LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Supreme Court rejects plea seeking increase in Assembly seats of AP, Telangana through delimitation

25/07/2025BlogNo Comments

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking directions for the Central government to increase the number of Assembly seats in the States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana through the delimitation process.

The Bench of Justice Surya Kant and Justice N Kotiswar Singh passed the order on a writ petition filed by Professor K Purushottam Reddy, seeking directions to the Union to operationalise Section 26 of the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act.

The petitioner contended that delimiting the Assembly and Parliamentary constituencies of only the recently-created Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, with the exclusion of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana, would create an unreasonable classification.

The Bench observed that Section 26 of the AP Reorganisation Act was subject to the Constitutional provision (Article 170) dealing with delimitation, as per which delimitation could be held only after the first census conducted after 2026.

Noting that Article 170(3) acted as a Constitutional bar in entertaining the plea for delimitation, the Apex Court said allowing such a prayer would open the floodgates of litigation by other States.

It further rejected the argument of discrimination vis-a-vis the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir on the grounds that the provisions dealing with delimitation in states were different when compared to UTs.

The top court of the country observed that constitutional distinctions existed between UTs and states. Since J&K had been reconstituted as a UT, it was not governed by the provisions of Chapter 3 of Part 7 of Constitution. UTs were regulated by parliamentary legislation.

Therefore, the exclusion of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana from the delimitation notification issued for J&K was not arbitrary or discriminatory, it held.

The post Supreme Court rejects plea seeking increase in Assembly seats of AP, Telangana through delimitation appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Trump, and the “Birthday Book”: The Haunting Return of a Predator’s Legacy
  • A Resounding Rebuke
  • When POCSO Hides Within Confusion
  • India’s Tightrope in a Volatile World
  • Regaining Lost Ground?

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.