Delimitation in J&K Valid Though Andhra & Telangana Excluded—No Violation of Equality: Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Notifications

“Delimitation in States Is Constitutionally Frozen Until Post-2026 Census; Article 170(3) Is a Constitutional Bar That Cannot Be Overridden by Statute”, Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment in K. Purushottam Reddy v. Union of India & Ors., dismissing challenges to the 2020 and 2021 Notifications that restricted delimitation to the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, while excluding Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The Court held that delimitation in States is barred under Article 170(3) of the Constitution until census data post-2026, and the distinction between States and Union Territories is constitutionally justified.

Justice Surya Kant, writing for the Bench, clarified that: “Section 26 of the AP Reorganisation Act is expressly made subject to the mandate contained in Article 170 of the Constitution. This qualifying phrase cannot be read as surplusage and must be given full legal effect.”

The case arose after the Union Government, through Notifications dated 06.03.2020 and 03.03.2021, conducted a delimitation exercise exclusively for Jammu and Kashmir, increasing its Assembly seats from 83 to 90 (excluding 24 PoK seats), under the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019.

Petitioners contended that Andhra Pradesh and Telangana were arbitrarily excluded, despite Section 26 of the AP Reorganisation Act, 2014 mandating an increase in their Assembly seats from 175 to 225 and 119 to 153, respectively. They claimed this violated Article 14 and defeated the legitimate expectation of their electorates.

Was the exclusion of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana from delimitation arbitrary under Article 14?

The Court emphatically rejected this, holding: “Article 170 of the Constitution, including the constitutional freeze on delimitation under clause (3), has no application to the Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir.”

Citing Haji Abdul Gani Khan v. Union of India (2023) 11 SCC 432, the Court reiterated:

“As far as the Legislative Assembly of the Union Territory of J&K is concerned, Article 170 will have no application... The reason is that the Legislative Assemblies of Union Territories are governed by the law made by Parliament in accordance with Article 239A.”

Therefore, the exclusion of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana is constitutionally mandated, as Article 170(3) bars any delimitation in States until after the first census post-2026. The Court cautioned that: “Granting such relief... would open the floodgates to similar demands from other States... and would destabilise the uniform electoral framework.”

Did Section 26 of the AP Reorganisation Act create an enforceable right?

The Court clarified that Section 26 is not self-executing and is expressly made “subject to the provisions contained in Article 170”:

“Any other construction of Section 26 would fall foul of both the language and the conception of Article 170 of the Constitution.”

Hence, the provision only contemplates future delimitation once the constitutional bar is lifted, not an immediate mandate.

Can the petitioners claim a legitimate expectation of delimitation?

The Court acknowledged the sentiment but ruled firmly: “The doctrine of legitimate expectation... cannot be invoked to claim an enforceable right contrary to the constitutional arrangement.”

It emphasized that constitutional limitations override administrative expectations, especially when Article 170(3) imposes an express embargo on readjustment of seats.

The Supreme Court upheld the validity of the delimitation exercise limited to Jammu and Kashmir, finding no arbitrariness or discrimination in excluding Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. The judgment firmly establishes that States are governed by Article 170, which freezes delimitation until after the 2026 census, while Union Territories are governed by Article 239A, allowing distinct treatment.

The Court concluded: “The Petitioner(s) cannot claim parity between the position of Jammu and Kashmir and that of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana… The delimitation undertaken for  the Union Territory cannot be mechanically extended to States.”

Date of Decision: 25 July 2025