Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

While asking the petitioner to approach the appropriate High Court, the Supreme Court of India recently refused to entertain pleas challenging the provisions of the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam Act, which provides 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

A bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and P.B. Varale orally remarked, “We are not inclined to interfere under Article 32,” while asking the petitioner to specify which fundamental right had been violated.

Court made these observations in petitions filed by Congress leader Dr Jaya Thakur and the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW). The bench noted that Thakur’s petition challenged the bill, which had already become law, while the NFIW contested the delimitation provision of the law. 

On 3 November, 2023, the Supreme Court  had said that it would hear the writ petition filed before it seeking immediate implementation of the 33% Women Reservation, introduced by way of The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty Eighth Amendment) Bil 2023 (Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam) in its true letter and spirit before Parliamentary General Election 2024 on November 22. 2023.

Notably, a division bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti refused to issue notice in the plea and tagged the same with a related petition.

Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for the petitioner Dr. Jaya Thakur told court that no census was required for implementation of the reservation.

Justice Khanna took the submission on record saying that the issue had to be examined.

In October 2023, A writ petition was filed before the Supreme Court of India seeking immediate implementation of the 33% Women Reservation, introduced by way of The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty Eighth Amendment) Bill 2023 (Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam) in its true letter and spirit before Parliamentary General! Election 2024.

The writ petition filed by Congress leader Dr. Jaya Thakur seeks implementation of the reservation without the rider of "after the delimitation is undertaken for this purposes after the relevant figures for the first census".

Supreme Court was told that while the parliament rightly passed the above Act for 33% reservation but putting the clog that the said act will be implemented ‘atter the delimitation is undertaken for this purpose after the relevant figures for the first census" may be declared as "void-ab-initio".

"The constitutional amendment cannot be hold for uncertain period. In fact, this amendment special session was called for implementing the reservation in Parliament as well as in the State Legislature and both houses passed this Bill unanimously and Hon'ble President of India also given assent and thereafter Act is notified on 28th September 2023, but despite the publication object of the Act cannot be withhold for uncertain period", the plea filed through Advocate Varinder Kumar Sharma adds.

It has been argued that a census is not required as the Act already declares a given 33% reservation for existing seats and it is an admitted position’ of our country having 50% women population and only 4% representation in the elections.

The Union Cabinet in September had approved the Women’s Reservation Bill which was originally introduced as the Constitution (Eighty First Amendment) Bill, 1996, in the Lok Sabha by the United Front Government with the objective to reserve 33% seats in the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies for women.

Said Bill also states that one-third of the seats reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes will be reserved for women from those groups. These reserved seats may be allotted to different constituencies in the state or union territory by rotation.

Additionally, the Bill clarifies that such reservation shall cease to exist 15 years after the commencement of this Amendment Act.

In August, the Supreme Court had questioned the Central Government on it delay in filing a response to a PIL filed by National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) seeking a writ of mandamus to the Union of India to place the Constitution (One hundred & Eighth Amendment) Bill, 2008 or the current draft of the Women’s Reservation Bill before both the Houses of the Parliament.

Case Title: National Federation of Indian Women v Union of India