Patna High Court Advocates demand immediate implementation of Women's Reservation Act, express dismay at the post dated cheque

The advocates of Patna High Court organized a talk on the subject of In Defense of Women's Reservation Act on April 23, 2026. The subject was introduced by Y. C. Verma, senior advocate and the newly elected President of Advocates Association. He underlined that the woman's reservation act was guided by the quest for political justice. 

 

While concluding the talk on the subject of the Constitution (106th Amendment Act, 2003 which entered  into force on April 16, 2026, Dr. Gopal Krishna, advocate pointed out that they who do not have sense of beauty cannot have sense of justice. The supporters of immediate implementation of Women's Reservation Act have a sense beauty which inspires their sense of justice. The million dollar question is: Did the male MPs who voted  for the bill do so only because they were assured that their seats would not be allocated to women? Why should women's seats be additional seats? What made male MPs confident about their re-election?  

The advocates who spoke on the occasion included Ayushi Chaudhary, Nupur, Isha Ann and Kumari Akanksha Rai. Chaudhary underlined that Bihar’s experience of electing more than 50 per cent of women to Panchayats in the state is creating a strong base of women leaders over multiple election cycles. These advocates argued that what is being promised in the name of woman's reservation was akin to promising 33 % share in mangoes once there are 85 mangoes on the tree. Women are demanding share in the existing mangoes.Tying women’s reservation to legislature expansion defies sane logic. (Photo:Dr, Gopal Krishna, Ayushi Chaudhary)  

Expressing his support for the enactment of the Constitution (106th) Amendment Act, 2023, Dr. Krishna contended that Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam should be implemented in right earnest. In 2023, the Parliament had passed the law unanimously to foster equitable representation of women in public life. This landmark legislation rotationally reserves one-third of all seats for women in the Lok Sabha and in all State Legislative Assemblies, including the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi. Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam notification was issued to implement old laws that were not implemented earlier. Noted journalists like Arvind Ujjwal, Mukesh Kumar Singh, and advocates like Shagufta Rashid, Priya Kumari, Arvind Singh, Najmal Hoda, Vishwas Kumar, Sanjana, Ugresh Kumar, Rahamatullah, Rashmi and Suman Kumari, a legal correspondent. graced the occasion. (Photo:Advocates Manju Sharma, Ayushi Chaudhary, Isha Ann, Kumari Akanksha Rai, Y.C. Verma (in the middle),  Dr. Gopal Krishna, Dr. Rajaram Rai, Amit Maharaj, Ram Jiban Prasad Singh, Dr. S.S.Yadav, Jnana Chandra Bhardwaj and Neeraj Kumar) 

The speakers noted that on April 17, 2026, the Lok Sabha rejected the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026. Consequently, the government withdrew the Delimitation Bill, 2026 and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026, which were dependent on the amendment. The failed amendment aimed to increase Lok Sabha seats to 850, linking 33% women's reservation to 2011 census-based delimitation. Notably, the Constitution (131st Amendment)Bill, 2026 failed to pass after receiving only 278 votes in favor (failing to secure the required two-thirds majority). The Delimitation Bill, 2026 was withdrawn following the failure of the 131st Amendment Bill. The Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026 too was withdrawn following the failure of the 131st Amendment Bill. Isha reminded, that before its enactment in 2023, Women's Reservation Bill was introduced in the parliament in 1996, 1998, 1999 and 2008. 

(Photo:Advocates Manju Sharma, Kumari Akanksha Rai, Y.C. Verma, Ayushi Chaudhary, Dr. Gopal Krishna and Arvind Ujjwal and Isha Ann) 

The Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026 had proposed increasing the maximum total strength of the Lok Sabha to 850 members (815 from states, 35 from Union Territories), expanding it from the current 550. The bill aimed to facilitate delimitation based on the 2011 Census to implement 33% women's reservation, but failed to pass. Advocate Bhardwaj shared a note saying, "Women have been facing denial of rights for long because of the patriarchal mindset." 

 

In her, speech Advocate Nupur underlined that the introduction of Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill, 2026, was a constitutional proposition, not a political event.  Disregarding constitutional reasoning, if we endorse the wrong means for reaching the right end, we set a precedent that will outlast any single legislative defeat. When a single amendment seeks to simultaneously expand the Parliament, redraw state boundaries, remove the delimitation freeze, and operationalise a reservation —all in one stroke—it raises a legitimate question: does such an omnibus amendment respect the constitutional discipline that the Basic Structure doctrine imposes? Or does it attempt, under the cover of a morally compelling objective, to reorganise the foundations of our federal democracy? The use of 2011 Census data - data that was already fifteen years old at the time - as the demographic basis for this restructuring compounds the concern. A delimitation exercise built on stale data does not merely risk inaccuracy. It creates a constitutional structure whose legitimacy may be challenged in courts for years, delaying rather than advancing the very women's representation it seeks to ensure." 

Subsequent to the amendment of the 2023, the new Article 330A of the Constitution reads: "Reservation of seats for women in the House of the People. “330A. (1) Seats shall be reserved for women in the House of the People. (2) As nearly as may be, one-third of the total number of seats reserved under clause (2) of article 330 shall be reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes. (3) As nearly as may be, one-third (including the number of seats reserved for women belonging to the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes) of the total number of seats to be filled by direct election to the House of the People shall be reserved for women.”.   

In her presentation, Advocate Nupur also pointed out that "The 2023 act ties its operationalisation to the completion of a Census and subsequent delimitation.....But the more important question, as lawyers, is whether there is a constitutional basis for demanding immediate implementation without waiting for the Census, and whether the current government can be compelled to move with urgency on the preconditions. First, the Census obligation is not optional. The last decennial Census was due in 2021. It remains unconducted in 2026. This is not a constitutional inevitability—it is an administrative failure. Second, connecting the bill with Second, the delimitation process is an independent constitutional function. The Delimitation Commission operates under Article 82 (for Lok Sabha) and Article 170 (for State Assemblies). It is not dependent on executive will alone—it requires a statutory notification and the Commission's independent exercise of power. The government cannot indefinitely delay reconstituting a Delimitation Commission without being constitutionally accountable for that delay. Third, the constitutional right created by the 2023 Act creates a correlative duty. When the Constitution provides that women shall be reserved one-third of seats, it does not grant the executive a discretionary timeline for compliance. The word 'shall' in constitutional provisions is obligatory. While the trigger for operationalisation is tied to delimitation, the obligation to create the conditions for delimitation—conducting the Census—is itself constitutionally compelled. Any further administrative delay beyond what is reasonably necessary is legally challengeable." 

Tracing the history of the demand for women's rights in the writings of Mary Wollstonecraft, Dr. Krishna drew the attention of the advocates towards what she wrote in her A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (1792) after writing A Vindication of the Rights of Men, in a Letter to the Right Honourable Edmund Burke, occaisioned by his Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790). She demanded equality based on natural reason because denying equality to women is indefensible. She wrote:"we shall not see women affectionate till more equality be established in society, till ranks are confounded and women freed, neither shall we see that dignified domestic happiness, the simple grandeur of which cannot be relished by ignorant or vitiated minds; nor will the important task of education ever be properly begun till the person of a woman is no longer preferred to her mind. For it would be as wise to expect corn from tares, or figs from thistles, as that a foolish ignorant woman should be a good mother." The ruling parties were pushing for delimitation without the 2027 Census results, on the grounds that it will enable implementation of the 2023 Nari Vandan Adhiniyam Act by or before the 2029 general election, delaying implementation to 2034 given the fact that the 2027 Census results will released during 2028-2030. Women’s reservation is independent of legislature expansion or Census results. The purpose of a delimitation commission is to allocate one-third of total seats to women. But it can be implemented in the current strength of Lok and Vidhan Sabhas.The enactment of the law was long due but as of now the law exists as a post dated cheque, which is indefensible. 

Now that the brief parliament session is over all sane citizens should ensure that women’s reservation is delinked from legislature expansion.