The Supreme Court refused to permit delimitation in Andhra Pradesh and Telangana before the next Census. Which of the following BEST reflects the Court's interpretative reasoning?
Delimitation in States is constitutionally frozen until the first Census after 2026, and statutory promises in the 2014 Act cannot override Article 170(3)
Parliament may increase Assembly seats through an ordinary law even without Census data if a State government requests it
The Delimitation Commission may use provisional Census figures if the Assembly passes a resolution
The Centre is obligated to carry out delimitation under the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, irrespective of constitutional restrictions
View Answer
Correct Answer: A — Delimitation in States is constitutionally frozen until the first Census after 2026, and statutory promises in the 2014 Act cannot override Article 170(3)
Explanation:
Article 170(3) of the Constitution mandates that readjustment of seats in State Legislative Assemblies shall occur only after completion of each Census, with a specific embargo on delimitation until after the first Census post-2026. The Court held that a parliamentary statute like the Andhra Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2014, cannot override this constitutional bar — it can only operate within the constitutional framework.