The Allahabad High Court dismissed a challenge to Ambedkar Nagar's delimitation and Alapur's reservation. The ruling underscores limited judicial review and the consequences of delayed constitutional challenges.
Newdelhi,Oct 15, 2026 13:38 IST
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a petition challenging the delimitation of Assembly constituencies in Uttar Pradesh's Ambedkar Nagar district and the reservation of the Alapur seat for Scheduled Castes.
The court held that the challenge was "highly belated" and had "failed to establish any violation of constitutional provisions". It said the delimitation order issued in 2006 had acquired the force of law and could not be reopened based on the petitioner's calculations of population and caste figures.
A division bench of Justice Shekhar B Saraf and Justice Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary passed the order on Wednesday. The delimitation order under challenge was published on December 5, 2006.
The petition was filed by Dileep Kumar, a resident and elector of Ambedkar Nagar district, who sought a revision of the delimitation and reservation of Assembly constituencies in the district.
Kumar contended that the population distribution across the five constituencies of Katehari, Tanda, Alapur, Jalalpur and Akbarpur was unequal and violated Article 170(2) of the Constitution. He said the delimitation had created an imbalance, with Jalalpur having a population of 4,60,245 compared with Akbarpur's 3,68,722.
He also claimed that the allocation of territorial areas had affected Alapur's reservation status. He argued that the percentage of its Scheduled Caste population did not justify its continued classification as a reserved constituency.
Rejecting the arguments, the bench said Article 170(2) required parity between population and seats only "so far as practicable". It said this allowed the Delimitation Commission to consider geographical continuity, administrative boundaries and other relevant factors.
The court added that the commission's internal guidelines, which permitted a deviation of up to 10 per cent from the average population, were not legal requirements that could be enforced as an absolute right.
The bench said courts could review delimitation orders only on limited grounds, including lack of legislative competence and violation of fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. According to the order, the petitioner had failed to establish either ground.
The court also noted that nearly two decades had passed since the order and successive Assembly elections had been held on its basis. It said reopening the arrangement at this stage would be inequitable, particularly when the 2026 Census was approaching completion and a fresh delimitation exercise could follow.
The High Court, therefore, declined to reopen the 2006 delimitation and reservation arrangement, citing the long delay and the petitioner's failure to show any constitutional violation.
- Ends