The 2001 Delimitation Process in Manipur: A Detailed Analysis

THE ENACTMENT of the Delimitation Act, 2002 initiated the process of Delimitation (readjustment of Parliamentary or Assembly seats) exercise in India. One of the affected state was Manipur and the exercise was to be based on the Census figures of 2001. In the proposed delimitation exercise, as a result of increase/reduction in population, there was bound to be corresponding re-adjustment in the number of Assembly seats in a District. In the proposed Delimitation exercise for Manipur, there was to be an increase of 3 ST AC segments in the hills and correspondingly a similar decrease of 3 General AC segments in the valley. In view of the proposal and being seized of the matter, a Cabinet meeting was called on 21st September, 2005. In the meeting chaired by Chief Minister O. Ibobi Singh, the Cabinet decided to approach the Government of India and the Delimitation Commission with a plea for maintaining “status quo” for the existing structure of the Assembly Constituencies. The basis for the plea was that a “law and order situation may arise” and that all the political parties were also of the view that if the delimitation exercise is allowed, “based on faulty and defective Census figure of 2001, it may sharpen the division and clash of interest between the Hill and Valley and this may ultimately lead to social turmoil/disorder surpassing any past turmoil or social disorder.”¹

The cabinet meeting was soon followed up by a meeting of all the political parties of Manipur on 22nd October, 2005 under the Chairmanship of O. Ibobi Singh. In the meeting it was held and proposed that the Delimitation Commission be informed and requested that the census figures of 2001were incorrect and defective, that the delimitation exercise be frozen and that status quo be maintained till such time the Registrar General, Election Commission of India rectifies the faulty and defective 2001 Census figures.²

On 18th November, 2005 all the Political Parties submitted their memorandum to Justice Kuldip Singh, Retired Supreme Court Judge, Chairman of the Delimitation Commission requesting in brief for maintaining the status quo of the Manipur Assembly constituencies citing the following allegations:

1. Anticipated loss of three valley Assembly Constituencies and the subsequent gain of three by the Hill districts.

2. Likelihood of serious law and order problem once the delimitation exercise is carried out.

3. Doubtful nature of Manipur’s population figures as reflected in the 2001 Census.

The signatories were: i) Th. Chaoba, BJP, ii) Dr. L. Chandramani Singh, Federal Party, iii) O. Joy Singh, MPP, iv) Gaikhangam, MPCC, v) R.K. Anand, DRPP, v) Ph. Parijat Singh, CPI, vi) Y. Mohendro Singh, CPM, vii) Holkhomang Haokip, NCP, and ix) Dr. W. Thoiba Singh, RJD.

Also read | Abnormal population growth of Chin-Kuki-Zo in Manipur since 1881

Acting under the Delimitation Act, 2002 and its subsequent Delimitation (Amendment) Act, 2003, the Commission had begun exercise relating to Assembly and parliamentary constituencies. However, the Gauhati High Court, Imphal Bench passed an Interim Order staying the delimitation exercise vide its order W.P(c) No. 16 of 2005. Subsequently, while the Gauhati High Court was vacating the Interim order, the Supreme Court stayed the aforesaid order of the High Court, arising from an SLP. In view of the Apex Court’s Interim Stay, the Secretary, Delimitation Commission issued directives to the seven Associate Members of Manipur State to co-operate with the Commission and to complete its work and pass final order in accordance with Constitutional and Statutory provisions. The Commission also expressed that allegation of “unholy haste” and threats of “dire consequences” received from the Associate Members were “unbecoming of responsible public representatives.”³ By this time, the Commission had finished its work in respect to 25 other states in the country. In the meanwhile, after 8 long years, the Delimitation exercise was deferred by the President of India under section 10A of the Delimitation (Amendment) Ordinance on 8th February, 2008.

In 2014 the Supreme Court disposed the legal challenge to the Centre’s decision for deferment of the delimitation exercises in Manipur and Nagaland and to make fresh representation to the new government to decide whether to defer the exercise for some more time or rescind the order taking account of the changes in the ground reality in these areas. Section 10A of the 2002 Act, provides for a situation in which the government could on its own rescind the order deferring delimitation. After 12 long years, the President was pleased to rescind the deferment order and passed another order on 28th February, 2020 for Delimitation exercise in Manipur along with Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, and Nagaland based on the 2001 Census figures and in J&K based on 2011 Census figures. While passing the order, the President recorded “…it appears that the circumstances that led to the deferring of the delimitation exercise (Assam, Manipur, Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland emphasis mine) have ceased to exist and that delimitation of the constituencies as envisaged under the Delimitation Act, 2002 could be carried out now.”⁴ The new Chairperson of the Delimitation Commission is Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai, Retired Supreme Court Judge.

Prior to this order, the Delimitation Commission had prepared the Draft Working Table based on 2001 rectified Census figures, on the Delimitation Act, 2002 and the Delimitation (Amendment) Act, 2003 as follows:

As per the calculation of the Delimitation Commission of India, the District of Imphal East, Imphal West and Bishnupur will be reduced by one Assembly segment each to bring parity. Further, the under- represented Districts of Ukhrul, Senapati and Chandel will be enhanced by 1 Assembly constituency each, leaving the total 60 Assembly seats undisturbed as before.

Also read | MP Sanajaoba Leishemba urges implementation of NRC to check abnormal population growth in few hill Manipur Distt

From the above figures it is clear that the doubtful population figures of the affected Hill districts for 2001 Census had been addressed as follows:

The Delimitation Commission while addressing its core concern of readjustment, should also give time to look into the curious anomaly of 25 villages within the district of Senapati as permissible under section 9, clause (a) of the Delimitation Act, 2002. The details of the 25 villages are as follows:

The above Data shows that the Villages in the Senapati district are distributed in 4 Assembly segments of the valley namely, 1. Keirao, 6 Assembly Constituency, Imphal East, 2.Lamlai, 8 Assembly Constituency, Imphal East,3. Wangkhem Assembly Constituency and 5. Heirok, 33 Assembly Constituency, Thoubal District respectively.

The 24 villages are in the Administrative Units of Senapati District as per 2001 census. But their voting rights have been included in the Imphal East and Thoubal District. The grievances of the villagers may also consider while readjusting the delimitation exercise.

Further, another curious anomaly is the case of the Outer Manipur Parliamentary Constituency. This is a constituency seat reserved for the ST.However,8 ‘General’ valley Assembly Constituencies of Thoubal District have been merged with the Outer Manipur Parliamentary Constituency. These assembly constituencies are 1. 33-Heirok, 2.34-Wangjing Tentha,3.35-Khangabok,4.36-Wabgai,5.37-Kakching,6.38-Hiyanglam,7.39-Sugnu,8.40 Jiribam.

Also read | MP Leishemba Sanajaoba Demands Illegal Immigrants Detection Before Delimitation Process

This arrangement had created a unique situation whereby ‘general’ status voters are asked to vote in ST constituency, but cannot themselves contest for election as the seat is reserved for ST. Candidate only. This obviously creates a situation of inequality. Citizens from the Hills and the Plains have been united seeking redresses on the issue. The Delimitation Commission should look into the issue and give necessary redresses.

In respect of the Ukhrul District, the villages and their corresponding micro population index(of 2001) concerning the old 4 Assembly Constituencies in 1972 comprising of Ukhrul, Chingai, Kamjong and Phungyar within the Ukhrul District are depicted in Annexure 1 and 11 & 111 respectively. The detail micro population index of Chandel District and Senapati District are as per Annexure 1V & V respectively.

Much after the Delimitation exercise was announced, the Congress Party called a Press Conference on 27th May, 2020 and stated that the party will never support the delimitation exercise based on 2001 census report. It also queried why the BJP is silent on the issue. O. Ibobi Singh, MLA, also claimed that in some districts the population rise was as high as 200%. He also added that the delimitation exercise should be frozen till 2026. The issue has unfortunately now become politicized. The Commission has till March, 2021 to complete its task.

Yazing Vicisy is a Social Activist. This articled was first published in 2020.

Footnote:

1. Secretary, Delimitation Commission of India’s letter dated 5^th August, 2007, pg. 2. ↩︎
2. Ibid, pg. 3. ↩︎
3. Op.cit., pg. 4. The Associate Members were Chairman, Mani Charanamai, MP; Dr. Thokchom Meinya, MP; O. Ibobi Singh, MLA; Gaikhangam, MLA; Phunzathang Tonsing, MLA; Ph. Parijat Singh, MLA and O. Joy Singh. ↩︎
4. <thewire.in/government/delimitation-commission-jk-assam-manipur-arunachal-nagaland> Retrieved 31-05-2020. ↩︎
5. Population of Manipur-2001 Census-Manipur Science and Technology (MASTEC), Retrieved 29-05-2020. ↩︎

(This is not a Ukhrul Times publication. UT is not responsible for, nor does it necessarily endorse its content. Any reports or views expressed are solely those of the author or publisher and do not necessarily reflect those of Ukhrul Times.)