2024 Lok Sabha Polls: Delhi High Court Refuses To Entertain PIL Seeking Urgent Implementation Of 'Women's Reservation Bill'

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to entertain a public interest litigation seeking urgent implementation of the “Women's Reservation Bill, 2023” to ensure the reservation of 33% seats for women in the upcoming Lok Sabha Elections 2024.

A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Mini Pushkarna granted liberty to the petitioner, a lawyer, Yogamaya MG, who withdrew the plea after some arguments, to approach the Supreme Court before which a similar petition has been filed.

At the outset, ASG Chetan Sharma representing the Union Government told court that the Bill has already become an Act and that as per Article 334A, the parliament has stipulated that the reservation will come into effect after the delimitation exercise is undertaken.

The Bill introduces Article 332A, which mandates the reservation of seats for women in every state Legislative Assembly.

Another newly introduced Article 334A states that the women reservation will be effective after the census conducted after the commencement of this Bill has been published. Based on the census, delimitation will be undertaken to reserve seats for women. 

“It is an exercise after the census. It has been engrafted under the Act. It has been debated in the parliament ….This is a publicity litigation,” ASG Sharma said.

However, the petitioner's counsel said that he is not challenging the vires of the Bill or the Act and is only seeking implementation of the women reservation in a time bound manner.

“I am not challenging the Act or the Bill. I don't know why my senior friend is going into the technicalities. Not challenginf act or bill. Why senior friend for technicalities. In the history of India, for the first time the parliament has unanimously passed the Bill. Since 75 years, there has been no representation. Let them come and say we can do it in a time bound manner. I am not challenging anything. I am only trying so that it can be done in a time bound manner. Otherwise it is not going to happen,” the counsel said.

Responding to the submissions, Acting Chief Justice told petitioner's counsel that if he is seeking urgent implementation of the Bill, he will have to challenge vires of Article 334A as a condition of delimitation exercise has been stipulated by the parliament prior women reservation.

“There are two issues. The matter is pending in the Supreme Court. Two courts cannot simultaneously do it. We don't have the luxury of time. Another thing is, there is a provision in the Act that it shall come into effect after the delimitation exercise is undertaken…You will have to challenge the validity or pray for its quashing,” the bench said.

It added: “It cannot be. Please understand. We cannot go behind it (the provision). You can either seek quashing (of the provision) or show us some good grounds (to quash it). The parliament has stipulated a condition. We cannot vary that.”

As the PIL was withdrawn, the court granted liberty to the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court where another writ petition seeking similar relief has been filed.

Last week, a single judge had refused to entertain the PIL filed by the petitioner seeking similar relief. The single judge had asked the petitioner to file a fresh PIL after which the matter was listed for hearing today before a division bench.

Title: MS. YOGAMAYA M.G. v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1303