CEC Gyanesh Kumar row, DMK stand complicate Centre's delimitation plan

New Delhi: The row over CEC Gyanesh Kumar's resignation complicates the Centre's delimitation plan on two fronts - the numbers needed to expand the Lok Sabha and ECI's role in the exercise, with Opposition protests adding to the political challenge.

One possible alternative is to redraw constituencies within the existing 543 Lok Sabha seats after publication of the relevant post-2026 Census figures, without expanding the House. This would avoid the need for a Constitution amendment specifically to increase the Lok Sabha strength and then implement women's reservation.

Expanding the House, by contrast, would require a Constitution amendment backed by a two-third majority in each House - out of members present and voting. DMK's 22 Lok Sabha MPs are significant to the numbers game. DMK chief and former Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin has declared Kumar's resignation "non-negotiable", demanding that the damage to ECI's institutional framework be undone and its "independence and integrity restored".


The proposed Delimitation Bill, 2026, envisaged a commission comprising a Supreme Court judge as chairperson, CEC or an EC nominated by him, and chief electoral officer of the concerned state.

With ECI facing allegations of bias over SIR, its role in delimitation could become another point of contention. The proposed legislation was not proceeded with after the linked Constitution amendment failed to secure the required majority.

Non-aligned regional parties whose support BJP has counted on - BJD, YSRCP and BRS - have also raised concerns over CEC. BJD sent two Rajya Sabha MPs to protest against Kumar. BRS working president KT Rama Rao has demanded Kumar's resignation and sought a Supreme Court probe into alleged SIR irregularities. YSRCP chief YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has urged the Centre to revisit the 2023 law governing the appointment and tenure of CEC and ECs, stressing the need to preserve public confidence in constitutional institutions.

Delimitation within the existing strength could avoid the special-majority hurdle associated with expanding the House, but would still require the relevant census figures and constitutional and legal processes to be followed.