Author: Khyati Chopra
College: Bharati Vidyapeeth University Institute Of Management and Research
LinkedIn Profile: www.linkedin.com/in/khyati-chopra-37a408410
The enactment of the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023, commonly known as the Women’s Reservation Act, 2023 (Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam), marks one of the most significant constitutional developments in India’s democratic history. The Amendment reserves one-third (33%) of the total seats in the Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi for women.
The legislation seeks to rectify the longstanding underrepresentation of women in legislative bodies and strengthen participatory democracy by ensuring equitable political representation. However, its implementation has been made contingent upon the completion of the first Census conducted after the commencement of the Amendment and the subsequent delimitation exercise. Consequently, despite its constitutional validity, the reservation has not yet been operationalised.
The constitutional amendment has generated extensive legal and political discourse concerning equality, substantive representation, federalism, delayed implementation, and the necessity for inclusive democratic governance. While proponents regard the Amendment as a landmark advancement in gender justice, critics question the postponement of its implementation and the absence of a separate reservation for women belonging to Other Backward Classes (OBCs).
Political participation is an indispensable component of democratic governance. Although the Constitution of India guarantees equality before the law and prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex, women’s representation in Parliament and State Legislatures has historically remained disproportionately low.
The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 represents Parliament’s attempt to bridge this democratic deficit by constitutionally mandating reservation for women in legislative institutions. The Amendment reflects India’s commitment to substantive equality, social justice, and inclusive governance while simultaneously raising important constitutional questions regarding implementation, electoral reforms, and representative democracy.
This article critically analyses the constitutional framework, legislative history, judicial developments, comparative perspectives, and legal implications of women’s reservation in legislatures. It further evaluates the Amendment’s strengths and limitations while examining whether it adequately fulfils the constitutional vision of equality and democratic participation.
The constitutional validity and legislative intent behind women’s reservation are rooted in various constitutional doctrines and principles.
The principle of substantive equality, recognised under Articles 14, 15 and 16 of the Constitution, permits the State to adopt affirmative action measures for historically disadvantaged groups. Unlike formal equality, substantive equality acknowledges structural barriers that prevent equal participation and therefore justifies differential treatment to achieve genuine equality.
Article 15(3) specifically empowers the State to enact protective discrimination or affirmative action in favour of women and children. This constitutional provision constitutes the primary legal basis for reservation policies benefiting women.
The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 inserts Articles 330A, 332A, and 334A into the Constitution.
The Amendment provides:
● Constitutionally mandated reservation of one-third of the total membership of the House of the People (Lok Sabha).
● Reservation of one-third of seats in State Legislative Assemblies.
● Reservation within seats already reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.
● Rotation of reserved constituencies after every delimitation exercise.
● Reservation to remain effective for fifteen years from commencement, unless extended by Parliament.
The Amendment operates prospectively and is contingent upon the completion of the first Census conducted after its commencement, followed by the delimitation process.
The doctrine of constitutional morality, frequently invoked by the Supreme Court, reinforces the obligation of constitutional institutions to ensure meaningful participation of historically marginalised communities, including women.
Similarly, the principle of representative democracy demands that legislative institutions adequately reflect the demographic composition of society. Women’s reservation seeks to translate political equality into institutional representation.
The demand for reservation of women in legislatures has existed for more than three decades.
The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments, 1992 introduced one-third reservation for women in Panchayats and Municipalities. These constitutional amendments significantly increased women’s participation in grassroots governance and demonstrated the effectiveness of reservation policies.
Inspired by the success of local government reservations, successive governments attempted to extend similar reservations to Parliament and State Legislatures.
The Women’s Reservation Bill was the subject of repeated legislative initiatives through successive introductions before Parliament:
● 1996
● 1998
● 1999
● 2008
Although the Bill was passed by the Rajya Sabha in 2010, it lapsed before being enacted due to the dissolution of the Lok Sabha.
Finally, in September 2023, Parliament passed the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Bill with an overwhelming majority, and it received Presidential assent on 28 September 2023.
The Amendment inserts:
Article 330A
Enshrines a constitutional mandate for the reservation of seats for women in the House of the People (Lok Sabha).
Article 332A
Provides reservation for women in State Legislative Assemblies.
Article 334A
Provides that reservation shall commence only after delimitation based on the first Census conducted after the Amendment comes into force.
Although the constitutional amendment has been enacted, reservation has not yet become operational because:
1. A post-amendment Census has not yet been completed.
2. Delimitation of constituencies has not yet taken place.
3. Reserved constituencies cannot be identified until delimitation is completed.
Thus, implementation remains legally deferred.
The Amendment advances several constitutional objectives:
● Promotion of gender equality.
● Strengthening participatory democracy.
● Enhancing inclusive governance.
● Improving legislative diversity.
● Increasing policy responsiveness towards women’s issues.
Several constitutional and political concerns continue to be debated:
The biggest criticism concerns the conditional implementation linked to Census and delimitation, resulting in uncertainty regarding the actual commencement of reservation.
Unlike reservations for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, the Amendment does not provide a separate quota for women belonging to Other Backward Classes.
Frequent rotation of constituencies may weaken long-term political accountability and discourage legislators from investing in constituency development.
Merit versus Reservation Debate
Opponents argue that reservation may undermine electoral competition, whereas supporters contend that structural barriers prevent women from contesting elections on equal terms.
Several democracies have adopted mechanisms to increase women’s political participation.
Rwanda has one of the highest percentages of women legislators globally due to constitutional quotas.
Countries such as France, Mexico, Nepal, and Bangladesh have also implemented gender-based reservation or quota systems in varying forms.
India’s constitutional amendment aligns with global commitments under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), to which India is a party.
Although the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act has not yet generated substantial judicial precedent, the Supreme Court has consistently recognised gender equality and affirmative action through several landmark decisions.
1. Government of Andhra Pradesh v. P.B. Vijayakumar (1995)
The Supreme Court upheld reservations for women in public employment and held that Article 15(3) enables the State to make special provisions for women as a form of affirmative action.
Principle: Protective discrimination in favour of women is constitutionally valid.
2. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992)
Although primarily concerning reservations for backward classes, the Supreme Court elaborated the constitutional philosophy underlying affirmative action and substantive equality.
Principle: Equality sometimes requires differential treatment to eliminate historical disadvantage.
3. Anuj Garg v. Hotel Association of India (2008)
The Supreme Court struck down gender-discriminatory legislation and emphasised that constitutional interpretation must promote women’s autonomy and dignity rather than paternalistic protection.
Principle: Gender justice forms an essential part of constitutional equality.
4. Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya (2020)
The Supreme Court granted permanent commission to women officers in the Indian Army and rejected gender stereotypes that limited women’s opportunities.
Principle: Institutional barriers against women violate constitutional equality.
5. Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018)
While declaring the offence of adultery unconstitutional, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that women cannot be treated as subordinate to men under constitutional jurisprudence.
Principle: Constitutional morality mandates equal dignity and autonomy for women.
The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 constitutes a transformative constitutional reform intended to enhance women’s participation in legislative governance. By reserving one-third of seats in Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies, the Amendment seeks to translate the constitutional promise of equality into meaningful political representation.
Nevertheless, the effectiveness of the reform depends upon its timely implementation. The linkage between reservation, Census, and delimitation has delayed the practical realisation of the constitutional mandate, thereby attracting legitimate criticism.
Women’s reservation should not merely be viewed as a numerical exercise but as an instrument for strengthening democratic legitimacy, improving legislative deliberation, and advancing constitutional values of equality, justice, and inclusive governance.
To maximise its impact, Parliament may also consider complementary reforms such as political party-level candidate quotas, leadership training, campaign finance support for women candidates, and enhanced political participation of women from socially and economically disadvantaged communities.
Ultimately, the Amendment reflects India’s evolving constitutional commitment to substantive equality and represents a decisive step towards building a more representative and inclusive democracy.
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1. What is the Women’s Reservation Act, 2023?
It is the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023, which provides 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha, State Legislative Assemblies, and the Legislative Assembly of the National Capital Territory of Delhi.
Q2. Has the reservation been implemented?
No. The reservation will take effect only after the first Census conducted following the Amendment and the subsequent delimitation exercise.
Q3. Which Articles were inserted by the Amendment?
The Amendment inserted Articles 330A, 332A, and 334A into the Constitution of India.
Q4. Is reservation available for women belonging to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes?
Yes. One-third of the seats already reserved for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes will also be reserved for women belonging to those categories.
Q5. Does the Amendment provide reservation for OBC women?
No. The Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023 does not create a separate reservation for women belonging to Other Backward Classes.
Q6. For how long will the reservation remain in force?
The reservation is constitutionally provided for 15 years from its commencement, although Parliament retains the power to extend its operation through subsequent constitutional amendment.
