CPO hails delimitation order by Gauhati HC

Phek, October 26 (MExN): The Chakhesang Public Organisation (CPO) has hailed a judgment order by the Gauhati High Court (GHC) that has, in effect, made sure that the next delimitation exercise will take place only on the basis of the first Census after the year 2026.  

Thus, the CPO concluded that the “2001 census (Nagaland) stands rejected to be the basis for delimitation exercises preventing all unwanted political upheavals in the state of Nagaland.”  

This case came as a result of CPO’s PIL (67/2006) in GHC which came up before the court for hearing on August 30 this year.  

The CPO had filed a PIL “challenging delimitation exercise on the basis of erroneous census of 2001 in the year 2006.”  

It mentioned that the President of India had issued a notification exempting the states of Nagaland, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh, Jharkhand and Manipur from the purview of the Delimitation Act of 2002 and subsequently, section 10A of delimitation Act of 2002 was amended by the Parliament exempting the state of Nagaland and other effected states.  

“The victory of the PIL successfully prevented the possible transfer of political power from the tribal hills to foothills with major compositions of population who are non-tribal and non-indigenous inhabitants,” stated CPO President, Kekhwengulo Lea and CPO General Secretary, Mutsivoyi Kotso. It expressed gratitude to MLAs and concerned communities “who stood by us with logistic support.”  

The PIL was filed praying for a writ of Mandamus and prohibition restraining the Government of India from continuing with delimitation exercise undertaken in the state of Nagaland and others on the basis of incorrect census data, informed the CPO.  

As per judgment order dated August 30, 2017, SC Keyal, Assistant Solicitor General of India submitted that in the terms of section 10A of the delimitation Act of 2002, a notification had been issued on February 8, 2008, by the President of India, differing delimitation exercise in the State of Nagaland, Assam, Arunachal Pradesh and others. Accordingly, he submitted before the Court that the petitions have become infructuous and, thus, do not call for adjudication.  

The GHC Constitutional Bench, composed of Chief justice Ajit Singh, Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Arup Kumar Goswami, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice Manojit Bhuyan, disposed the same as infructuous.