The Supreme Court on Friday refrained from passing any direction to the Centre for implementation of the September 21 approval of Parliament to provide one-third reservation in the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies for women, saying: “We will be virtually legislating. It will be very difficult for us to do that.”

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti, however, posted the petition filed by Madhya Pradesh Congress leader Jaya Thakur for further hearing on November 22. The court said the matter would be tagged with a similar petition filed by the National Federation of Indian Women (NFIW) seeking reintroduction of the women’s reservation bill that was passed by the Rajya Sabha in 2010 but which lapsed after the dissolution of the 15th Lok Sabha.

The Congress leader had sought a direction to the Union government for the implementation of the reservation for women, effected through the Constitution (One Hundred and Sixth Amendment) Act, 2023, before the 2024 general election.

Appearing for the petitioner, senior advocate Vikas Singh questioned the rationale behind the government saying the quota policy would be implemented only after the completion of a population census.

“Census is not needed. The Act doesn’t speak of delimitation, so it can be done. There is no need for census data,” Singh said.

“I can understand if it is for reservation for backward classes, since the Constitution raises questions of adequate representation. So, your Lordships had said there should be a census to find out (the representation of OBCs). But what has the census got to do with this (women’s reservation bill)?” Singh asked.

Justice Khanna said the court would not pass any directive or issue notice at this juncture. “We will be virtually legislating then,” he said.

Singh said the government’s decision to rely on a census before implementing the quota for women in the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies was “arbitrary” and ought to be struck down as unconstitutional and illegal.

However, the bench said: “…Will be very difficult for us to do that.”

It added: “We have understood your argument. You are saying census is not required. But there are a lot of issues. Seats will have to be first reserved…”

Singh said there is no provision in the Act which says that seats have to be first reserved or delimitation has to be carried out. “It is not there in the amendment. No whisper,” he said.

The bench said: “May not be so, but quotas are always fixed on that basis. This is implemented by the rules. We are not dismissing this, but will take it up along with… (the NFIW pending matter).”