Delimitation orders issued under constitutional provisions are immune from judicial review barring exceptional circumstances; challenges to their validity cannot be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J.

1. These writ appeals filed under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, arise out of a common judgment dated 07.10.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.19332 of 2025 and connected matters/judgments dated 13.10.2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)No.32965 of 2025, W.P.(C)No. 31421 of 2025 and W.P.(C)No.31016 of 2025, following the common judgment dated 07.10.2025. The writ petitions were filed to challenge the final delimitation orders published by the State Delimitation Commission, Kerala. Before the learned Single Judge, the learned Standing Counsel for the State Delimitation Commission contended that on account of the legal bar under Article 243-O(a), 243-ZG and 329(a) of the Constitution of India, no interference is possible under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the delimitation orders passed by the Commission. In support of the said contention, the learned Standing Counsel placed reliance on various decisions, including the decision of the Constitution Bench in Meghraj Kothari v. Delimitation Commission, AIR 1976 SC 669. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the writ petitioners contended that the principle laid down in the decisions cited by the learned Standing Counsel for the State Delimitation Commission that the courts should adopt a keep its hands off approach, has been diluted after the exposition of the basic structure doctrine in the celebrated judgment in Kesavananda Bharathi Sripadgalvaru v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225. They also relied on the decision of the Apex Court in Kishorchandra v. Chhanganlal Rathod, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1879. The learned Single Judge considered the question as to whether the final delimitation orders are amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. After considering the rival contentions on the above issue, the learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgement dated 07.10.2025, dismissed the writ petitions as not maintainable, holding that the final delimitation orders are not amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the judgment, it was made clear that the dismissal of the writ petitions shall not, in any manner, prejudice the rights of the petitioners to pursue the statutory remedies available to them under the law. Following the said decision, the learned Single Judge rendered the judgments dated 13.10.2025 in the connected writ petitions.

2. W.A.No.2440 of 2025 arises out of the judgment in W.P.(C)No.20851 of 2025, which was one filed by the appellants, who are permanent residents of Abdul Rahman Nagar Grama Panchayat in Malappuram District, challenging Ext.P10 final delimitation order dated 15.05.2025 of the State Delimitation Commission in respect of the said Grama Panchayat; and a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to initiate a fresh delimitation exercise in respect of the said Grama Panchayat, in accordance with the statutory provisions, including the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Ext.P2 Guidelines dated 24.09.2024 issued by the State Delimitation Commission for delimitation of constituencies in Grama Panchayat, Block Panchayat and District Panchayat, for the year 2024. The petitioners have also sought for a declaration that the delimitation exercise culminated by the publication of Ext.P9 revised Appendix 1A, 2A and 4A dated 28.04.2025 and Ext.P10 final delimitation order is arbitrary, illegal and unconstitutional.

2.1. W.A.No.2465 of 2025 arises out of the judgment in W.P.(C)No.19384 of 2025, which was one filed by the appellants, who are permanent residents of Uduma Grama Panchayat in Kasaragod District, cha