<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court </a>on Tuesday sought to know the steps taken by the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/election-commission">Election Commission of Indi</a>a with regard to delimitation exercise in the northeastern states, especially in Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland, as the presidential order of 2020 rescinded the deferment of delimitation.</p><p>A bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar asked Additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre, "Since, 2020, what have you been doing?”</p><p>Nataraj submitted the government is getting the report and the deliberations are going on.</p><p>He also said there are tribal communities in the northeastern states, and the situation is sensitive. He also said there are subsequent developments in these states and at present, it may not be conducive.</p>.Delhi pollution: Supreme Court allows lawyers to appear virtually.<p>"We are in touch with respective state governments and once we get a proper report...our intention is not to defer anything,” he said. </p><p>The bench, however, said said that is something separate.</p><p>"You cannot say...Once the rescinding takes place, then you have to do it. Then the Election Commission has to do it,” the bench said.</p><p>“As soon as it is rescinded, you have to at least set the ball rolling. What have you done,” the bench asked the counsel.</p><p>The court also emphasised that all the northeastern states’ cannot be clubbed together. </p><p>The bench also pointed out the situation in Nagaland is not adverse and also in Arunachal Pradesh there is nothing adverse right now. </p><p>Nataraj said there are tribal communities who are more agitated by this exercise, citing a report from a state government. </p><p>“Entire northeastern states are so sensitive, we do not want to aggravate the situation,” he said.</p><p>The bench asked Nataraj to take instruction on the matter as the exercise has to be done. </p><p>The court fixed it for further hearing in the third week of January 2025.</p><p>The petition sought delimitation in four north-eastern states of India, namely, Manipur, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.</p><p>Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 provided for delimitation of parliamentary and assembly constituencies in Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur or Nagaland.</p><p>It stated that if the President is satisfied that the conditions prevailing in the aforementioned states are conducive for the conduct of the delimitation exercise, the President may rescind the deferment order issued under the provisions of Section 10A of the Delimitation Act, 2002 in relation to that state, and provide for the conduct of delimitation exercise in the State by the Election Commission.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/supreme-court">Supreme Court </a>on Tuesday sought to know the steps taken by the <a href="https://www.deccanherald.com/tags/election-commission">Election Commission of Indi</a>a with regard to delimitation exercise in the northeastern states, especially in Arunachal Pradesh and Nagaland, as the presidential order of 2020 rescinded the deferment of delimitation.</p><p>A bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar asked Additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, appearing for the Centre, "Since, 2020, what have you been doing?”</p><p>Nataraj submitted the government is getting the report and the deliberations are going on.</p><p>He also said there are tribal communities in the northeastern states, and the situation is sensitive. He also said there are subsequent developments in these states and at present, it may not be conducive.</p>.Delhi pollution: Supreme Court allows lawyers to appear virtually.<p>"We are in touch with respective state governments and once we get a proper report...our intention is not to defer anything,” he said. </p><p>The bench, however, said said that is something separate.</p><p>"You cannot say...Once the rescinding takes place, then you have to do it. Then the Election Commission has to do it,” the bench said.</p><p>“As soon as it is rescinded, you have to at least set the ball rolling. What have you done,” the bench asked the counsel.</p><p>The court also emphasised that all the northeastern states’ cannot be clubbed together. </p><p>The bench also pointed out the situation in Nagaland is not adverse and also in Arunachal Pradesh there is nothing adverse right now. </p><p>Nataraj said there are tribal communities who are more agitated by this exercise, citing a report from a state government. </p><p>“Entire northeastern states are so sensitive, we do not want to aggravate the situation,” he said.</p><p>The bench asked Nataraj to take instruction on the matter as the exercise has to be done. </p><p>The court fixed it for further hearing in the third week of January 2025.</p><p>The petition sought delimitation in four north-eastern states of India, namely, Manipur, Assam, Nagaland, and Arunachal Pradesh.</p><p>Section 8A of the Representation of the People Act, 1950 provided for delimitation of parliamentary and assembly constituencies in Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur or Nagaland.</p><p>It stated that if the President is satisfied that the conditions prevailing in the aforementioned states are conducive for the conduct of the delimitation exercise, the President may rescind the deferment order issued under the provisions of Section 10A of the Delimitation Act, 2002 in relation to that state, and provide for the conduct of delimitation exercise in the State by the Election Commission.</p>