Panaji: In a major setback to the government’s efforts to re-align Assembly seats before the 2027 state elections, the High Court of Bombay at Goa on Thursday restrained the Census Commissioner from notifying Scheduled Tribe (ST) population figures for the state.
The High Court granted interim stay on the issuance of notification by the Census Commissioner on Goa’s estimated Scheduled Tribe population.
A Division Bench of Justice Valmiki Menezes and Justice Amit S Jamsandekar granted the interim relief in a writ petition filed by Edwin Lucio Fernandes, challenging the constitutional validity of the Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Act, 2025.
The court held that the petitioner established an arguable case that the 2025 Act violates Articles 170(3) and 332 of the Constitution of India, which freeze constituency delimitation until figures from the first census taken after 2026 are published.
The High Court also said, “If there was no manner for the Census Commissioner to be able to even ascertain or estimate the population figures as required by Section 3, before publishing the same, there could be no justification for presuming the proportion of population of Schedule Tribe community to the population of the state being 9.9% at present, when the figure pertains to the year 2001 Census.”
Granting interim relief, the High Court said, “Pending disposal of this petition, the Respondent No. 3, Census Commissioner, is hereby restrained from issuing any notification or notifying in the Gazette of India the figures referred to in its communication dated 10.09.2026 to the Ministry of Law and Justice or from notifying any other population figures either ascertained or estimated on any basis other than on the basis of the first Census after 2026.”
The dispute stems from a communication dated September 10, 2026, from the Assistant Registrar General to the Ministry of Law and Justice. In that letter, the Census Commission conceded it was unable to ascertain or estimate current ST population figures from available data.
However, the authority proceeded to ‘reasonably presume’ that the ST population proportion remained at 9.9% of the state’s total population, relying on 2001 census data after the Kunbi, Gauda, and Velip communities were added in 2003.
The High Court said that statutory power cannot be exercised on arbitrary assumptions. It said, “In our opinion, there is absolutely no basis to the statement made in the communication.”
The High Court noted that issuing an unverified notification would inflict irreversible harm. Under Section 3(4) of the 2025 Act, published population figures become final and immune to judicial review.
The High Court observed, “Release of any notification reflecting these to be the population figures would not only be contrary to the mandate of Article 170(3) and Article 332 of the Constitution of India, but would also be contrary to the requirement of Sub Section 2 and Sub Section 3 of Section 3 of the Act itself.”
Senior advocate Naushad Engineer for the petitioner said that the High Court in Prasad Gaonkar v. ECI (2022) and the Supreme Court in K Purushottam Reddy v. Union of India (2025) affirmed that Article 170(3) bars fresh delimitation before the post-2026 census.
The High Court has granted interim stay on the issuance of notification by the Census Commissioner on Goa’s estimated Scheduled Tribe population, Deputy Solicitor General of India Pravin Faldessai said. He said, “The stay was granted as interim relief in a petition challenging the constitutional validity of the Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Act, 2025.”
Faldessai clarified that the stay concerns the estimated population notification under Section 3 of the Act, while reservation and delimitation are not presently part of the petition.
He said withholding the notification would hold up the subsequent ST reservation process. The Goa government is not a party to the petition, he pointed out and added that the Goa government or the Centre could possibly challenge the stay, as the process for ST reservation would be held up with this interim stay. He, however, said that he was not in the know of any such decision for now.
