How India plans to vote in a 'one nation, one election' in 2034

Simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state legislatures are provided for under the 2024 Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the 2024 Union Territories Laws (Amendment Bill) read more
Since the government intends to hold the first nationwide simultaneous polls by 2034 following the ratification of the constitutional reform bill for 'one nation, one election', all state assemblies elected after 2029 would serve for a shorter period of time to synchronise their term with the 2034 general elections.
PP Choudhary, head of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) on the 'one nation, one election' bill (The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024), told Times of India that the assembly, which is set to be elected in 2032, may only serve a two-year term after 2027 in order to ensure that the next elections in Uttar Pradesh, the largest state in India, coincide with the Lok Sabha elections, which may occur in 2034.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha and state legislatures are provided for under the 2024 Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill and the 2024 Union Territories Laws (Amendment Bill).
According to the constitution amendment bill, the President may announce when the next general elections are due by announcing the date of the Lok Sabha's first session following a general election, which is most likely scheduled for 2029.
When the Lok Sabha's five-year term ends, the tenure of all state assemblies established after this date would also end. An election for the Lok Sabha or state legislature will be conducted for a term equivalent to the remaining five years if it is dissolved before its five-year mandate.
As a result, its subsequent election will coincide with the cycle of simultaneous elections. Assembly elections will only be held to coincide with the Lok Sabha elections, even in states where polls are scheduled.
The bill does, however, stipulate that the Election Commission may propose to the President that elections for a state assembly be held separately from those for the rest of the nation if it believes that this is not possible. The President may issue an order to hold elections for that assembly at a later date.
STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD
Choudhary, the BJP MP for Pali in Rajasthan, stated that based on the JPC's operations, the panel's term may be prolonged because the members agreed to visit states and union territories prior to delivering their final recommendations.
To date, JPC members have travelled to Uttarakhand and Maharashtra.
The bills were filed in the LS in December of last year and submitted to the Chaudhary-led panel, which has been consulting with stakeholders for comments.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Standard

35 minutes ago

• Business Standard

Rahul Gandhi slams PM Modi over 'Make in India', cites job concerns

The Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha and Congress MP Rahul Gandhi on Saturday criticized Prime Minister Narendra Modi saying that despite promises of a "Make in India" factory boom, manufacturing in the country is at a record low and youth unemployment is very high. Gandhi questioned the effectiveness of the "Make in India" initiative, highlighting that manufacturing in the country has fallen to a record low of 14 per cent of the economy since 2014. He also pointed to rising youth unemployment and a doubling of imports from China, accusing Prime Minister Narendra Modi of focusing on slogans rather than real solutions. In a post on X, Rahul Gandhi shared a video and wrote, "Make in India" promised a factory boom. So why is manufacturing at record lows, youth unemployment at record highs, and why have imports from China more than doubled? Modi ji has mastered the art of slogans, not solutions. Since 2014, manufacturing has fallen to 14% of our economy." He highlighted the challenges faced by India's youth, sharing in a post that he met two talented young men, Shivam and Saif, in Nehru Place, New Delhi, who remain unable to fulfil their potential. He criticised the country's current economic model and said, "In Nehru Place, New Delhi, I met Shivam and Saif - bright, skilled, full of promise - yet denied the opportunity to fulfil it. The truth is stark: we assemble, we import, but we don't build. China profits." He said that Prime Minister Modi has no new ideas and has given up on growing India's industries. He added that even the important PLI scheme is being quietly stopped. Gandhi called for big changes to help Indian producers with honest reforms and financial support, warning that if India doesn't build its industries, it will keep buying from other countries. "With no new ideas, Modi ji has surrendered. Even the much-hyped PLI scheme is now being quietly rolled back. India needs a fundamental shift - one that empowers lakhs of producers through honest reforms and financial support. We must stop being a market for others. If we don't build here, we'll keep buying from those who do. The clock is ticking," the post reads The Make in India initiative was launched by the Prime Minister in September 2014 as part of a wider set of nation-building initiatives.

Indian Express

3 hours ago

• Indian Express

Roll back Ordinance on fee hike by private schools in Delhi, hold public consultations, say protesting parents

The Cabinet nod to Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Ordinance, 2025, without public consultation, was one of the key contentions raised as hundreds of parents gathered at Chhatrasal Stadium in North Delhi on Saturday morning to protest arbitrary fee hikes by private schools in the Capital. Alleging harassment of students by such schools, the parents claimed that they have been subjected to years of unapproved fee hikes. The demonstration, led by the group United Parents' Voice (UPV), was initially planned outside Chief Minister Rekha Gupta's Office at the Delhi Secretariat. However, it was relocated after the Delhi Police denied permission, citing security and traffic concerns. The protest follows the Delhi Cabinet's June 10 decision to approve an Ordinance based on the Delhi School Education (Transparency in Fixation and Regulation of Fees) Bill, 2025. The Bill had earlier received the Cabinet's approval on April 29, soon after parents staged widespread protests against fee hikes. The Bill, however, could not be presented in the Assembly because the Budget session was cut short. While the government officials have stated that the Bill and the Ordinance aim to curb arbitrary fee increases and improve transparency, parents alleged that the legislation was drafted without public consultation and fails to address ongoing issues affecting students and families. After being denied permission on Friday to hold the demonstration at outside the Secretariat by the Delhi Police, which imposed Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023 across the I.P. Estate area, the group moved the protest to Chhatrasal Stadium at 8 am Saturday, where the CM was attending the International Yoga Day celebrations. 'The government is scared of the parents' voice. The system has acknowledged our strength. Now let's show up in even bigger numbers,' said Mahesh Mishra, one of the protesters whose child studies at Delhi Public School, Dwarka. The group's key demands included an immediate pause in the implementation of the Ordinance, a 30-day public consultation period, an end to the alleged harassment of children by private schools, strict action against rule-violating institutions, rollback of unjustified hikes since 2019, and the establishment of a robust, transparent grievance redressal system for parents. 'We urge an immediate halt to the proposed Ordinance and the Bill. These should first be subjected to transparent public consultation as per constitutional and fundamental rights, as parents and citizens are the primary stakeholders in any education-related policy decision,' Mishra added. While carrying placards and raising slogans, the demonstrators demanded action against private schools for alleged coercive practices. UPV claimed that children had been removed from rolls by private schools, denied access to classes, and in some cases, physically blocked at school gates by bouncers over fee-related issues. The group described such incidents as mental harassment and demanded accountability from schools engaging in such practices. Another long-standing concern that echoed at the protest was the issue of unapproved fee hikes going back to 2019. The parents' group said that despite repeated appeals, the government has failed to roll back what they described as arbitrary and unjustified increases. They also highlighted the absence of a functional and time-bound grievance redressal mechanism. DPS Dwarka, Maharaja Agrasen Model School, Pitampura, and Apeejay School, Sheikh Sarai, are some of the schools that have been embroiled in disputes amid the fee hike row.

The Wire

3 hours ago

• The Wire

In Critique of Draft Rohith Vemula Bill, UN Experts Urge Stronger Safeguards for SC, ST Students

New Delhi: Two United Nations special rapporteurs have issued a detailed statement raising concerns and offering recommendations on the draft Rohith Vemula (Prevention of Exclusion or Injustice) (Right to Education and Dignity) Bill proposed by the Karnataka government and urged the government to consider them. Ashwini K.P., special rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, and Nicolas Levrat, special rapporteur on minority issues, noted that while the Bill aims to combat caste-based discrimination in higher education, it lacks key human rights protections and clarity in legal definitions. The draft legislation of the law, named after Rohith Vemula, seeks to criminalise discrimination against students from Scheduled Castes (SCs), Scheduled Tribes (STs), Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and religious minorities in educational institutions. The special rapporteurs come under the purview of the 'special procedures' of the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC); they are 'independent human rights experts' who are mandated by the UN to report and advise on 'human rights from a thematic or country-specific perspective'. Under their special mandate from the UNHRC, they have highlighted 'several human rights considerations that should be considered during the ongoing development of the legislation'. UN concerns on the draft Bill The special rapporteurs stated that the draft Bill does not mention 'specific protection for Dalits and Adivasis against disproportionate discrimination in various areas' and urged the drafting committee to 'explicitly' include provisions for their protection. Ashwini K.P., replying to an email questionnaire by The Wire, said: 'The current draft clubs OBCs, SC, ST and minority communities together. All of them face marginalisation, but it's crucial to understand and recognise the heterogeneous nature of their experiences. The persistent and systematic forms of discrimination that Dalit and Adivasi students face require explicit acknowledgement.' They also claimed that there is a lack of definition for 'direct or indirect discrimination', which could result in the law failing to provide 'comprehensive protection' to those affected. It could also lead to misuse of the law and oppression of activities unrelated to the law, including those in the 'defence of human rights'. The draft includes provisions to imprison a person convicted of discriminating against SC, ST, OBC and minority students for up to one year or impose a fine of Rs 10,000. Heads of higher education institutions will also be held liable, and the institutions may lose government aid or grants in case of such convictions. The punitive nature of the draft law was also criticised. They warned that it may 'undermine the promotion of understanding, tolerance and friendship among racial or ethnic groups'. Focusing on addressing the social roots of caste-based discrimination, the rapporteurs recommended placing greater emphasis on effective 'preventive measures' such as orientation programmes and educational awareness campaigns. To ensure effective implementation, they also recommended setting up a grievance redressal mechanism, ensuring 'protection for whistleblowers' and introducing 'accountability measures' for educational institutions that fail to comply. The special rapporteurs also claimed that the Bill's drafting process has not been sufficiently deliberative and has not included the 'voices of those who may experience caste-based discrimination and harassment, including Dalit and Adivasi students, scholars and activists'. They called upon the committee to introduce provisions that make the process more transparent, consultative and participatory. Finally, the rapporteurs noted the need for diversity and proportional representation in the drafting committee itself and urged that there be 'proportionate caste, gender and geographical representation from the state of Karnataka in the committee'. The political equation The move to draft this law comes after leader of opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, wrote a letter to the three Congress-led state governments in April urging them to enact the law that was promised in the party's 2024 Lok Sabha election manifesto. Following this, Karnataka chief minister Siddaramaiah instructed his legal adviser to prepare a draft of the Bill. 'The Union government brushed the incident under the carpet although it was clear that Rohith Vemula was targeted because of his [Dalit] caste,' said minister Priyank Kharge confirming that he provided inputs for drafting the Bill. However, Ashwini claimed that the Indian government 'has not approached the UNHRC or any other international bodies for recommendations'. Meanwhile, the BJP's leader of opposition in the Karnataka legislative council, Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, agreed that caste-based discrimination should be banned but questioned whether such discrimination can be addressed solely through legislation. This is not the first time that such a demand has been raised. In 2019, Radhika Vemula and Abeda Tadvi – the mothers of Rohith Vemula and Payal Tadvi – filed a petition in the Supreme Court demanding that the government enforce the 2012 University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations that aim to protect vulnerable students from discrimination in educational institutions. The UGC guidelines also have a specific definition of 'discrimination' and various kinds of discriminatory behaviour, but in January 2025, after the case was heard only for the second time, the UGC released new draft regulations intended to replace the 2012 ones. N. Sukumar, a professor at Delhi University, noted in an interview to Scroll that in the new draft, 'these terms are loosely defined'. When the various aspects of the problem are not properly defined, 'there is hardly any scope to address the issues of caste on the campus.' Rohith Vemula and a legacy of institutional violence Vemula, a PhD scholar belonging to Dalit community at the University of Hyderabad, was among five students suspended in September 2015 following a complaint filed by the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP), the student wing of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, the BJP's ideological fountainhead. His monthly research fellowship of Rs 25,000 was also discontinued, reportedly due to his activities in the Ambedkar Students' Association. The ABVP's complaint was forwarded by then-Union minister Bandaru Dattatreya to then-human resource development minister Smriti Irani, who subsequently asked the university to take appropriate action. Following their suspension and removal from university housing, the students began a relay hunger strike and stayed in a temporary tent on campus. On January 17, 2016, Vemula died by suicide, leaving behind a note in which he expressed a deep sense of disillusionment and described his birth as a 'fatal accident'. His death was one amongst numerous such incidents in the past two decades where a Dalit student was allegedly pushed over the edge and died by suicide. Activists consider these to be 'institutional murders', since every part of the education institution – including the student body, the faculty and the administration – are said to work in tandem to make sure that caste hierarchies are upheld and no voices can be raised against it. This leaves the student completely cornered. Some say that caste-based discrimination, humiliating abuse and alienation by peers have pushed students like Payal Tadvi, Darshan Solanki, Ayush Ashna and Varad Sanjay Nerkar over the edge. They were allegedly targeted for belonging to a certain caste and viewed as not fit to be in such institutions. There are no avenues for redressal of complaints as well, since the administration too engages in suppressing their voices, activists say. While a few of these cases received media attention, many others were recorded through an independent study by the Delhi-based Insight Foundation, led by educationist Anoop Kumar. Path ahead Ashwini claims that 'currently there is no specific legislation in India which addresses caste-based discrimination in higher education for Dalit and Adivasi students. While some mechanisms such as grievance redressal cells exist in colleges and universities, there is no exclusive framework to protect students from marginalised backgrounds in academic spaces.' Therefore, although some critics believe that the draft Rohith Vemula (Prevention of Exclusion or Injustice) (Right to Education and Dignity) Bill is a politically motivated move by the Congress, Ashwini believes that 'the intention behind the Rohith Vemula Act is to fill this gap and ensure a safe space for students coming from marginalised backgrounds'. Such a law becomes crucial in an education system where, according to her, 'student suicides among marginalised communities highlight the disproportionate discrimination faced by them'. She claims that there is a pattern of structural exclusion and systematic discrimination against Dalit and Adivasi students, and that this legislation is important to create a 'safer academic environment' for them. But critics also raise questions of political motivation and appropriation of the long-fought struggles of activists like Radhika Vemula and Abeda Tadvi in creating an equitable and safe educational space by Rahul Gandhi and the Congress. According to the UNHRC special rapporteurs, the draft law has the potential to make effective changes – but this can only be realised if such expert criticism and recommendations are taken into account and the drafting process becomes more publicly participatory. Tamoghna Chakraborty is an intern at The Wire. If you know someone – a friend or a family member – at risk of suicide, please reach out to them. The Suicide Prevention India Foundation maintains a list of telephone numbers they can call to speak in confidence. The TeleManas helpline, a government helpline, functions 24×7, its numbers are 1-800 891-4416 or 14416. You could also take them to the nearest hospital.