The High Court has restrained the Census Commissioner from notifying or publishing estimated Scheduled Tribe (ST) population figures for the State of Goa on any basis other than the first official Census conducted after 2026.The High Court further observed that, if the Census Commissioner notified any such population figures, the figures so notified would replace any figures previously published. Since such a notification would not be justiciable after publication, it could render the entire petition infructuous..

The impugned Readjustment of Representation of Scheduled Tribes in Assembly Constituencies of the State of Goa Act, 2025 was enacted by Parliament on August 13, 2025, and brought into force on August 6, 2026. It sought to create an enabling mechanism empowering the Election Commission of India to readjust Assembly seats and provide political reservation to Scheduled Tribes in Goa ahead of the State Assembly elections scheduled for early 2027.

Under Section 3 of the Act, the Census Commissioner was empowered to ascertain or estimate the ST population, determine its proportion to the total population of the State, and notify those figures.

The petitioner’s counsel argued that Section 3 conferred uncanalised and arbitrary powers on the Census Commissioner. He contended that the constitutional mandate under Articles 170(3) and 332 imposes an express bar on any readjustment or delimitation until the publication of the figures from the first census conducted after 2026.

The petitioner relied on earlier rulings of the High Court and the Supreme Court, both of which affirmed the constitutional freeze on constituency delimitation prior to the post-2026 census.

During the proceedings, Deputy Solicitor General of India Adv. Pravin Faldessai placed on record a communication dated September 10, 2026, from the Assistant Registrar General/Census Commissioner to the Ministry of Law and Justice. In that communication, the Census Commissioner acknowledged an inability to ascertain or estimate the current total population or ST population from available data, but noted that the ST proportion recorded in the 2001 Census stood at 9.9% and could be “reasonably presumed” to remain roughly the same.

The High Court expressed serious concern over this reasoning, observing that the Census Commissioner had conceded an inability to determine the current figures, yet proceeded to “presume” the proportion based on 2001 Census data without any factual basis.

The Court noted that the three prominent communities—Kunbi, Gauda, and Velip—were included in the ST list on January 8, 2003, after the 2001 Census. Consequently, the 2001 Census recorded only 566 Scheduled Tribe individuals in Goa.

The High Court further observed that notifying population figures under Section 3(4) of the Act would render them final and non-justiciable before a court, potentially rendering the constitutional challenge infructuous before the petition could be finally decided.

Holding that the petitioner had made out a strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience lay in granting interim relief, the bench issued Rule in the matter and ordered that the Census Commissioner be restrained from issuing any notification or publishing, in the Gazette of India, the figures referred to in the communication dated September 10, 2026.

Granting interim relief, the High Court observed that no population figures—whether ascertained or estimated—may be notified on any basis other than the first official Census conducted after 2026, which is scheduled to commence on January 5, 2027.