Twenty-third Amendment of the Constitution of India

The Twenty-third Amendment of the Constitution of India (1969) was enacted to modify the provisions relating to the reservation of seats and special representation for certain communities in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies. It was designed to reflect the evolving demographic, political and social realities of the Republic while extending constitutional safeguards for disadvantaged communities for another decade. The amendment mainly affected Articles 330, 332, 333, and 334 of the Constitution.

Historical Context and Background

At the inception of the Constitution, Article 334 provided that the reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes (SCs) and Scheduled Tribes (STs), and the representation of the Anglo-Indian community by nomination in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies, would cease after twenty years from 26 January 1950, that is, by 26 January 1970. However, despite two decades of progress, it was widely recognised that social and economic disparities persisted, and the objectives of equality and adequate representation were far from achieved.
The Constituent Assembly had introduced these provisions as temporary, meant to bridge historical inequities, but by the late 1960s, it became evident that extending the arrangement was necessary to maintain the momentum of social justice. Simultaneously, political and territorial changes—such as the creation of Nagaland as a separate State in 1963—required fresh constitutional calibration, especially in view of the fact that over 90 per cent of Nagaland’s population was tribal. Consequently, reservation of seats for STs in Nagaland was deemed unnecessary and inconsistent with demographic realities.

Objectives and Need for the Amendment

The Twenty-third Amendment, enacted in 1969, had four primary objectives:

1. To discontinue the reservation of seats for the Scheduled Tribes in Nagaland, both in the Lok Sabha and the State Legislative Assembly, given the State’s overwhelming tribal majority.
2. To restrict the nomination of Anglo-Indians to the State Legislative Assemblies to not more than one member, thereby introducing uniformity and limiting discretion previously vested in Governors.
3. To extend the reservation of seats for the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, and Anglo-Indians for another ten years, from 1970 to 1980.
4. To bring consistency in Articles 330, 332, 333, and 334, ensuring the alignment of representation policies across States and Union territories.

This Amendment thus combined social policy extension with demographic rationalisation and procedural uniformity.

Key Provisions and Constitutional Changes

The Constitution (Twenty-third Amendment) Act, 1969 made targeted amendments to the following articles:

• Article 330 (Reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha)The words “except the Scheduled Tribes in the tribal areas of Assam” were replaced by“except the Scheduled Tribes in the tribal areas of Assam and in Nagaland”, thereby excluding Nagaland from the scheme of reservation for Scheduled Tribes in the House of the People.
• Article 332 (Reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Legislative Assemblies of the States)A parallel amendment inserted the same exclusion clause for Nagaland, discontinuing reservation of seats for Scheduled Tribes in its State Assembly.
• Article 333 (Representation of the Anglo-Indian community in State Legislative Assemblies)Previously, Governors had wide discretion to nominate “such number of members” as they deemed appropriate. The amendment restricted this discretion by stipulating that “the Governor may nominate one member of that community to the Assembly”. A transitional provision ensured that existing nominated members would continue until the dissolution of the concerned Assembly.
• Article 334 (Duration of reservation and special representation)The phrase “twenty years” was replaced with “thirty years”, extending the constitutional reservation and nomination scheme up to 26 January 1980.

This extension would later be repeated by subsequent amendments—the 45th (1980), 62nd (1990), 79th (1999), 95th (2009), and 104th (2020) Amendments—each prolonging the arrangement for another decade.

Legislative Process and Enactment

The Constitution (Twenty-third Amendment) Bill, 1969 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 21 August 1969 by Panampilly Govinda Menon, then Minister of Law. It was designated Bill No. 78 of 1969. The Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Bill articulated three justifications:

1. Despite social progress, the conditions necessitating reservation and nomination had not ceased to exist, warranting a further ten-year continuation.
2. Given that Nagaland’s population was predominantly tribal, reservation there would be redundant.
3. To ensure parity, Anglo-Indian representation was to be capped at one nominated member per State Assembly.

The Bill was debated and passed in the Lok Sabha on 8–9 December 1969, and subsequently passed by the Rajya Sabha on 17 December 1969 without amendments. It received Presidential assent on 23 January 1970 from President V. V. Giri, and was published in the Gazette of India the following day.

Ratification by the States

As the amendment affected representation in State Legislatures, it required ratification under Article 368(2) by at least half of the State Legislatures. The following States ratified the amendment:

• Assam, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Mysore, Nagaland, Punjab, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal.

The States of Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Jammu and Kashmir, Orissa, and Uttar Pradesh did not ratify it. After receiving the required number of ratifications, the amendment was duly enacted and brought into force.

Impact on Representation in Nagaland

Nagaland’s inclusion as a full-fledged State in 1963 necessitated a distinctive constitutional arrangement. Given its tribal population exceeding 90 per cent, reservation for Scheduled Tribes was deemed unnecessary. Instead, political representation was designed to reflect the community’s natural majority without the need for statutory reservation. Articles 330 and 332 were thus modified to exclude Nagaland’s Scheduled Tribes from the ambit of reserved seats in both the national and State legislatures.
This arrangement respected the federal and cultural distinctiveness of Nagaland while maintaining the principle of representative equality. It also reflected the Indian government’s commitment to asymmetric federalism, allowing tailored governance models for special category States.

Anglo-Indian Representation and its Limitation

The Anglo-Indian community, a small but historically significant minority, had been granted representation in both Houses of Parliament and State Assemblies through nominations under Articles 331 and 333. Before 1969, the number of Anglo-Indians nominated to State Assemblies was entirely at the Governor’s discretion. The Twenty-third Amendment standardised this by limiting nomination to one member per State Assembly, thereby ensuring uniformity across the country and preventing potential over-representation.
The continuation clause under Article 333(2) allowed sitting nominated members to continue until their Assembly’s dissolution, avoiding abrupt termination of tenure.

Extension of Reservation Period under Article 334

The amendment’s most enduring feature was the extension of reservation and special representation for ten more years—from 1970 to 1980. This was justified on the ground that Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes continued to face systemic disadvantages in education, employment, and political participation. The Constituent Assembly had always envisaged that these provisions could be periodically reviewed and extended based on progress achieved.
Subsequent amendments to the Constitution—45th (1980), 62nd (1990), 79th (1999), 95th (2009), and 104th (2020)—each extended the period by another decade, reaffirming the continuing relevance of constitutional safeguards for marginalised groups.

Significance and Evaluation

The Twenty-third Amendment is significant for three reasons:

1. Continuity with Reform – It maintained the system of affirmative representation while introducing measured restrictions and regional adaptations.
2. Recognition of Regional Distinctiveness – By excluding Nagaland from the reservation scheme, it acknowledged the unique demographic structure of a State where the majority itself comprised Scheduled Tribes.
3. Institutional Uniformity – By capping Anglo-Indian nominations to one per State Assembly, it enhanced constitutional consistency and reduced administrative discretion.

The amendment also marked the second periodic review of India’s reservation framework since 1950, demonstrating the Constitution’s flexibility to adapt protective measures in light of changing socio-political circumstances.

Legacy and Later Developments

Although initially set to expire in 1980, the reservation and nomination system persisted through successive amendments, attesting to its continued necessity in India’s democratic consolidation. The Anglo-Indian nomination in legislatures, however, was discontinued in 2020 following the 104th Constitutional Amendment, signalling the gradual withdrawal of certain temporary provisions as socio-political integration progressed.
The Twenty-third Amendment, therefore, stands as a landmark in the evolution of India’s representational policy. It preserved the inclusive vision of the Constitution while refining the balance between equality, diversity, and regional particularity—principles that continue to shape India’s democratic architecture.