Current Affairs Topics Quiz Archive
International Relations Economics Polity & Governance Environment & Ecology Science & Technology Internal Security Geography Social Issues Art & Culture Modern History

Now, Rajasthan Assembly passes Bill to repeal two-child norm for ULB elections

March 10, 2026 4 min read Polity & Governance Social Issues GS Paper 2 (Polity Local Governance Social Justice)
On This Page ▼

What Happened

  • The Rajasthan Legislative Assembly passed the Rajasthan Municipal (Amendment) Bill, 2026 to repeal the two-child eligibility condition for contesting Urban Local Body (ULB) elections
  • This followed the earlier passage of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Bill, 2026 scrapping the same norm for Panchayati Raj elections
  • The two-child norm, originally introduced in 1994-1995 during the Bhairon Singh Shekhawat government, disqualified persons with more than two children from contesting local body elections
  • Rajasthan Law Minister Jogaram Patel announced the Cabinet's approval, citing changed national population dynamics and demographic goals
  • The repeal aligns Rajasthan with the national shift away from coercive population control — India dropped its population stabilisation targets in official policy

Static Topic Bridges

Two-Child Norm in Local Body Elections: Legal History and Supreme Court Position

The two-child norm as a disqualification for local body election candidates has been a contested constitutional question, with the Supreme Court upholding it as a valid reasonable restriction on political participation.

  • Origin: Several states introduced the two-child norm as a population control measure for PRI/ULB candidates in the 1990s — Rajasthan (1994), Haryana (1994), Andhra Pradesh (1994), Madhya Pradesh (2000), Odisha (1994)
  • Landmark SC verdict — Javed v. State of Haryana (2003): The Supreme Court upheld Haryana's two-child norm as constitutional. It held that:
  • The norm is not violative of Articles 14 (Equality), 19 (Freedom), or 21 (Right to Life)
  • It is a reasonable restriction imposed in public interest (population control)
  • The disqualification is prospective and voluntary — persons with existing children at the time of commencement are protected by savings clauses
  • Reproductive rights under Article 21 do not extend to a positive right to contest elections regardless of family size
  • Despite the SC's validation, several states later repealed the norm voluntarily — recognising it had perverse effects (discrimination against women, encouragement of female foeticide to comply, penalisation of the poor who had less access to family planning services)

Connection to this news: Rajasthan's repeal reverses what is now widely seen as a socially counterproductive policy — even as it remains constitutionally valid per Javed v. Haryana. It reflects a legislative policy evolution rather than a judicial mandate.

Panchayati Raj and Urban Local Bodies: Constitutional Framework

The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments (1992) created constitutional mandates for rural and urban local self-government. Qualifications for membership of these bodies fall within the legislative competence of state legislatures.

  • 73rd Amendment (Part IX, Articles 243-243O): Established the three-tier Panchayati Raj system (Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Samiti, Zila Parishad); mandates reservation of 1/3 seats for women; requires 5-year terms and regular elections through State Election Commissions
  • 74th Amendment (Part IXA, Articles 243P-243ZG): Established constitutional status for Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) — Nagar Panchayats, Municipal Councils, Municipal Corporations; similar reservation and election provisions
  • Article 243F (Disqualifications): A person is disqualified from being chosen as a member of Panchayat if they are so disqualified by or under any law made by the Legislature of the State — giving state legislatures broad power to impose disqualifications, including the two-child norm
  • Article 243V: Analogous provision for ULBs — disqualifications may be imposed by state law
  • State Election Commission (Article 243K/243ZA): Superintendence of elections to local bodies vested in State Election Commissions, not the Election Commission of India

Connection to this news: The Rajasthan Municipal (Amendment) Bill operates squarely within Article 243V — the state legislature is within its constitutional authority to add or remove disqualifications for ULB membership. The repeal is a legitimate exercise of state legislative power.

Population Policy and Reproductive Rights

India's official population policy has shifted significantly from earlier coercive approaches to a rights-based, voluntary framework. The two-child norm repeal reflects this evolution.

  • National Population Policy (NPP) 2000: Targeted Total Fertility Rate (TFR) of 2.1 by 2010; explicitly disavowed coercive methods; promoted small family norm through incentives and education
  • Current TFR: India achieved replacement-level fertility (TFR ~2.0) nationally per NFHS-5 (2019-21); many southern states are already below replacement level (TFR ~1.6-1.8)
  • Coercive norm perverse effects documented: Women who had children from previous marriages or suffered child loss were penalised; sex-selective abortions incentivised to comply with the norm; poor and marginalised communities disproportionately affected
  • India's 2036 Population Projection (MoHFW): Total population expected to stabilise — population growth is no longer a primary policy concern for most states
  • ICPD Programme of Action (1994): India is a signatory; commits to reproductive rights as human rights, voluntary family planning, and elimination of coercive measures

Connection to this news: Rajasthan's repeal of a 30-year-old norm acknowledges the evidence that coercive population measures in electoral law do not achieve demographic goals but do impose discriminatory costs — particularly on women, the poor, and the politically marginalised.

Key Facts & Data

  • Rajasthan Municipal (Amendment) Bill, 2026 and Rajasthan Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Bill, 2026 — both passed March 2026
  • Two-child norm introduced in Rajasthan: 1994-1995 (Bhairon Singh Shekhawat government)
  • Javed v. State of Haryana (2003): SC upheld two-child norm as constitutionally valid
  • 73rd Amendment (1992): Constitutional basis for Panchayati Raj; Article 243F — disqualification provisions
  • 74th Amendment (1992): Constitutional basis for ULBs; Article 243V — disqualification provisions
  • India's TFR: ~2.0 nationally (NFHS-5, 2019-21) — already at replacement level
  • NPP 2000: Targeted TFR 2.1 by 2010; disavowed coercive measures
  • Article 243K: State Election Commission for Panchayat elections; Article 243ZA: SEC for ULB elections