Opinion Five reasons why south India is upset

The powers that be proclaim they know — and only they know — what is in the interest of the country. And the mantra they chant is homogenisation. The single biggest obstacle they see towards achieving this goal is south India.

Fault Line 1: Delimitation, a political earthquake in the making

One of the most pressing concerns is the proposed delimitation exercise. According to Article 82 of the Constitution, Lok Sabha seats are to be reallocated after every Census to reflect updated population figures. However, this process was suspended in 1976. The freeze was later extended by the Vajpayee government to ensure fair representation.

With the ruling government delaying the 2021 Census and preparing for delimitation before the 2029 elections, the repercussions for south India could be severe.

Population projections as of March 2025 indicate that the total number of Lok Sabha seats would increase to around 790 on a pro-rata basis. While Kerala would maintain its 20 seats, Uttar Pradesh alone would see a jump from 80 to 133 seats. Consequently, the southern states’ share of Lok Sabha seats would shrink from the current 24 per cent of 543 seats to just 19 per cent. In contrast, the Hindi belt’s representation would rise from 32 per cent to 38 per cent.

Additionally, reapportionment would impact SC/ST-reserved seats, altering reservation dynamics in favour of the North. This deliberate power shift risks deepening regional disparities and undermining India’s federal character. If the South loses its ability to form coalitions to block constitutional amendments, its role in national decision-making will be further diminished.

Fault Line 2: Language imposition, the battle for identity

Language remains a flashpoint in North-South relations. Since the 1968 and 1986 education policies, the Centre has pushed for the three-language formula, mandating Hindi, English, and a regional language in schools. However, this policy has disproportionately benefitted Hindi while eroding linguistic diversity. In north India, regional languages like Bhojpuri and Maithili have suffered decline due to Hindi dominance.

The new National Education Policy (NEP) 2020 claims to offer flexibility in language choice, but in practice, Hindi is being aggressively promoted while resources for other languages remain inadequate. Data shows that over 90 per cent of Hindi belt residents are monolingual, whereas south Indian states exhibit multilingual proficiency. Furthermore, states with higher English proficiency, such as Tamil Nadu and Kerala, consistently rank higher on the Human Development Index (HDI) and Gross Enrolment Ratios (GER), while Hindi-speaking states lag behind.

The 2019 draft of the NEP initially mandated Hindi in non-Hindi states, forcing the government into damage control mode after widespread protests. The South views this as a larger attempt to culturally homogenise India by reducing regional languages to a secondary status.

Fault Line 3: Education policies — centralised control and political coercion

The Centre has used funding as a tool to push states into compliance with its policies. The centrally sponsored Samagra Shiksha scheme, which funds education programmes, has been selectively withheld from states like Tamil Nadu and Kerala for not adopting NEP 2020 or the PM SHRI project. Tamil Nadu has seen ₹2,152 crore blocked, impacting 40 lakh students and 32,000 staff members, while Kerala has been denied ₹849.2 crore.

The shift of education from the State List to the Concurrent List under the 42nd Amendment has allowed the Centre to dictate education policies without considering the states’ concerns. While Gujarat under Narendra Modi successfully removed the governor’s role in university affairs, Opposition-ruled states have faced roadblocks in implementing similar reforms. The new UGC regulations further threaten state autonomy by granting governors sweeping powers over vice-chancellor appointments in state universities despite states bearing 76 per cent of their education expenditure.

Fault Line 4: Financial discrimination, the unequal distribution of resources

Financial devolution has long been a source of contention, with south Indian states contributing disproportionately to the national tax pool while receiving comparatively less in return. The South views this financial imbalance as an unfair penalty for its better governance and economic discipline. The Fourteenth and Fifteenth Finance Commissions recommended devolution of 42 per cent and 41 per cent of net tax revenue to states, but the effective share received has declined to 30 per cent in 2023-24. Considering three verticals — share from the Central Taxes, grants mandated by the Finance Commission and money disbursed through centrally sponsored schemes — the South feels neglected and punished for its stellar performance.

Uttar Pradesh, despite contributing far less in taxes, has received more central funds than all southern states combined.

Despite these increased allocations, states like Bihar and Uttar Pradesh continue to struggle with high fertility rates, poor education, and weak healthcare systems, raising questions about fund utilisation.

Fault Line 5: One Nation, One Election – The death of federalism?

The proposal for One Nation, One Election (ONOE) is another step toward centralisation. India’s Constitution grants independent powers to the Union and states under Schedule VII. The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Kesavananda Bharati case reaffirmed that federalism is part of the Constitution’s basic structure.

ONOE would require forcibly aligning state assembly terms with the Lok Sabha, necessitating either premature dissolutions or arbitrary extensions. This undermines the constitutional guarantee of five-year legislative terms and places state governments at the mercy of central decision-making. The proposal includes a new Article 82A, granting the President, on the advice of the Election Commission, the authority to defer or terminate state elections. For south Indian states, ONOE is an existential threat to their self-governance.

The bigger picture: A push toward unitary rule?

Controversial laws such as the Goods and Services Tax (GST), NEP 2020, and the new criminal bills were passed without meaningful consultations with states. The relentless push for “one nation”— be it One Nation, One Election; One Nation, One Tax; One Nation, One Civil Code; or One Nation, One Language — is not about efficiency but about enforcing a monolithic identity. This vision prioritises the Hindi-Hindu heartland while relegating south India and other non-Hindi regions to a secondary status.

The South’s growing discontent

The South’s anger is not merely a reaction to recent events but a culmination of decades of policy decisions. The fundamental question here is: What defines India? A true federal democracy acknowledges and respects its diversity rather than enforcing uniformity. As the battle for federalism intensifies, south India’s resistance to these policies is not just about preserving regional identity — it is about safeguarding the very idea of India as a pluralistic, inclusive republic.

The writer is a Rajya Sabha member from Kerala, belonging to the CPM