Holding simultaneous elections for the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies in 2029 under the Modi government’s ‘One Nation, One Election’ initiative is possible if the Constitution is amended and state governments support the move, according to P.P. Chaudhary, the chairman of the joint parliamentary panel examining the related bills.

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill, 2024, and the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024, which aim to synchronise Lok Sabha and State Assembly polls, were sent to the 31-member joint committee of Parliament headed by Mr. Chaudhary, a BJP MP from Rajasthan, following the Opposition’s demand for broader scrutiny.

When asked if State assembly elections could be held alongside the 2029 Lok Sabha polls, Mr. Chaudhary said on Monday (August 24, 2026) that if the constitutional amendment is approved in Parliament by 2028, the rollout of ‘One Nation, One Election’ can begin that same year.

“Then what is the problem? If the States express their desire in 2029, we can’t give the States directions to dissolve their Assembly.”

“They have to make their own decisions. It depends on the respective Chief Ministers and their Council of Ministers. If the Council of Ministers of the States decide in favour of ‘One Nation One Election’, that State elections should be held along with the Lok Sabha polls, then it is possible. It is up to them what they decide. The Indian Constitution allows that; it is permissible.”

“Under the Indian Constitution, the states are empowered to hold simultaneous polls,” he told reporters at the Parliament House complex after a meeting of the panel.

The BJP leader said democracy means the will of the people, not the will of the political parties, and everyone has to see what the will of the people is.

“We have visited 10 states and interacted with a cross-section of people, and we have realised that 99 per cent of people, civil society, want simultaneous polls for Lok Sabha and State Mssemblies,” he said.

Mr. Chaudhary said there may be different opinions of political parties, but the committee has to work together in the interest of the country.

“We have to work on what the people want, what the country wants. We are working with the will of the people. That is why we have invited civil society members to take their opinions,” he said.

Mr. Chaudhary said that Parliament gave the panel the mandate to examine and give recommendations on the two Constitution amendment bills.

Two-thirds of members of Parliament have to support the bills for their passage.

Another government-sponsored Constitution amendment bill, the delimitation-linked women reservation bill, which also required support of two-thirds of members of Parliament, was defeated in the Lok Sabha in April.

Mr. Chaudhary said the Parliament mandated the committee to examine the legislation and fix the shortcomings, if any, and make sure that the simultaneous polls are held successfully.

He said if simultaneous elections in Lok Sabha and State assemblies are held, everyone will benefit from it and the biggest beneficiary will be the country’s youth.

mr. Chaudhary also said that 30% of the time of government schools is used in poll-related work every year.

The Bills were introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 2024, following which they were referred to the joint committee for examination.

The Bills were formulated after a high-level panel, headed by former President Ram Nath Kovind, recommended holding Lok Sabha, State assembly and local body elections simultaneously in a phased manner. Union Home Minister Amit Shah was also a member of the high-level panel headed by Mr. Kovind.

Following the adoption of the Constitution, elections to the Lok Sabha and all State Legislative Assemblies were conducted simultaneously from 1951 to 1967.

The first general elections to the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies were held together in 1951-52, a practice that continued for three subsequent general elections in 1957, 1962, and 1967.

However, this cycle of synchronised elections was disrupted in 1968 and 1969 due to the premature dissolution of some State Legislative Assemblies.

The Fourth Lok Sabha was also dissolved prematurely in 1970, with fresh elections held in 1971. Unlike the First, Second, and Third Lok Sabha, which completed their full five-year terms, the Fifth Lok Sabha’s term was extended until 1977 under Article 352 because of the declaration of Emergency.

Since then, only a few Lok Sabha terms have lasted the full five years, such as the Eighth, Tenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth. Others, including the Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Eleventh, Twelfth, and Thirteenth, were dissolved early.

State Assemblies have faced similar disruptions over the years. Premature dissolutions and term extensions have become a recurring challenge.

These developments have firmly disrupted the cycle of simultaneous elections, leading to the current pattern of staggered electoral schedules across the country.

Published – August 25, 2026 02:39 am IST

P.P. Choudhary, chairman of Joint Parliamentary Committee on simultaneous elections. File
| Photo Credit: ANI

A file image of Chairman of the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC), P.P. Chaudhary.
| Photo Credit: ANI

New Delhi:

Finance Commission Chairman Arvind Panagariya in an affirmation to the idea of ‘One Nation, One Election’ explained that frequent elections do not give enough opportunities to the government to carry out reforms.

NK Singh, the former Chairman of the Finance Commission, also supported ‘One Nation, One Election’ as a key area of economic reforms, citing wasteful expenditure and distractions due to “elections being held every second day”.

Both economists spoke to NDTV Editor-in-Chief Sanjay Pugalia in an exclusive interview.

Mr Panagariya, who served as the first Vice Chairman of the government think tank NITI Aayog from January 2015 to August 2017, told NDTV, “One Nation, One Election constitutes a very, very far reaching important reform, far beyond the political matrix, which has huge implications for economic growth and development.”

“If I may add, on this important issue that Mr Singh has mentioned, One Nation, One Election. When elections happen repeatedly, it also impacts the government’s ability to introduce reforms,” Mr Panagariya said.

“The current situation actually provides a good example. In May 2024 we had the parliamentary elections and since then we have been having one or another election every six months,” he told NDTV.

“That obviously denies the government the ability to bring major reforms because they become the bone of contention during elections,” Mr Panagariya added.

A Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) reviewing the One Nation, One Election bill has 27 members from Lok Sabha and 12 from Rajya Sabha.

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill was introduced in the winter session of the Lok Sabha. The bill would pave the way for simultaneous elections to the Lok Sabha, state assemblies, and local bodies with minimum gap.

But its implementation will need a series of amendments to the Constitution that can only be done with two-thirds majority in parliament. Some provisions may have to be ratified by governments in states and Union Territories.

The Opposition has voiced objections, with most parties contending that the bill would subvert the Constitution – an allegation the government has repeatedly refuted. The Opposition parties have claimed the Centre is robbing the states of the right to self-determination, besides violating the Constitution.

Even in a competitive democracy where political rivals joust fiercely and yet maintain a semblance of informed and civil discourse, it is a difficult task to push through legislation on contentious issues. When a competitive democracy becomes deeply polarised, to the extent that civil discourse is replaced by bitterness, abuse and mistrust, legislation of any kind becomes extremely difficult, if not impossible. At this point in time, the planned law on One Nation, One Election (ONOE) could become a victim of such a situation. 

There could be competing views on the need for ONOE and its impact on polity in a federal democracy like India. But in the absence of sagacity and pragmatism, hyperbole, rhetoric and polemics have ended up destroying both the discourse and the process of legislation for an amendment for simultaneous elections that the NDA regime proposed during the “washed out” winter session of the Parliament. As expected, the Bill has been referred to a select committee. It is anybody’s guess whether the NDA regime will manage to cobble together a two-thirds majority of “present” members to be able to pass the Bill.

No Time To Govern

However, what about the idea of ONOE? On the face of it, there is some merit to the argument in favour of simultaneous elections. There can be no dispute that the political landscape in India is littered with elections the way the Indian calendar is littered with festivals. Look at what has happened over the last year. There were elections to state assemblies in Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh and Madhya Pradesh. Soon after that came the 2024 Lok Sabha elections. When political parties, voters and analysts had barely even begun to digest the import of the verdict, assembly elections became due in Haryana and Jammu & Kashmir (after a gap of 10 years). Even before one could delve deeper into the surprise verdicts, elections in Maharashtra and Jharkhand were announced. Just as India starts the new year in 2025, elections to the Delhi assembly will be announced. For Indian voters, pollsters, pundits and assorted debaters alike, the year 2025 will be a relatively dull year as only Bihar will go for elections towards the end of the year. But 2026 will see a flurry, with Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Assam being the major states that will elect new governments. That will be followed in 2027 by shenanigans in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Punjab, Goa and some others. There will be another series of assembly elections soon after, and then the 2029 Lok Sabha elections will be due before you can pause to take a breath.

This is clearly not a healthy situation. National-level parties are perpetually in campaign mode because of this never-ending stream of assembly elections. Purely regional parties don’t suffer as much as their footprint normally doesn’t extend beyond one state. For instance, Tamil Nadu chief minister and DMK chief M. K. Stalin and his son-cum-inheritor Udaynidhi Stalin couldn’t care much about elections to West Bengal and Assam, which will be held along with Tamil Nadu in 2026. Perhaps even neighbouring Kerala won’t be too important for them. 

A Case For ONOE

Yet, there is an impact on governance because elections mean the Model Code of Conduct, a period when policy decisions are paralysed. In a rapidly changing and evolving geopolitical scenario, this doesn’t augur well. Since the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leads the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) at the centre, it cannot announce significant policy decisions in 2026 as they could impact voter behaviour in states like Kerala, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal and Assam. Any window for serious governance and policymaking would be brief because soon it would be time for elections in Uttar Pradesh et al. Besides, there is the issue of costs, the diversion of human and other resources for the conduct of elections, and the question of organising paramilitary forces every few months. 

These factors do suggest that there is a case for simultaneous elections. On the other hand, what could be the reasons that present a case against it? There are some who argue that a single burst of elections to Parliament and all the state assemblies would give an unfair advantage to resource-rich national parties like the BJP, which would outgun and steamroll opponents who can’t match its resources, particularly at the regional level. That’s simply not true. The year 1967 was the last time India saw simultaneous polls. Even then, while Indira Gandhi led the Congress to a victory in the Lok Sabha, she lost about 10 states to various opposition groups and alliances. Even in contemporary times, the Narendra Modi-led BJP has won massive victories in Delhi in the Lok Sabha elections, to be followed soon by massive victories for the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP in assembly elections. The Indian voter is astute and knows how to distinguish between national and local issues. In any case, many regional parties have publicly announced their support for ONOE.

Give And Take

The problem is not the idea but the deeply divisive and polarised nature of Indian politics. The Janata Dal (United) (JD-U), an NDA ally, is in favour of simultaneous polls. On the other hand, its rival, the Rashtriya Janata Dal (RJD), which is also largely confined to Bihar, is fiercely opposed to it. Both support and opposition don’t seem to stem from merits but from political divide and a deep mistrust. The manner in which the recent winter session of the Parliament was conducted reveals how bitter and deep this gulf is. In such a situation, it would take an extraordinary level of pragmatic give-and-take politics to make ONOE a reality. 

It is possible, the contentious GST Bill was passed in 2017 despite deep divisions. But for the sake of pragmatism, the authors would suggest two solutions. First, start with One Nation, Two Elections, wherein assembly elections are divided into two separate bunches. Second, and more important, the government should seriously consider a law that would enable referendums in India, as held in other major democracies. Why not have a national vote where citizens deliver a verdict on ONOE and other major issues?

(Yashwant Deshmukh is the Founder & Editor-in-Chief of CVoter Foundation and Sutanu Guru is Executive Director)

Disclaimer: These are the personal opinions of the author

New Delhi:

Parliament’s winter session – its final week roiled by mud-slinging and protests by MPs over Amit Shah’s “Ambedkar is the fashion” remark and disruptions and fractious debates over the ‘one nation, one election’ push – concluded Friday afternoon, with a stern message from Rajya Sabha Chair.

“The world watches our democracy. Yet we fail our citizens through our conduct. These Parliamentary disruptions mock public trust and expectations. Our fundamental duty to serve with diligence lies neglected,” Jagdeep Dhankhar said.

“Where reasoned dialogue should prevail, we witness only chaos. I urge every Parliamentarian, regardless of party, to examine their conscience,” Mr Dhankhar, against whom the opposition also filed a no-confidence motion, that was slapped down on procedural grounds, lamented on X after adjourning the Upper House.

“We squander precious opportunities that could serve the greater good of our people. I hope MPs will introspect deeply and citizens exercise accountability.”

The world watches our democracy, yet we fail our citizens through our conduct. These Parliamentary disruptions mock public trust and expectations. Our fundamental duty to serve with diligence lies neglected.

Where reasoned dialogue should prevail, we witness only chaos. I urge… pic.twitter.com/yCfOsiatL9

— Vice-President of India (@VPIndia) December 20, 2024

An uneasy calm lay over Parliament this morning as MPs from the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party and (a suddenly united) opposition held protests and counterprotests, and traded allegations.

As the day dawned, opposition MPs rallied behind the Congress’ Rahul Gandhi and demanded Mr Shah resign and slammed the BJP for yesterday’s physical confrontation, while the ruling party massed outside Parliament targeting Mr Gandhi – against whom they have filed a dramatic ‘attempt to murder’ police complaint and accused of making a woman lawmaker feel “uncomfortable”.

READ | Police Case Against Rahul Gandhi For “Injuring” 2 BJP MPs

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and the Samajwadi Party’s Akhilesh Yadav were among those who led the opposition’s charge. Ms Gandhi Vadra, who yesterday ripped into the BJP over the charges against her brother, today said the ruling party is “scared” because Mr Shah’s remarks had “exposed their true sentiments” about the iconic Dalit leader. She also criticised the BJP for lodging false police complaints against Mr Gandhi; ” Rahulji can never push anyone. I am his sister… I know him. Frankly, the country knows this too…”

#WATCH | Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra says, “This Government is scared. This Government is scared to have a discussion on Adani matter. It is scared of having any discussion. They know that their true sentiments for Ambedkar ji have come out. So, they are now scared of the… pic.twitter.com/SU9LR6xUss

— ANI (@ANI) December 20, 2024

Mr Yadav, meanwhile, demanded the BJP and Mr Shah apologise for the comment. “The insult to Babasaheb Ambedkar and the attitude of the BJP towards him… if we have to take the country forward, Babsaheb’s Constitution shows the way (but) the BJP is attempting to weaken it.”

READ | “If PM Respects Ambedkar…”: Congress’ Kharge Targets Amit Shah

In response, the BJP camp – which has lashed out at the Congress and Mr Gandhi over his alleged “assault” of two of its MPs, Pratap Sarangi and Mukesh Rajput – doubled down on its attacks.

Lok Sabha MP Nishikant Dubey declared, “For the first time I saw the ugly face of this party”, and claimed he had seen Mr Gandhi “climbing up the Makar Dawar (the Parliament’s main door, outside which MPs pushed and shoved each other yesterday) … after climbing up, he pushed Pratap Sarangi ji… Mukesh Rajput ji got pushed… they (the Congress MPs) had no remorse… condemnable.”

#WATCH | Delhi | BJP MP Nishikant Dubey says, “…I saw Rahul Gandhi climbing up the Makar Dwar, so I and another leader saw this and we decided to give him space. After climbing up, he pushed Pratap Sarangi ji, Santosh Pandey ji who is next to us. Mukesh Rajput ji got pushed and… pic.twitter.com/Xy8TLovrDj

— ANI (@ANI) December 20, 2024

Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju batted away the Congress’ demands for Mr Shah to quit and said, “It is the Congress that should apologise… it is not left with anything to say so they have resorted to manhandling. Our MPs say there should be police action against Rahul Gandhi.”

On Thursday there was utter bedlam outside Parliament after MPs from the ruling party and the opposition clashed, pushing and jostling each other while screaming and shouting slogans.

READ | Parliament Protests Turn Into BJP, Congress’ Injury vs Injury Claims

The injury to the BJP’s Mr Sarangi – visuals showed him with a bandage on his head and being taken in an ambulance – and the hospitalization of Mr Rajput fuelled the party’s counterattack. A trio of BJP MPs, including ex-Union Minister Anurag Thakur, then filed a complaint at a nearby police station.

Not to be outdone, the Congress then claimed an injury to party boss Mallikarjun Kharge and filed a complaint of its own. Delhi Police has turned both complaints over to its Crime Branch. The party also called the ‘attempt to murder’ complaint a “badge of honour for defending Babasaheb’s legacy”.

READ | “Injuries On My Knees”: M Kharge After Parliament Showdown

Amit Shah’s Ambedkar Remark

All of this followed Mr Shah’s remark about Dr Ambedkar – regarded as the architect of the Constitution – which were delivered at the tail end of a four-day debate on the august text.

“It has become the fashion to say ‘Ambedkar, Ambedkar, Ambedkar…’ If they (the opposition) took God’s name so many times, they will get a place in heaven,” Mr Shah quipped.

The opposition’s reaction was instantaneous and furious, and the ferocity of it appeared to unsettle Mr Shah and the BJP. A normally combative Home Minister – Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s No 2 and one of the most powerful figures in the ruling party – issued a statement on the row.

And Mr Modi himself led high-ranking cabinet members in defending Mr Shah.

READ | “Congress Anti-Ambedkar, Twisted My Words”: Amit Shah Responds

“They (the Congress) have distorted the comment I made in the Rajya Sabha,” Mr Shah said, while Mr Modi thundered on X, “If the Congress and its rotten ecosystem think malicious lies can hide their misdeeds of years, especially insults to Dr Ambedkar, they are gravely mistaken!”

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

New Delhi:

Two bills to amend the Constitution – and allow simultaneous federal and state elections by 2034 – were sent to a 39-member joint parliamentary committee Friday morning, as the final act of a Lok Sabha winter session roiled by unseemly Congress vs BJP, protest vs counterprotest drama over Home Minister Amit Shah’s “Ambedkar is the fashion” remark. The Lower House was then adjourned sine die.

Congress MPs Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and Manish Tewari and the Trinamool’s Kalyan Banerjee and Saket Gokhale are among the opposition faces on the committee, while former Union Minister Anurag Thakur, Sambit Patra, and Anil Baluni will represent the government.

Others on the panel – expanded from 31 after smaller parties also demanded representation – are from Maharashtra’s rival Shiv Sena and NCP factions and two of the BJP’s allies; the latter, though, doesn’t yet include either Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar’s JDU or Andhra Pradesh Chief Minister Chandrababu Naidu’s TDP, both of which are seen as propping the BJP’s government at the centre.

READ | ‘1 Nation, 1 Poll’ Panel To Include Priyanka Gandhi, Anurag Thakur

The JPC will have an initial term of 90 days but this can be extended. It has been tasked with holding “wider consultations” on five contentious amendments to the Constitution, which include limiting and/or altering, and linking terms of state and union territory assemblies to the Lok Sabha.

Among those to be consulted is the Election Commission, the country’s top poll body and which will have the extraordinarily mammoth task of organising the simultaneous elections.

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill was tabled in the Lok Sabha this week by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, and triggered fierce protests from the opposition.

READ | Congress’ “Two-Thirds Majority” Jab At BJP Over ‘One Nation, One Poll’

The Congress and two INDIA bloc allies – the Samajwadi Party and the Trinamool, neither of whom have seen eye-to-eye this Parliament session – united to condemn what they said were attempts to subvert the Constitution and the country’s federal character, by robbing legislatures of independence.

The proposed switch to simultaneous polls has, however, been backed by the ruling BJP, which has claimed streamlining the electoral calendar – which sees multiple state and local body polls every year – offers multiple economic benefits, including preventing ‘policy paralysis’ and lowering costs.

What Is ‘One Nation, One Election’?

Simply put, it means all Indians will vote in Lok Sabha and Assembly elections – to pick central and state representatives – in the same year, if not at the same time.

As of 2024, only four states voted with a Lok Sabha election – Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Odisha voted alongside the April-June Lok Sabha election. Three others – Maharashtra, Haryana, and Jammu and Kashmir – voted in October-November.

NDTV Special | ‘One Nation, One Election’: What Is It And How Will It Work

The rest follow a non-synced five-year cycle; Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Telangana, for example, were among those voted at different times last year, while Delhi and Bihar will vote in 2025 and Tamil Nadu and Bengal are among those that will vote in 2026.

Can ‘One Nation, One Election’ Work?

Not without the amendments to the Constitution and that amendment being ratified by the governments of all states and union territories, as well as, possibly, major political parties.

These are Article 83 (term of Parliament), Article 85 (dissolution of Lok Sabha by the President), Article 172 (duration of state legislatures), and Article 174 (dissolution of state legislatures), as well as Article 356 (imposition of President’s Rule).

Legal experts have warned that failure to pass such amendments will leave the proposal open to attack on charges of violating India’s federal structure.

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

New Delhi:

Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and Manish Tewari are on the Congress’ list of nominees to a joint parliamentary committee that will study the ‘one nation, one election’ Constitution Amendment Bill that was tabled in Parliament yesterday, sources told NDTV Wednesday afternoon. 

Mr Tewari was the first opposition leader to speak out against the ‘one nation, one election’ proposal after the bill was placed in the House; the Congress leader said the move to a single election model  “directly challenges the federal nature of the country… by imposing uniformity across states”.

The Congress, the single largest opposition party in Parliament, has also named Randeep Surjewala and Sukhdeo Bhagat Singh, while the Trinamool has named Saket Gokhale and Kalyan Banerjee.

Uddhav Thackeray’s Shiv Sena has nominated Anil Desai, while the faction led by Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde will be represented by his son, Shrikant Shinde, sources said further.

The committee can have a maximum of 31 MPs based on each party’s Lok Sabha numbers. This favour the ruling BJP – the largest party in the Lower House with 240 MPs. The Congress has 99 MPs.

A maximum of 10 committee members can also be drawn from the Upper House; Mr Surjewala and Mr Gokhale, for example, are from the Rajya Sabha. The BJP, sources told NDTV, will lead the committee.

‘One Nation, One Poll’ Committee

The JPC is expected to hold “wider consultations” with various stakeholders, including MPs not part of the committee and other legal and constitutional experts, such as former judges and lawyers.

Former members of the Election Commission may also be consulted.

The Election Commission is the top poll body in the country and will have the extraordinarily mammoth task of organising simultaneous Lok Sabha and state elections, if the bills to amend the Constitution, and the ‘one nation, one election’ bill itself, are passed by Parliament and then ratified by the states.

READ | 31 Members, 90-Day Term: What We Know About ‘ONOP’ Panel

Sources also said the BJP is keen on consulting all Assembly Speakers, while feedback will also likely be sought from the public. Once these inputs have been gathered, sources said the committee will consider each aspect, moving clause by clause, of the two bills proposing changes to the Constitution.

The committee will have an initial 90 days to submit its report.

What Is Constitution Amendment Bill?

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill proposes changes to five articles of the Constitution to allow for the conduct of simultaneous federal and state elections, as the first step in the ‘one nation, one poll’ electoral model pushed by the BJP.

Introduced by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal in the Lok Sabha, it prompted hours of bitter arguments, debates, and protests before the opposition forced a division vote – unusual at this stage of a bill – for Parliament to formally accept the proposed legislation.

READ | Congress’ “Two-Thirds Majority” Jab At BJP Over ‘One Nation, One Poll’

This first hurdle was easily cleared; 269 MPs voted to table it, while 198 stood opposed. That narrow margin – enough to introduce the proposed law but not enough to pass it, if that was a vote to do so.

BJP vs Opposition Over ONOP

The tabling of the bill saw fierce protests from almost every major opposition party.

The Congress, the Trinamool, the Samajwadi Party, and the DMK all spoke out against it, demanding it either be scrapped or sent to a joint committee, while the Shiv Sena group led by ex-Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray and the NCP of Sharad Pawar also expressed their opposition.

Asaduddin Owaisi of the AIMIM rose to make a brief but forceful point, asserting the proposed changes to the Constitution would violate states’ right to self-governance. 

READ | “Not Tampering With State Powers”: Law Minister On ‘One Nation, One Poll’

There were, however, also stray voices of support.

Two of the BJP’s allies – Andhra Pradesh’s ruling Telugu Desam Party and the Sena faction of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde – spoke of their “unequivocal” support for the bill.

The YSR Congress of ex Andhra Chief Minister Jagan Reddy and Punjab’s Shiromani Akali Dal are also understood to be backing the ‘one nation, one election’ push.

What Is ‘One Nation, One Election’?

Simply put, it means all Indians will vote in Lok Sabha and Assembly elections – to pick central and state representatives – in the same year, if not at the same time.

As of 2024, only four states voted with a Lok Sabha election – Andhra Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Sikkim, and Odisha voted alongside the April-June Lok Sabha election. Three others – Maharashtra, Haryana, and Jammu and Kashmir – voted in October-November.

NDTV Special | ‘One Nation, One Election’: What Is It And How Will It Work

The rest follow a non-synced five-year cycle; Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, and Telangana, for example, were among those voted at different times last year, while Delhi and Bihar will vote in 2025 and Tamil Nadu and Bengal are among those that will vote in 2026.

Can ‘One Nation, One Election’ Work?

Not without an amendment to the Constitution and that amendment being ratified by the governments of all states and union territories, as well as, possibly, major political parties.

NDTV Explains | ‘One Nation, One Election’. What Are Pros And Cons?

These are Article 83 (term of Parliament), Article 85 (dissolution of Lok Sabha by the President), Article 172 (duration of state legislatures), and Article 174 (dissolution of state legislatures), as well as Article 356 (imposition of President’s Rule).

Legal experts have warned that failure to pass such amendments will leave the proposal open to attack on charges of violating India’s federal structure.

New Delhi:

The BJP will send notices to MPs who were not present in the Lok Sabha today during the introduction of the government’s flagship “One Country One Election Bill”, sources have told NDTV. More than 20 BJP MPs were absent during the division of the house, sources said. The party had earlier sent a three-line whip to its Lok Sabha members, directing them to be present in the House.

The absence of the MPs was not a roadblock to the two bills meant to amend the Constitution and permit simultaneous parliamentary and state elections. 

But it did provide ammunition to the Congress, which claimed it was evidence that the government did not have enough support on the issue.

The bills were passed by simple majority, as required by the rulebook; 269 MPs voted in favour and 198 opposed it.

But the Congress pointed out that a Constitution amendment bill needs two-thirds majority to get passed.

“Undoubtedly the government has larger numbers on its side… but to pass it (bills to amend the Constitution) you need a 2/3 majority that they very clearly don’t have,” Congress’s Shashi Tharoor told reporters. “It is obvious (then) that they should not persist too long with this,” he added.

The Constitution (129th Amendment) Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha today by Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal.

The government plans to send it to a committee for discussion and get everyone on board, especially because the huge numbers that will be required to make the switch that will involve a series of amendments to the Constitution. These amendments will then have to be ratified by the governments of all states and union territories.

This is precisely where the Opposition has massive objections. Most parties contend that the bill will subvert the Constitution – an allegation the government has repeatedly refuted.

Even today while introducing the bill, Union minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said, “Laws can be brought in for electoral reforms… this bill is aligned with the process of easing the electoral process, which will be synchronised. There will be no damage to the Constitution via this Bill. There will be no tampering with the basic structure of the Constitution”.