A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and SVN Bhatti remarked that the top court could not step into the legislative domain by issuing such directions.

During the court proceedings, a petition submitted by Dr. Jaya Thakur, an Indian National Congress (INC) leader, was under consideration. Dr. Thakur's petition sought judicial intervention to enforce the recently enacted Constitutional Amendment Act, which mandates the reservation of seats for women in the legislature.

The plea argued that this implementation should occur promptly, without the need to wait for the completion of a census or a delimitation exercise. The Women's Reservation Bill had been approved by the Lok Sabha on September 20 and the Rajya Sabha on September 21 before receiving the President's assent on September 28.

The Constitutional Amendment Act introduced Article 334A to the Indian Constitution, stipulating that the reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and State legislative assemblies would only be initiated after a delimitation exercise conducted following the first census subsequent to the amendment's enactment.

Dr. Thakur's petition, in contrast, urged for the immediate implementation of women's reservations without the requirement of completing a delimitation exercise. To achieve this, the plea sought the nullification of the phrase "after an exercise of delimitation is undertaken for this purpose after the relevant figures for the first census" in Article 334A.

The petition asserted that a Constitutional amendment should not be subjected to an indefinite delay. It also contended that there is a presumption of constitutional validity for enactments unless they are declared contrary to the Constitution.

The census, originally slated for 2021, was delayed due to the COVID-19 pandemic and is now anticipated to occur in 2024. Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President JP Nadda had previously asserted that both the census and delimitation exercises were vital to determine which seats should be reserved for women.