Origin and Evolution of Basic Structure Doctrine

To prepare for Indian Polity for any competitive exam, aspirants have to know about the basics of the Basic Structure of the Constitution. It gives an idea of all the topics important for the IAS Exam and the polity syllabus (GS-II). Basic Structure of the Constitution and related topics are extremely important for the UPSC Exam. This is an essential portion of the polity. As IAS aspirants, you should be thorough with the Basic Structure of the Constitution. This article will provide you with relevant details about the Origin and Evolution of Basic Structure Doctrine.

Shankari Prasad case 1951

• • Question of amenability of FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS under Art 368; challenged first CAA (Fundamental Right to Property) 1951.
  • Parliament can abridge or take away any of the FR by enacting a constitutional amendment act and such a law will not be void under 13 (‘law’ in Art. 13 includes only ordinary laws and not constituent laws)

Golakhnath case 1967

• • SC ruled that the FR as ‘transcendental and immutable’ position
  • Hence, the Parliament cannot abridge or take away any of fundamental rights.

24th CAA 1971

• • Asserted parliament has the power to abridge or take away any of the FR under Art. 368 and such an act will be out of ambit of meaning of ‘law’ under Art 13.

Kesavananda Bharati case 1973

• • Overruled its judgement in the Golak Nath case (1967).
  • Stated that Parliament is empowered to abridge or take away any of the FR.
  • Laid down a new doctrine of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.
  • Ruled that the constituent power of Parliament under Art. 368 does not enable it to alter the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.
  • Parliament cannot abridge or take away a Fundamental Right that forms a part of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.

EFFECTS OF KESAVANANDA BHARTI CASE

• • • It has set specific limits to the Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
    • It allows the Parliament to amend any and all parts of the Constitution subject to basic structure.
    • It places the Judiciary as the final authority in deciding if an amendment violates basic structure and what constitutes the basic structure.

Indira Nehru Gandhi case 1975

• • Doctrine of basic structure of the constitution was

42nd CAA 1976 –

• • Amended Art. 368 – no limitation on the constituent power of PARLIAMENT.
  • Any amendment cannot be questioned in any court on any ground.

Minerva mills case 1980 –

• • Invalidated provisions of 42nd CAA as it excluded judicial review (basic feature)
  • Limited amendment power of parliament is part of basic structure.
  • PARLIAMENT cannot expand its amending power under article 368 into unlimited.

Waman Rao case 1981-

• • SC clarified that doctrine would be apply to constitutional amendments enacted after April 24, 1973 (Kesavananda Bharati case) (Including 9th schedule)

Present position

• • Parliament (under Art. 368) can amend any part of the Constitution including the FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS subject to the ‘basic structure’ doctrine.