Constitutional amendments are usually revised as a list of numbers to be swallowed — 42nd, 44th, 73rd, 101st — and it is the fastest-forgotten page in the whole polity syllabus. There is a far better way in. The story of amending the Constitution is one long argument between Parliament and the Supreme Court about who has the last word. Every famous amendment and every famous case is a move in that argument. Learn the argument and the numbers stop being random. This capsule goes a level deeper than our Constitution capsule, for SSC CGL and CHSL, RRB NTPC, State PSC, banking general awareness and UPSC Prelims.
The Hinge: A Sixty-Year Argument About the Last Word
Every constitution has to answer one uncomfortable question. If Parliament can change the Constitution, and the Constitution is what limits Parliament, then what actually limits Parliament?
India did not settle that question in 1950. It settled it slowly, through a back-and-forth that ran for decades. Parliament would pass an amendment. The Court would test it. Parliament would answer with another amendment. The Court would answer back.
That is why the amendments you are asked about cluster where they do. They are not scattered — they bunch around the moments when the argument got hot, which is why so many famous numbers fall between 1971 and 1980.
The Argument, Move by Move
Read this table twice and the whole chapter has a shape. Notice that the sides keep swapping.
| Year | The move | What it decided |
|---|---|---|
| 1951 | Shankari Prasad case | Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights. An amendment is not an ordinary “law”, so Article 13 does not catch it. |
| 1965 | Sajjan Singh case | Same answer, by 3:2 — but two judges record doubts. The argument is opening up. |
| 1967 | Golaknath case | The Court reverses itself, 6:5. Fundamental Rights are beyond amendment; Parliament cannot take them away. |
| 1971 | 24th Amendment | Parliament answers: it declares it can amend any part of the Constitution, Fundamental Rights included. |
| 1971 | 25th Amendment | Adds Article 31C — laws made to implement certain Directive Principles cannot be struck down for violating some Fundamental Rights. |
| 1973 | Kesavananda Bharati case | The turning point. A 13-judge bench, by 7:6: Parliament may amend any part, but may not damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution. |
| 1975 | Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain | The new doctrine is used for the first time to strike down an amendment — clauses of Article 329A, inserted by the 39th Amendment to put the Prime Minister’s election beyond the courts. |
| 1976 | 42nd Amendment | Parliament’s biggest push: tries to place amendments beyond judicial review altogether and gives Directive Principles primacy over Fundamental Rights. |
| 1978 | 44th Amendment | A new Parliament reverses much of the 42nd and rebuilds the safeguards. |
| 1980 | Minerva Mills case | Strikes down the parts of the 42nd that had shielded amendments from review — clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 — and the widened Article 31C. |
| 2007 | I. R. Coelho case | A nine-judge bench: laws put into the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973, the date of the Kesavananda judgment, can still be tested against the basic structure. |
Where the argument ended up: Parliament won the power, and the Court kept the limit. Parliament may amend anything; it may not amend the Constitution into something else. That one sentence is the answer to most descriptive questions on this topic.
What “Basic Structure” Actually Means
Here is the honest part that textbooks often skip. The Court has never published a closed list of what the basic structure contains. It decides case by case. That is deliberate — a fixed list could be worked around.
Features the Court has treated as basic in various judgments include the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, judicial review, the separation of powers, free and fair elections, federalism, secularism, the sovereign democratic republican structure, and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
So the right exam answer is never “the basic structure is X, Y and Z”. It is “the doctrine limits Parliament’s amending power, and the Court identifies basic features case by case”. That distinction separates a strong answer from an average one.
Article 368: Three Doors, Not One
Article 368, in Part XX, is the amending article. But not every change to the Constitution walks through it, and that is exactly what is tested.
| Route | What it needs | Used for |
|---|---|---|
| Simple majority (outside Article 368) | An ordinary majority of members present and voting, like any normal Bill | Creating new States, altering State areas, boundaries or names (Articles 2 to 4); creating or abolishing a State Legislative Council (Article 169) |
| Special majority (Article 368) | In each House: a majority of the total membership of that House and at least two-thirds of those present and voting | Most of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles |
| Special majority plus State ratification | The special majority above, plus ratification by the legislatures of not less than half the States | Election of the President; the extent of Union and State executive power; the Supreme Court and High Courts; distribution of legislative powers; the Seventh Schedule; State representation in Parliament; Article 368 itself |
The trap in that first row: changes made by simple majority are not counted as constitutional amendments under Article 368 at all. So when a question says “a State’s name can be changed by a simple majority”, it is correct — and it is not an exception to Article 368, it is outside it.
A memory hook for the third route: state ratification is needed wherever a change would alter the balance between the Centre and the States, or the position of the courts. Ask yourself “does this touch federalism or the judiciary?” — if yes, the States get a vote.
The Amendments You Must Know by Number
| Amendment | Year | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | 1951 | Created the Ninth Schedule and Article 31B to protect land reform laws from challenge; added grounds for reasonable restrictions on free speech |
| 7th | 1956 | Reorganisation of States on linguistic lines; abolished the Part A, B, C and D classification |
| 24th | 1971 | Declared Parliament’s power to amend any part, including Fundamental Rights; made Presidential assent to amendments compulsory |
| 25th | 1971 | Inserted Article 31C, protecting laws implementing certain Directive Principles |
| 42nd | 1976 | The “mini-Constitution” — see the next section |
| 44th | 1978 | Reversed much of the 42nd; moved the right to property out of Fundamental Rights |
| 52nd | 1985 | Anti-defection law, added as the Tenth Schedule |
| 61st | 1989 | Voting age lowered from 21 to 18 |
| 73rd | 1992 | Panchayati Raj given constitutional status — Part IX and the Eleventh Schedule |
| 74th | 1992 | Municipalities given constitutional status — Part IXA and the Twelfth Schedule |
| 86th | 2002 | Right to education as a Fundamental Right — Article 21A, for ages 6 to 14 |
| 91st | 2003 | Council of Ministers capped at 15 per cent of the strength of the House |
| 101st | 2016 | Introduced the Goods and Services Tax and the GST Council |
| 102nd | 2018 | Constitutional status for the National Commission for Backward Classes |
| 103rd | 2019 | 10 per cent reservation for economically weaker sections |
| 104th | 2019 | Extended SC and ST reservation in legislatures; ended nomination of Anglo-Indians |
| 105th | 2021 | Restored the States’ power to identify their own backward classes |
| 106th | 2023 | One-third reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies |
Four of these create Schedules, and that is a favourite question. 1st → Ninth. 52nd → Tenth. 73rd → Eleventh. 74th → Twelfth. They came in that order, so the Schedules are numbered in that order too — and the last two are easy to keep apart because villages came before towns: 73rd and Eleventh for panchayats, 74th and Twelfth for municipalities.
The 42nd and the 44th: One Pair Worth More Than the Rest
If you learn only one pair of amendments properly, learn this one. The 42nd is the high-water mark of Parliament’s side of the argument; the 44th is the tide going out.
| The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 | The 44th Amendment Act, 1978 |
|---|---|
| Added Socialist, Secular and Integrity to the Preamble | Left the Preamble as the 42nd had made it |
| Added Fundamental Duties as a new Part IVA, Article 51A | Kept the Fundamental Duties |
| Extended the term of the Lok Sabha and State Assemblies from 5 to 6 years | Restored the term to 5 years |
| Gave Directive Principles primacy over Fundamental Rights through a widened Article 31C | That widening was later struck down in Minerva Mills, 1980 |
| Tried to put constitutional amendments beyond judicial review | Those clauses were struck down in Minerva Mills, 1980 |
| Added Part XIVA on administrative tribunals | Kept it |
| National Emergency could rest on “internal disturbance” | Narrowed the ground to “armed rebellion” |
| The right to property was still a Fundamental Right | Made property a legal right under Article 300A, not a Fundamental Right |
| — | Articles 20 and 21 cannot be suspended even during an Emergency, and an Emergency needs the Cabinet’s written recommendation |
The one-line summary: the 42nd made the government stronger, the 44th made the citizen safer — and the Court finished the job in 1980.
Why You Will See Two Different Years for the Same Amendment
This catches people constantly, and almost nobody explains it, so here it is.
An amendment has a year in its name and a different date when it starts working. The 42nd Amendment is officially The Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976; it received assent in December 1976, and most of it came into force in January 1977. So you will see it listed as both 1976 and 1977, and both are true — they are answering different questions.
The rule for exams: use the year in the Act’s name. 42nd is 1976, 44th is 1978, 73rd and 74th are 1992, 101st is 2016. If an option offers you the commencement year instead, it is usually the distractor.
One more caution: the total count of amendments rises over time. As of now it stands at 106, the latest being the 106th of 2023. Learn the structure and the landmark numbers; check the current total before your exam rather than trusting an old note.
Practice Questions
Q1. The doctrine of basic structure was laid down in:
(a) Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967 (b) Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973 (c) Minerva Mills v. Union of India, 1980 (d) Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, 1951
Answer: (b) Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973 Kesavananda Bharati, 1973 — a 13-judge bench deciding 7:6 that Parliament may amend any part of the Constitution but may not damage or destroy its basic structure. Minerva Mills, 1980 applied and reinforced the doctrine; it did not create it.
Q2. Which amendment declared that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights?
(a) The 42nd Amendment, 1976 (b) The 44th Amendment, 1978 (c) The 24th Amendment, 1971 (d) The 25th Amendment, 1971
Answer: (c) The 24th Amendment, 1971 The 24th Amendment, 1971, passed to answer the Golaknath judgment of 1967. The 25th Amendment of the same year inserted Article 31C, which is a different thing.
Q3. Amending which of the following requires ratification by at least half the State legislatures?
(a) The Fundamental Rights (b) The Directive Principles of State Policy (c) The Seventh Schedule and the distribution of legislative powers (d) The Preamble
Answer: (c) The Seventh Schedule and the distribution of legislative powers Anything touching federalism or the judiciary needs the States’ agreement — the Seventh Schedule, the distribution of legislative powers, the election of the President, the Supreme Court and High Courts, and Article 368 itself. Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles need only the special majority.
Q4. The right to property ceased to be a Fundamental Right through the:
(a) 24th Amendment, 1971 (b) 42nd Amendment, 1976 (c) 44th Amendment, 1978 (d) 1st Amendment, 1951
Answer: (c) 44th Amendment, 1978 The 44th Amendment, 1978, moved it out of Fundamental Rights and made it a legal right under Article 300A. The 44th also restored the five-year term and narrowed the Emergency ground to armed rebellion.
Q5. Which Schedule was created by the First Constitutional Amendment of 1951?
(a) The Eighth Schedule (b) The Ninth Schedule (c) The Tenth Schedule (d) The Eleventh Schedule
Answer: (b) The Ninth Schedule The Ninth Schedule, along with Article 31B, to shield land reform laws from challenge on Fundamental Rights grounds. The Tenth came with the 52nd Amendment of 1985 (anti-defection) and the Eleventh with the 73rd of 1992 (panchayats).
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Saying the basic structure is a fixed list. It is not. The Court identifies basic features case by case, and that openness is the point.
- Crediting Minerva Mills with the doctrine. Kesavananda Bharati, 1973 created it; Minerva Mills, 1980 defended it.
- Swapping the 24th and the 25th. The 24th asserted the power to amend Fundamental Rights; the 25th inserted Article 31C.
- Treating a change of a State’s name as an Article 368 amendment. It is passed by simple majority and is outside Article 368.
- Getting the special majority half-right. It needs both a majority of the total membership and two-thirds of those present and voting — not one or the other.
- Confusing the Act year with the commencement year. The 42nd is the Act of 1976 even though most of it began in 1977.
- Assuming the 42nd was entirely undone. The Preamble words, the Fundamental Duties and Part XIVA all survive.
Test Yourself
Reading a capsule is not the same as recalling it under time pressure. Our Test Your Knowledge page carries free Static GK and current affairs quizzes, each with an explanation for every answer and a downloadable PDF for offline revision. The Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles that this whole argument was fought over are covered in our capsule on Parts III and IV, and the Constituent Assembly that wrote them appears at the end of our Indian National Movement capsule.
Sources: the text of Article 368 and of the amendment Acts named above; established accounts of the Supreme Court judgments in Shankari Prasad (1951), Sajjan Singh (1965), Golaknath (1967), Kesavananda Bharati (1973), Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), Minerva Mills (1980), Waman Rao (1981) and I. R. Coelho (2007); and standard NCERT and reference material on constitutional amendments. Amendment Acts are cited by the year in the Act’s own name; commencement dates may differ and are explained in the text. The total number of amendments changes over time — verify the current figure before an exam.
