The Basic Structure Doctrine is one of the most important areas of Indian Polity for UPSC Prelims.
It was established by the Supreme Court in:
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973
The doctrine means:
Parliament can amend the Constitution, but cannot destroy or damage its Basic Structure.
For Prelims, the most important areas are:
Article 368 → Amendment Power
Kesavananda Bharati → Basic Structure
Minerva Mills → Limited Amending Power
Waman Rao → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
I.R. Coelho → Ninth Schedule Review
The Basic Structure Doctrine was established in:
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973
The Supreme Court held that:
Parliament's power to amend the Constitution is not unlimited.
Kesavananda Bharati → 1973 → Basic Structure
Article 368 deals with:
Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution and the procedure therefor
It is located in:
Part XX
of the Constitution.
Part XX → Amendment of the Constitution
Article 368 → Constitutional Amendment
No.
The Constitution does not contain an express provision stating:
"Parliament cannot alter the Basic Structure."
The doctrine was:
Judicially Evolved
by the Supreme Court.
Basic Structure is expressly mentioned in Article 368.
False
Yes.
Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under:
Article 368
However, the power is:
Limited
by the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Amend → Yes
Destroy Basic Structure → No
No.
Parliament's amending power is subject to:
Basic Structure
The Supreme Court reaffirmed this principle in:
Minerva Mills v. Union of India, 1980
Article 368 gives Parliament unlimited power to amend the Constitution.
False
The:
Limited Nature of Parliament's Amending Power
is itself recognised as part of the:
Basic Structure
This was strongly established in:
Minerva Mills, 1980
Minerva Mills → Limited Amending Power
Basic Structure refers to:
Essential Features of the Constitution
that cannot be destroyed through constitutional amendment.
There is:
No Exhaustive List
of Basic Structure features.
The Supreme Court has recognised various features, including:
Basic Structure → No Exhaustive List
No.
Not every constitutional provision is automatically part of the Basic Structure.
The doctrine protects:
Essential Constitutional Features
rather than:
Every Individual Provision
This requires careful wording.
Parliament can amend constitutional provisions related to features that form part of the Basic Structure.
However, it cannot:
Destroy or Damage the Basic Structure
A Basic Structure feature can be modified, but cannot be destroyed in its essential character.
Parliament can amend:
Fundamental Rights
through the constitutional amendment procedure.
However, it cannot use the amendment power to:
Destroy the Basic Structure
Fundamental Rights can never be amended.
False
In:
Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967
the Supreme Court held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights.
This position was later altered through constitutional developments and the ruling in:
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973
Golaknath → FR Amendment Restricted
Kesavananda → Amendment Allowed but Basic Structure Protected
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
1973
13-Judge Constitution Bench
Basic Structure Doctrine
Parliament Can Amend the Constitution
but:
Cannot Destroy Basic Structure
Kesavananda → 13 Judges → 1973 → Basic Structure
The Kesavananda Bharati case was decided by:
13 Judges
It remains one of the largest Constitution Benches of the Supreme Court.
Kesavananda Bharati was decided by a 9-Judge Bench.
False
It was:
13 Judges
The case examined:
Parliament's Amending Power
under:
Article 368
The Court recognised:
Wide Amending Power
but rejected:
Unlimited Amending Power
The Court did not say:
Constitution Cannot Be Amended
Instead, it established:
Amendment Power + Basic Structure Limitation
Power to Amend → Yes
Power to Destroy → No
Minerva Mills v. Union of India
1980
Minerva Mills → Limited Power + Judicial Review + FR-DPSP Balance
1975
The Supreme Court recognised:
Free and Fair Elections
as an important feature of the Basic Structure.
Indira Gandhi Case → Free and Fair Elections
1994
The judgment is important for:
Federalism
and:
Secularism
as constitutional features.
S.R. Bommai → Federalism + Secularism
Waman Rao v. Union of India
1981
It dealt with:
Ninth Schedule + Basic Structure
The important date is:
24 April 1973
This is the date of the:
Kesavananda Bharati Judgment
Waman Rao → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu
2007
Nine-Judge Constitution Bench
The judgment held that post-24 April 1973 laws placed in the:
Ninth Schedule
can be examined for:
Basic Structure Violations
I.R. Coelho → 2007 → 9 Judges → Ninth Schedule Review
The Ninth Schedule was created through:
First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951
It is associated with:
Article 31B
It was initially intended largely to protect:
Land Reform Laws
First Amendment → Ninth Schedule
Article 31B → Ninth Schedule
Article 31B provides constitutional protection to laws included in the:
Ninth Schedule
However, the protection is not:
Absolute
for relevant post-24 April 1973 insertions.
The important sequence is:
First Amendment, 1951
↓
Ninth Schedule
↓
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973
↓
Basic Structure Doctrine
↓
Waman Rao, 1981
↓
24 April 1973 Cut-Off
↓
I.R. Coelho, 2007
↓
Ninth Schedule Review
Ninth Schedule → Not Absolute Immunity
No.
The Ninth Schedule continues to exist.
Article 31B continues to operate.
The judgment established:
Judicial Review for Basic Structure Violations
of relevant post-24 April 1973 Ninth Schedule insertions.
No.
The Court does not automatically invalidate every Ninth Schedule law.
It examines whether:
Basic Structure Is Damaged
Post-1973 Ninth Schedule Law = Automatically Invalid
False
This date is extremely important.
24 April 1973
is the date of the:
Kesavananda Bharati Judgment
It became an important cut-off in:
Waman Rao
for Ninth Schedule jurisprudence.
24 April 1973 is the date of Waman Rao judgment.
False
Waman Rao was decided in:
1981
Judicial Review means:
Courts Can Examine the Constitutional Validity of Government Action
It is recognised as part of:
Basic Structure
Judicial Review → Basic Structure
Parliament cannot remove Judicial Review in a manner that:
Destroys the Basic Structure
This was strongly reaffirmed in:
Minerva Mills
India follows:
Constitutional Supremacy
rather than:
Absolute Parliamentary Sovereignty
Parliament derives its power from:
The Constitution
India → Constitution Supreme
Parliament → Constitutionally Limited
India has a:
Parliamentary Form of Government
but does not follow:
Absolute Parliamentary Sovereignty
in the classical British sense.
India follows parliamentary government, therefore Parliament is constitutionally supreme.
False
The Preamble contains foundational values such as:
The Preamble helps identify:
Constitutional Identity
and has been relevant to Basic Structure jurisprudence.
Yes.
The Supreme Court has accepted that the Preamble can be amended, subject to:
Basic Structure
The:
42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976
added:
to the Preamble.
Preamble can never be amended.
False
Directive Principles are part of:
Part IV
The Supreme Court has emphasised the need for:
Harmony and Balance
between:
Fundamental Rights + Directive Principles
In:
Minerva Mills, 1980
this balance was recognised as constitutionally important.
Federalism is recognised as part of:
Basic Structure
The constitutional distribution of powers between:
Union + States
cannot be completely destroyed.
Federalism → Basic Structure
Secularism is recognised as part of:
Basic Structure
The constitutional identity of India cannot be transformed in a manner that:
Destroys Secularism
Democracy is a:
Basic Structure Feature
Parliament cannot use Article 368 to establish:
Permanent Authoritarian Rule
India is a:
Republic
The republican form of government is recognised as part of the:
Basic Structure
Rule of Law means:
Government Power Is Subject to Law
It is an important feature of:
Basic Structure
The Constitution distributes power among:
This:
Separation of Powers
is part of the constitutional structure.
An independent Judiciary is essential for:
Judicial Review
and:
Constitutional Protection
Therefore:
Judicial Independence → Basic Structure
Free and fair elections are essential to:
Democracy
They were recognised as an important constitutional feature in:
Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain, 1975
Free and Fair Elections → Basic Structure
The power to amend the Constitution is itself:
Limited
This limitation is part of the:
Basic Structure
Minerva Mills, 1980
Yes.
Article 368 itself can be amended.
But Parliament cannot amend it in a manner that:
Destroys the Basic Structure
Article 368 is completely beyond amendment.
False
No.
An amendment attempting to remove all limitations on Parliament's amending power would violate:
Basic Structure
Article 368 → Amendable
Unlimited Article 368 → Not Permitted
Yes.
The position after:
Kesavananda Bharati
is that Fundamental Rights can be amended.
However:
Basic Structure Cannot Be Destroyed
Not in a manner that:
Destroys Basic Structure
The constitutional validity of such an amendment would be tested through:
Basic Structure Review
No, not in a manner that destroys the Basic Structure.
Judicial Review is itself recognised as:
Basic Structure
No, not in a manner that destroys the Basic Structure.
Federalism is recognised as a:
Basic Structure Feature
An amendment that fundamentally destroys:
Free and Fair Elections
and:
Democratic Government
would raise a Basic Structure violation.
Democracy + Free Elections → Basic Structure
No.
It is a:
Judicially Evolved Constitutional Doctrine
No.
The list is:
Open + Non-Exhaustive
The Supreme Court identifies features case by case.
No.
The doctrine protects:
Essential Constitutional Features
not every individual provision equally.
No.
The Constitution can be amended.
The doctrine creates:
Limited Rigidity
rather than:
Complete Rigidity
No.
It permits:
Constitutional Evolution
while preventing:
Constitutional Destruction
Change → Yes
Destruction → No
A large parliamentary majority does not mean:
Unlimited Constitutional Power
Even a very large majority must comply with:
Basic Structure
Political Majority ≠ Constitutional Sovereignty
The doctrine does not formally establish:
Judicial Supremacy
It establishes:
Constitutional Supremacy
The Judiciary acts as:
Guardian and Interpreter of the Constitution
Constitution Is Supreme
Essential Constitutional Features Cannot Be Destroyed
Constitutional Supremacy → Broad Principle
Basic Structure → Judicial Limitation on Amendment
Parliament has:
Legislative Power
and:
Constitutional Amendment Power
But neither is:
Unlimited
Parliament → Powerful
Constitution → Supreme
Constitutional amendments can be reviewed when they are challenged as:
Basic Structure Violations
This is an important feature of:
Constitutional Supremacy
Shankari Prasad
↓
Amending Power Upheld
Sajjan Singh
↓
Amending Power Reaffirmed
Golaknath
↓
Fundamental Rights Amendment Restricted
Kesavananda Bharati
↓
Basic Structure Doctrine
Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain
↓
Free and Fair Elections
Minerva Mills
↓
Limited Amending Power + Judicial Review
Waman Rao
↓
24 April 1973 Cut-Off
S.R. Bommai
↓
Federalism + Secularism
I.R. Coelho
↓
Ninth Schedule Review
1951 → Amendment
1965 → Reaffirmed
1967 → Golaknath
1973 → Basic Structure
1975 → Elections
1980 → Limited Power
1981 → Ninth Schedule Cut-Off
1994 → Federalism + Secularism
2007 → Ninth Schedule Review
Kesavananda Bharati → Basic Structure
Minerva Mills → Limited Amending Power
Indira Gandhi → Free and Fair Elections
Waman Rao → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
S.R. Bommai → Federalism + Secularism
I.R. Coelho → Ninth Schedule Review
Article 368 → Constitutional Amendment
Article 31B → Ninth Schedule
Part XX → Amendment of Constitution
Article 13 → Laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights
Article 32 → Constitutional Remedies
Article 226 → High Court Writ Jurisdiction
Not every constitutional change uses the same procedure.
Broadly:
Simple Majority
Special Majority
Special Majority + State Ratification
The Basic Structure Doctrine applies to:
Constitutional Amendments
that fall within the amendment framework and are challenged on structural grounds.
Certain constitutional changes can be made by:
Simple Majority of Parliament
Such changes are generally outside the formal Article 368 amendment procedure.
Examples include certain matters under:
Articles 2, 3 and 169
Articles 2 + 3 + 169 → Simple Majority
The standard special majority under Article 368 requires:
Majority of Total Membership of Each House
AND:
Two-Thirds of Members Present and Voting
Special Majority = Majority of Total Membership + 2/3 Present and Voting
Certain federal provisions require:
Special Majority of Parliament
plus:
Ratification by at least half of the State Legislatures
It requires:
At Least Half
not:
Two-Thirds of States
There is:
No Joint Sitting
for a Constitutional Amendment Bill.
Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha must separately pass it according to the required majority.
Constitutional Amendment Bill → No Joint Sitting
After a Constitutional Amendment Bill has been duly passed under Article 368:
The President Shall Give Assent
The President does not have the ordinary discretionary power to withhold assent from a properly passed Constitutional Amendment Bill.
Article 368 → President Shall Give Assent
State Legislatures cannot:
Introduce Constitutional Amendment Bills
A Constitutional Amendment Bill can be introduced only in:
Parliament
Where ratification is required, State Legislatures participate after Parliament passes the Bill.
An ordinary law can be invalidated for violating:
Constitutional Provisions
A Constitutional Amendment can be invalidated for:
Basic Structure Violation
Ordinary Law → Constitutional Review
Amendment → Basic Structure Review
The Preamble:
Can Be Amended
but:
Cannot Be Amended in a Way That Destroys Basic Structure
The 42nd Amendment added:
Socialist + Secular + Integrity
Directive Principles are:
Not Enforceable by Courts
but:
Constitutionally Important
The Constitution seeks:
Harmony Between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
This balance was strongly emphasised in:
Minerva Mills
Ninth Schedule → Article 31B
Created → First Amendment, 1951
Historical Purpose → Land Reform Protection
Waman Rao → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
I.R. Coelho → Post-1973 Review
The:
42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976
attempted to significantly expand Parliament's amending power.
It inserted:
Article 368(4)
and:
Article 368(5)
to restrict judicial review and declare broad amending power.
These provisions were struck down in:
Minerva Mills
42nd Amendment → Attempted Unlimited Amending Power
Minerva Mills → Struck Down
The:
24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971
strengthened Parliament's constitutional amendment power.
It also made:
Presidential Assent Mandatory
for Constitutional Amendment Bills.
It was part of the constitutional background to:
Kesavananda Bharati
The:
25th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971
introduced:
Article 31C
and attempted to give greater protection to certain Directive Principles over specified Fundamental Rights.
Its provisions became important in:
Kesavananda Bharati
and:
Minerva Mills
1st Amendment, 1951 → Ninth Schedule + Article 31B
24th Amendment, 1971 → Strengthened Amending Power
25th Amendment, 1971 → Article 31C
42nd Amendment, 1976 → Major Constitutional Changes
44th Amendment, 1978 → Reversed several Emergency-era changes
1st → Ninth Schedule
24th → Amendment Power
25th → Article 31C
42nd → Major Expansion
44th → Corrective Changes
"Parliament cannot amend the Constitution."
False
"Parliament can amend every part of the Constitution without limitation."
False
"Basic Structure is expressly mentioned in Article 368."
False
"Basic Structure was established in Kesavananda Bharati."
True
"The Basic Structure Doctrine prevents all constitutional amendments."
False
"Judicial Review is part of Basic Structure."
True
"Federalism is recognised as part of Basic Structure."
True
"Secularism is recognised as part of Basic Structure."
True
"There is an exhaustive list of Basic Structure features."
False
"Limited Amending Power is part of Basic Structure."
True
Basic Structure = No Constitutional Amendment
False
Basic Structure = Every Article Is Unamendable
False
Basic Structure = Express Constitutional Provision
False
Basic Structure = Judicial Supremacy
False
Basic Structure = Parliamentary Power Completely Removed
False
Basic Structure = Exhaustive List
False
Basic Structure = Only Fundamental Rights
False
Basic Structure = Only Judiciary Can Change Constitution
False
Basic Structure = Ninth Schedule Abolished
False
Basic Structure = Preamble Cannot Be Amended
False
Shankari Prasad, 1951 → Amendment Power Upheld
Sajjan Singh, 1965 → Amendment Power Reaffirmed
Golaknath, 1967 → Fundamental Rights Amendment Restricted
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973 → Basic Structure
Indira Gandhi, 1975 → Free and Fair Elections
Minerva Mills, 1980 → Limited Amending Power
Waman Rao, 1981 → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
S.R. Bommai, 1994 → Federalism + Secularism
I.R. Coelho, 2007 → Ninth Schedule Review
Article 13 → Judicial Review of Laws Inconsistent with Fundamental Rights
Article 31B → Ninth Schedule
Article 32 → Constitutional Remedies
Article 226 → High Court Writ Jurisdiction
Article 368 → Constitutional Amendment
1st Amendment → Ninth Schedule
24th Amendment → Parliament's Amending Power
25th Amendment → Article 31C
42nd Amendment → Attempt to Expand Amending Power
44th Amendment → Post-Emergency Constitutional Corrections
Basic Structure
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973
13 Judges
368
Amend → Yes
Destroy → No
Democracy
Federalism
Secularism
Judicial Review
Rule of Law
Separation of Powers
Judicial Independence
Free and Fair Elections
Limited Amending Power
Minerva Mills → Limited Power
Waman Rao → Cut-Off
I.R. Coelho → Ninth Schedule Review
| Topic | Correct Fact |
|---|---|
| Basic Structure | Judicially evolved doctrine |
| Established | Kesavananda Bharati, 1973 |
| Bench | 13 Judges |
| Article | 368 |
| Part | XX |
| Parliament's Power | Wide but limited |
| Basic Structure List | Non-exhaustive |
| Judicial Review | Basic Structure |
| Federalism | Basic Structure |
| Secularism | Basic Structure |
| Democracy | Basic Structure |
| Rule of Law | Basic Structure |
| Separation of Powers | Basic Structure |
| Limited Amending Power | Basic Structure |
| Ninth Schedule | Article 31B |
| Ninth Schedule Created | First Amendment, 1951 |
| Waman Rao | 1981 |
| Important Cut-Off | 24 April 1973 |
| I.R. Coelho | 2007 |
| I.R. Coelho Bench | 9 Judges |
| Minerva Mills | 1980 |
| Free and Fair Elections | Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain |
| Federalism + Secularism | S.R. Bommai |
| Joint Sitting | Not available for Constitutional Amendment Bill |
| State Ratification | At least half, where required |
| President | Shall give assent after proper passage |
| Preamble | Can be amended subject to Basic Structure |
1951 → First Amendment → Ninth Schedule
1971 → 24th Amendment → Strengthened Amendment Power
1971 → 25th Amendment → Article 31C
1973 → Kesavananda → Basic Structure
1975 → Indira Gandhi → Free and Fair Elections
1976 → 42nd Amendment → Attempted Expansion of Amending Power
1980 → Minerva Mills → Limited Amending Power
1981 → Waman Rao → 24 April 1973 Cut-Off
1994 → S.R. Bommai → Federalism + Secularism
2007 → I.R. Coelho → Ninth Schedule Review
Article 368
↓
Parliament's Amending Power
↓
Kesavananda Bharati
↓
Basic Structure Doctrine
↓
Parliament Can Amend
↓
Parliament Cannot Destroy Basic Structure
↓
Minerva Mills
↓
Limited Amending Power
↓
Waman Rao
↓
24 April 1973 Cut-Off
↓
I.R. Coelho
↓
Ninth Schedule Review
Basic Structure is NOT:
No Amendment
Every Article Unamendable
Expressly Written
Exhaustive List
Judicial Supremacy
A Judicially Evolved Limitation
On Parliament's Amending Power
To Protect Essential Constitutional Features
Kesavananda → Basic Structure
Minerva Mills → Limited Power
Waman Rao → Date
I.R. Coelho → Ninth Schedule
Article 368 → Amendment
Constitution → Supreme
