The Constitution (Twenty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1971 was enacted to:
Affirm and strengthen Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, in response to the Supreme Court's decision in Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967.
24th Amendment → Parliament's amending power affirmed + Article 13 clarified + Article 368 strengthened + Presidential assent made mandatory.
The central issue was:
Whether Parliament could amend Fundamental Rights.
In:
Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, 1951
the Supreme Court broadly upheld Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.
In:
Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, 1965
the Court again broadly accepted the amendment power.
In:
I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab, 1967
the Supreme Court took a significantly more restrictive view.
The Supreme Court held, by a narrow majority, that:
Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights through the constitutional amendment procedure then understood under Article 368.
The Court treated a constitutional amendment as:
"Law" for the purposes of Article 13.
Since Article 13 prohibits laws taking away or abridging Fundamental Rights:
Parliament's amendment power was restricted.
The judgment created a constitutional problem for the government's reform agenda.
Important programmes affected by the broader constitutional debate included:
The Constitution was amended through:
24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971.
The Amendment sought to make clear that:
Parliament has the power to amend any provision of the Constitution.
This included:
Fundamental Rights.
The 24th Amendment amended:
Article 368.
It expressly stated that Parliament may:
Amend by way of addition, variation or repeal any provision of the Constitution.
This made Parliament's constitutional amending power:
Explicit rather than merely implied.
The Amendment reinforced that a Constitution Amendment Bill must be passed by:
The required special majority of Parliament.
The amendment procedure remains constitutionally distinct from:
Ordinary legislation.
A major change was:
The President is required to give assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill duly passed under Article 368.
The constitutional text did not make the President's assent in this context as explicitly mandatory.
Presidential assent became compulsory.
The 24th Amendment also added:
Article 13(4).
It provides, in substance, that:
Article 13 does not apply to constitutional amendments made under Article 368.
This directly addressed the logic used in:
Golaknath.
Article 13 generally protects Fundamental Rights by invalidating laws inconsistent with them.
After the 24th Amendment:
Constitutional amendments made under Article 368 are excluded from Article 13.
This did NOT mean:
Constitutional amendments became immune from all judicial review.
Later:
Kesavananda Bharati
established the Basic Structure limitation.
The 24th Amendment clarified Parliament's position:
Fundamental Rights can be amended.
After Kesavananda Bharati:
They can be amended only subject to the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Fundamental Rights → Amendable.
Basic Structure → Cannot be destroyed.
| Golaknath, 1967 | 24th Amendment, 1971 |
|---|---|
| Parliament's power restricted | Power expressly affirmed |
| FRs could not be amended under the then-prevailing interpretation | FRs expressly amendable |
| Amendment treated as "law" under Article 13 | Constitutional amendments excluded from Article 13 |
| Judicial restriction | Parliamentary power restored/strengthened |
→ Parliament can amend the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.
→ Parliament cannot alter the Constitution's:
Basic Structure.
24th → Amending power.
Kesavananda → Limitation on that power.
The doctrine was laid down in:
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973.
Parliament's power to amend the Constitution is:
Wide, but not unlimited.
The Supreme Court has recognised elements such as:
There is:
No single exhaustive judicial list.
The Amendment sought to strengthen:
Parliament's constitutional amending power.
It did not legally eliminate:
Judicial review.
Kesavananda Bharati confirmed:
Constitutional amendments remain subject to basic-structure review.
Under the amended Article 368:
The President shall give assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill duly passed under the constitutional procedure.
President:
❌ Can simply refuse assent like an ordinary bill.
✅ Assent is constitutionally mandatory once the amendment has been duly passed.
The 24th Amendment concerns:
Amendments under Article 368.
Not every constitutional change requires Article 368.
Some provisions are changed through:
Simple-majority legislation under specific constitutional provisions.
→ Ordinary laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights can be invalid.
→ Constitutional amendments under Article 368 are outside Article 13.
Basic Structure → Judicial check remains.
The 24th Amendment restored constitutional space for:
A Constitution must retain capacity for social transformation.
The amendment was closely connected to the broader tension between:
Individual Fundamental Rights
and
Transformative State policy.
The 24th Amendment strengthened one side of the constitutional balance:
Parliamentary amending power.
The Basic Structure Doctrine later ensured:
Constitutional supremacy and judicial review.
The amendment is part of the broader constitutional dialogue:
Parliament ↕ Judiciary ↕ Constitution.
Golaknath → Parliamentary response → 24th Amendment → Kesavananda → Basic Structure.
The:
25th Constitutional Amendment, 1971
followed the same broader constitutional conflict.
→ Amending power.
→ Property rights + Article 31C.
They attempted to:
Strengthen the State's ability to pursue socio-economic transformation.
The:
42nd Amendment, 1976
went much further in trying to strengthen Parliament and limit judicial scrutiny.
It attempted to make:
Parliament's amending power effectively unlimited.
Minerva Mills, 1980
struck down parts of this approach.
24th → Power affirmed.
42nd → Attempted broader supremacy.
Minerva Mills → Limits reaffirmed.
The:
44th Amendment, 1978
was largely a post-Emergency corrective measure.
24th → Parliament's amendment power strengthened.
44th → Rights and democratic safeguards strengthened.
First Amendment.
Shankari Prasad.
Sajjan Singh.
Golaknath.
24th Amendment.
25th Amendment.
Kesavananda Bharati.
42nd Amendment.
Minerva Mills.
I.R. Coelho.
The Supreme Court upheld:
Parliament's power to amend Fundamental Rights.
Broad parliamentary amending power.
The Court again broadly upheld Parliament's constitutional amendment power.
Amendment power remained largely intact.
The Court restricted Parliament's ability to amend Fundamental Rights.
Fundamental Rights received stronger judicial protection from constitutional amendment.
Parliament responded by:
Expressly affirming amendment power over all constitutional provisions, including Fundamental Rights.
The Supreme Court held:
Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot damage or destroy its Basic Structure.
The Supreme Court held:
Limited amending power itself is part of the Constitution's Basic Structure.
Parliament cannot use Article 368 to:
Give itself unlimited amending power.
The Court held:
Laws inserted into the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 can be examined against the Basic Structure.
Judicial review remains a constitutional safeguard.
The 24th Amendment:
The amendment also raised concerns about:
The final constitutional position is neither:
Parliamentary supremacy
nor:
Judicial supremacy.
It is:
Constitutional supremacy.
Parliament:
Can amend the Constitution.
Judiciary:
Can review constitutional amendments.
Basic Structure:
Cannot be destroyed.
1971.
Strengthen Parliament's constitutional amendment power.
Articles 13 and 368.
Article 13(4).
Constitutional amendments under Article 368 are not treated as "law" for Article 13.
Parliament's power to amend expressly affirmed.
Required to give assent to a duly passed Constitution Amendment Bill.
Golaknath judgment, 1967.
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973.
Limits amendment power.
1971.
1976.
1980.
The 24th Amendment created the Basic Structure Doctrine.
❌ Wrong.
It was created by:
Kesavananda Bharati judgment, 1973.
The 24th Amendment made Fundamental Rights unamendable.
❌ Wrong.
It clarified that they:
Can be amended.
But later:
Basic Structure limitation applies.
The 24th Amendment abolished judicial review of constitutional amendments.
❌ Wrong.
Judicial review survives through:
Basic Structure Doctrine.
Article 13(4) says ordinary laws can override Fundamental Rights.
❌ Wrong.
It excludes:
Constitutional amendments under Article 368
from Article 13.
The President has discretion to veto a Constitution Amendment Bill.
❌ Wrong.
Assent is:
Mandatory after proper parliamentary passage.
The Amendment changed only Article 368.
❌ Wrong.
It also inserted:
Article 13(4).
Golaknath upheld unlimited amendment power.
❌ Wrong.
It restricted Parliament's power regarding Fundamental Rights.
Kesavananda completely rejected Parliament's power to amend Fundamental Rights.
❌ Wrong.
It held:
Fundamental Rights can be amended, but basic structure cannot be destroyed.
The 24th Amendment gave Parliament power to amend the Constitution by simple majority.
❌ Wrong.
Article 368's prescribed procedure remains applicable.
The 24th Amendment made Parliament supreme over the Constitution.
❌ Wrong.
The Constitution remains supreme.
| 1st Amendment, 1951 | 24th Amendment, 1971 |
|---|---|
| Social justice + land reform | Amendment power |
| Article 15(4) | Article 13(4) |
| Articles 31A/31B | Article 368 strengthened |
| Ninth Schedule | President's assent mandatory |
| Speech restrictions | Fundamental Rights amendability clarified |
→ Parliament's power to amend.
→ Article 31C and property-related changes.
24 → Amendment Power.
25 → Property/DPSP.
→ Amendment power affirmed.
→ Attempted to make amendment power effectively unlimited.
Minerva Mills → Unlimited amendment power unconstitutional.
→ Strengthened Parliament's constitutional amendment power.
→ Strengthened emergency safeguards and constitutional liberties.
→ Clarified Article 368.
→ Restored Parliament's reform capacity.
→ Enabled transformative socio-economic legislation.
→ Defined relationship between Parliament and Judiciary.
Kesavananda later established:
Basic Structure Doctrine.
The 24th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1971 was Parliament's response to the Supreme Court's restrictive interpretation of constitutional amendment power in Golaknath. It reaffirmed Parliament's authority to amend every part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, while strengthening the formal procedure under Article 368.
Kesavananda Bharati, 1973
→ Basic Structure Doctrine.
Minerva Mills, 1980
→ Limited amending power itself protected.
I.R. Coelho, 2007
→ Ninth Schedule review.
The 24th Amendment established that Parliament possesses broad constitutional amending power, but subsequent judicial doctrine ensured that this power remains subordinate to the Constitution's basic structure. Thus, India's system reflects constitutional supremacy rather than absolute parliamentary or judicial supremacy.
