Revision summary
Early cases allowed amendments of fundamental rights; Golaknath (1967) blocked abridgement. Kesavananda (1973) held that Article 368 cannot destroy the Constitution’s basic structure. Indira Gandhi (1975) and Minerva Mills (1980) applied the lock to elections and judicial review. Coelho (2007) and NJAC (2015) reached the Ninth Schedule and appointments. Impact: amendments are reviewable; democracy, secularism, federalism, and judicial review sit above a super-majority.
Model answer
Introduction
The basic structure doctrine says Parliament may amend the Constitution under Article 368 but may not destroy its identity. Evolution ran through property and rights cases of the 1950s–70s. Impact is that judicial review now sits even on constitutional amendments, which is the deepest check on a super-majority.
Body
Evolution
- Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965) held that a constitutional amendment is not “law” under Article 13, so fundamental rights could be amended.
- I.C. Golaknath (1967) reversed that: Parliament could not abridge fundamental rights; the First, Fourth, and Seventeenth Amendments were saved only prospectively.
- The Twenty-fourth Amendment tried to restore amending power; Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) then held that Article 368 does not include the power to damage or destroy the Constitution’s basic structure.
- Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) struck a clause that had placed the Prime Minister’s election beyond judicial review, applying the doctrine to an emergency-era amendment.
- Minerva Mills (1980) restored the balance between Parts III and IV and struck clauses that had given amendments immunity from judicial review.
- Waman Rao, I.R. Coelho (2007), and the NJAC Fourth Judges case (2015) extended the doctrine to the Ninth Schedule and to judicial appointments.
What counts as basic
- The Court has listed, among others, supremacy of the Constitution, republican and democratic form, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, judicial review, free and fair elections, and the rule of law.
- The list is illustrative, not a closed Article; each challenge tests whether the identity of the Constitution survives.
Impact
- No Lok Sabha majority, even with Article 368 numbers, can turn India into a theocracy, a unitary erasure of States, or a system without judicial review by a stroke of amendment.
- Governments still amend widely — GST, reservations, Delhi, women’s reservation — so the doctrine is a ceiling, not a freeze.
- Critics call it judicial supremacy; defenders call it the only lock after the Forty-second Amendment’s emergency overreach.
- The impact on Uttar Pradesh and every State is the same Union-wide lock: a State cannot hide a constitutional fraud in a later Ninth Schedule entry after Coelho.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD G[Golaknath 1967] --> K[Kesavananda 1973] K --> I[Indira Gandhi 1975] I --> M[Minerva Mills 1980] M --> C[Coelho NJAC] K --> L[Lock on identity] A[Art 368 amendments] --> L
Conclusion
The doctrine evolved from a rights-amendment quarrel into Kesavananda’s identity lock, then into election, judicial-review, and Ninth Schedule cases. Its impact is that amendments are reviewable and some features are beyond even a constituent majority. Parliament remains the amending body; it is no longer an unreviewable sovereign.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Write a critical note on problems and reforms of administrative system in Uttar Pradesh.
Next question in the 2022 paper (Q18). View answer →
-
Can Parliament still amend the Constitution?
Yes, under Article 368, including many fundamental-right and federal clauses. It cannot destroy identified basic features.
-
Is basic structure written in the text?
No single article lists it. The Court reads it from the Preamble, the scheme, and implied limits on Article 368.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS2 · 8 marks
Describe the salient features of “UMANG Scheme” related to e-governance.
Welfare schemes
UMANG is a unified mobile and web app for new-age governance, launched in November 2017 by MeitY and NeGD. One login reaches many central and state services instead of separate department apps. Aadhaar, DigiLocker, and payments sit on the same rail. The catalogue is multilingual and searchable. The platform works only where departments keep their modules live.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS2 · 8 marks
What are the fundamental causes of poverty and hunger? What government schemes have been implemented to eliminate poverty and hunger?
Welfare schemes
Poverty and hunger rest on insecure earnings, unequal land and social access, and weak health and education. Climate and delivery leaks turn a shock into chronic hunger. NFSA 2013 and PMGKAY supply a cereal floor; MGNREGA supplies rural wages. NRLM, PMAY-G, PM POSHAN, POSHAN Abhiyaan, and ICDS attack livelihood, housing, and nutrition. Cereal rations do not by themselves end micronutrient hunger.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2022 · UPGS2 · 8 marks
Discuss the role of non-governmental organisations in the process of policy making.
Indian Constitution
NGOs shape policy by turning field failure into campaigns that later become law. They supply notes, model bills, and pilots that ministries and committees use. NITI Aayog, social audit, standing committees, media, and PIL are the usual doors. FCRA and donor templates can help or distort Indian federal design. NGOs advise and watch; they do not enact statutes.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.