Parliament can change the Constitution. This power comes from Article 368. But can Parliament change anything it wants? The Supreme Court said no. Some parts are so basic that no amendment can destroy them. This rule is called the basic structure doctrine. It came from the Kesavananda Bharati case of 1973. Exams ask about the cases, the years and the list of basic features. This post explains them in simple words. It ends with 15 previous year questions.
Key Points (Quick Revision)
- The doctrine was laid down in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala on 24 April 1973.
- A bench of 13 judges decided the case by a majority of 7 to 6.
- Parliament can amend any part, but it cannot destroy the basic structure.
- The doctrine is not written in the Constitution. It is a judicial creation.
- The NJAC amendment of 2014 was struck down under this doctrine in 2015.
1. What is the basic structure?
The Constitution has some core ideas. These include democracy, secularism and the rule of law. Together they form its basic structure.
Parliament can amend the Constitution. But an amendment cannot damage or destroy this core. If it does, the Supreme Court can strike it down.
The Constitution does not use the words "basic structure". The idea was created by the Supreme Court. The court has also never given a final, closed list. It decides case by case what is basic.
2. The road to Kesavananda Bharati
The doctrine grew out of a long fight. The fight was between Parliament and the courts. The issue was simple. Can Parliament amend Fundamental Rights?
Shankari Prasad case (1951). The First Amendment was challenged. The court said Parliament can amend any part, including Fundamental Rights. An amendment is not a "law" under Article 13.
Sajjan Singh case (1965). The court repeated the same view. Parliament kept its full power.
Golaknath case (1967). The court changed its mind. It said Fundamental Rights cannot be amended at all. An amendment is a "law" under Article 13. So an amendment cannot take away these rights.
The 24th Amendment (1971). Parliament replied to Golaknath. It changed Article 13 and Article 368. It said Parliament can amend any part, including Fundamental Rights.
This set the stage for the big case.
3. The Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973
Kesavananda Bharati was the head of a math in Kerala. He challenged Kerala's land reform laws. The case grew into a test of the 24th, 25th and 29th Amendments.
A bench of 13 judges heard it. This is still the largest bench in Indian history. The judgment came on 24 April 1973.
By a majority of 7 to 6, the court held two things:
- Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights. So Golaknath was overruled.
- But Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
The lead opinion was written by Chief Justice S. M. Sikri. Justice H. R. Khanna's view was the deciding one. The lawyer for the petitioner was Nani Palkhivala.
4. Cases that shaped the doctrine after 1973
Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975). The 39th Amendment put the election of the Prime Minister beyond court review. The court struck that part down. Free and fair elections and judicial review were held to be basic features.
The 42nd Amendment (1976). Parliament added clauses (4) and (5) to Article 368. They said no amendment could be questioned in any court.
Minerva Mills case (1980). The court struck down these clauses. It said a limited amending power is itself part of the basic structure. It also said the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is basic.
Waman Rao case (1981). The court fixed a date. Laws put in the Ninth Schedule before 24 April 1973 are safe. Laws added after that date can be tested.
S. R. Bommai case (1994). Secularism and federalism were held to be basic features. The case also limited the misuse of Article 356.
I. R. Coelho case (2007). A nine-judge bench confirmed the Waman Rao rule. Even Ninth Schedule laws after 1973 must pass the basic structure test.
NJAC case (2015). The 99th Amendment created the National Judicial Appointments Commission. The court struck it down. Independence of the judiciary is a basic feature.
5. What counts as basic structure?
There is no final list. But the courts have named many features over the years. The most often cited are:
| Basic feature | Main case |
|---|---|
| Supremacy of the Constitution | Kesavananda Bharati (1973) |
| Sovereign, democratic and republican form of government | Kesavananda Bharati (1973) |
| Secular character of the Constitution | Kesavananda Bharati (1973), S. R. Bommai (1994) |
| Separation of powers | Kesavananda Bharati (1973) |
| Federal character | Kesavananda Bharati (1973), S. R. Bommai (1994) |
| Free and fair elections | Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) |
| Judicial review | Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), Minerva Mills (1980) |
| Limited power of Parliament to amend | Minerva Mills (1980) |
| Harmony between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles | Minerva Mills (1980) |
| Independence of the judiciary | NJAC case (2015) |
| Rule of law and equality | Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), Minerva Mills (1980) |
Other features named by the courts include the welfare state, the unity and integrity of India, and the principle of reasonableness.
6. Why the doctrine matters
The doctrine keeps a balance. Parliament stays strong. It can amend the Constitution to meet new needs. But it cannot use that power to end democracy itself.
It protects Fundamental Rights. A large majority in Parliament cannot take away the core of these rights.
It also keeps the courts independent. This is why the NJAC amendment failed.
Some people criticise the doctrine. They say judges, who are not elected, get the last word. They say the list of basic features is vague. The court replies that the Constitution, not Parliament, is supreme. The doctrine protects the Constitution from a temporary majority.
7. Previous year questions
- The basic structure doctrine was laid down in which case? – Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
- In which year was the Kesavananda Bharati case decided? – 1973
- How many judges were on the bench in the Kesavananda Bharati case? – 13
- What was the majority in the Kesavananda Bharati judgment? – 7 to 6
- Which Article of the Constitution gives Parliament the power to amend it? – Article 368
- In which case did the Supreme Court hold that Fundamental Rights cannot be amended? – Golaknath case (1967)
- Which amendment was passed to overcome the Golaknath judgment? – 24th Amendment (1971)
- Which amendment inserted clauses (4) and (5) in Article 368 to bar judicial review of amendments? – 42nd Amendment (1976)
- In which case were clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 struck down? – Minerva Mills case (1980)
- Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after which date can be tested on the basic structure? – 24 April 1973
- Which case held that Ninth Schedule laws after 1973 are open to judicial review? – I. R. Coelho case (2007)
- In which case were secularism and federalism held to be basic features? – S. R. Bommai case (1994)
- Which amendment created the National Judicial Appointments Commission? – 99th Amendment (2014)
- Who was the Chief Justice of India at the time of the Kesavananda Bharati judgment? – S. M. Sikri
- Which was the first case in which the Supreme Court said Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights? – Shankari Prasad case (1951)
8. How to revise this topic
Start with the timeline: Shankari Prasad 1951, Sajjan Singh 1965, Golaknath 1967, 24th Amendment 1971, Kesavananda 1973.
Next, fix the three numbers of Kesavananda: 13 judges, 7 to 6, 24 April 1973.
Then learn what each later case added: 1975 elections, 1980 limited amending power, 1994 secularism and federalism, 2007 Ninth Schedule, 2015 judicial independence.
Finally, memorise the table of basic features. Exams pick one feature and ask for its case.
9. Frequently Asked Questions
What is the basic structure doctrine?
It is a rule laid down by the Supreme Court. Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, but it cannot destroy its basic structure, such as democracy, secularism, judicial review and the rule of law.
Which case gave the basic structure doctrine?
The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, decided on 24 April 1973 by a 13-judge bench with a majority of 7 to 6.
Is the basic structure written in the Constitution?
No. The words do not appear in the Constitution. The doctrine was created by the Supreme Court and is developed case by case.
What did the Minerva Mills case decide?
In 1980 the court struck down clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368, added by the 42nd Amendment. It held that a limited amending power and judicial review are part of the basic structure.
Why was the NJAC struck down?
The 99th Amendment of 2014 created the National Judicial Appointments Commission. In 2015 the Supreme Court held that it harmed the independence of the judiciary, which is a basic feature, and struck it down.
For more Polity topics in simple language, see our Important Constitutional Amendments, Fundamental Rights and Schedules of the Constitution posts, or browse the Polity section. Preparing for a state PSC? Start with the UPSC CSE guide or join the 100 Hour GS Course.