Important Constitutional Amendments
Important Constitutional Amendments
Important Constitutional Amendments
LEGALITE
IMPORTANT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS
The Constitution of India is neither flexible nor rigid enough but it is a synthesis of both.
Constitution of India (under article 368 of Part XX) provided the powers to Parliament to
amend the Constitution and its procedures but cannot amend those provisions which form the
‘basic structure’ of the Constitution (As ruled by the Supreme Court in the Keshashavananda
Bharti Case, 1973). The Constitution can be amended in three ways:
1. Amendment by simple majority of the Parliament.
2. Amendment by special majority of the Parliament.
3. Amendment by special majority of the Parliament and the ratification of half of the state
legislature.
1|Page
The Constitution (31st Amendment) Act, 1973
Increased the elective strength of the Lok Sabha from 525 to 545. Under the Act, the upper
limit of representatives of the States goes up from 500 to 525 and that of the Union
Territories decreases from 25 to 20.
1. The 42nd Amendment Act narrowed down the scope of judicial review of laws. Under the
original Constitution, no distinction was made between Central laws and State laws as
regards judicial review, Parliament and State legislatures were equally subject to the
limitations imposed by the Constitution on their law-making power.
The Supreme Court was competent to invalidate a law of Parliament or of the State
legislature if it was not in tune with any provision of the Constitution. Similarly, a High Court
had the power to invalidate any law irrespective of the source of such law.
The 42nd Amendment, for the first time, made a distinction between Central laws and State
laws as regards the competence of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts to invalidate
them on the ground of unconstitutionality.
It provided that (a) the Supreme Court could not declare any State law unconstitutional unless
in such proceedings the constitutionality of the Central law was also involved; and (b) the
High Court could not strike down a Central law-as unconstitutional.
2. A law made to implement any of the Directive Principles of State Policy could not be
struck down by the Supreme Court or the High court on the ground that it violated any of the
Fundamental Rights.
3. A Central or State law could not be declared invalid unless not less than two-thirds of the
judges hearing the case held the same to be constitutionally invalid.
5. Directive Principles of State Policy were given precedence over the Fundamental Rights.
6. It empowered the Centre to send its armed forces to meet any “grave situation of law and
order” in any State, irrespective of the wishes of the State Government.
8. It made it explicit that the President would be bound by the advice of the Council of
Ministers.
2|Page
9. The term of the Lok Sabha and of the State Legislatures was extended from five years to
six years.
10. The incorporation of a set of Fundamental Duties for citizens formed an important part of
the Amendment Act.
3|Page
Article 21A was added along with insertion of a new fundamental duty to part4(Article 51A)
of the constitution.
4|Page
5|Page