AMENDMENTS IN INDIAN CONSTITUTION:

First special provisions for the advancement of socially and economically backward
Amendment Act, classes.Provided for the saving of laws providing for the acquisition of estates,
1951 etc.​Added Ninth Schedule to protect the land reforms and other laws
included in it from the judicial review. ​After Article 31, ​Articles 31A and
31B were inserted.
Came in response to State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan,
Later challenged in the Shankari Prasad vs. Union of India case. ​The
amendment was challenged on the ground that it violates the Part-III of the
constitution and therefore, should be considered invalid.
Second Amendment The scale of representation in the Lok Sabha was readjusted stating that 1 member can represent
Act, 1952 even more than 7.5 lakh people.

The Constitution ● The ​provision of having a common High Court for two or more
(Seventh states was introduced
Amendment) ● Abolition of Class A, B, C and D states – 14 States and 6 Union
Act, 1956 Territories were formed
● Introduction of Union Territories

Ninth Adjustments to Indian Territory as a result of an agreement with Pakistan

Amendment Act, (Indo-Pak Agreement 1958)​:
1960 Cession of Indian territory of ​Berubari Union (West Bengal) to Pakistan

19th Amendment System of Election Tribunals was abolished​ and High Courts were given the power to
Act, 1966 hear the election petitions

21st Amendment Act, Sindhi language was language into 8th Schedule of Indian Constitution
1967

24th Amendment Twenty Fourth Constitutional Amendment Act was brought in response to the
Act, 1971 Golaknath ruling (1967) of the Supreme Court which held that the Parliament
does not have the power to take away any fundamental rights through
amendment to the Constitution​.
● Affirmed the power of Parliament to amend any part of the
Constitution including fundamental rights by amending Article 13
and 368.
● Made it compulsory for the President to give his assent to a
Constitutional Amendment Bill.

25th Amendment Fundamental Right to Property was curtailed

Act, 1971
26th Amendment Act, Privy Purse and privileges of former rulers of princely states were abolished
1971

31st Amendment Lok Sabha seats were increased from 525 to 545
Act, 1972
40th Amendment Parliament was empowered to specify from time to time the limits of the
Act, 1976 territorial waters, the continental shelf, the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and
the maritime zones of India.

42nd The most comprehensive amendment of the Indian Constitution, called the
Amendment Act, ‘Mini-Constitution,’
1976 The Amendment was meant to enhance enormously the strength of the Government. The major
Amendments made in the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment Act are: Preamble The
characterization of India as ‘​Sovereign Democratic Republic’ has been changed to
‘Sovereign Socialist Secular Democratic Republic’.
The words ​‘Unity of the nation’ have been changed to ‘Unity and integrity of the nation’.
Parliament and State Legislatures: ​The life of the Lok Sabha and State Legislative
Assemblies was extended from 5 to 6 years.
Executive: It amended Article 74 to State explicitly that the President shall act in accordance
with the advice of the Council of Ministers in the discharge of his functions.
Judiciary: The 42nd Amendment Act inserted Article 32A in order to deny the Supreme Court
the power to consider the Constitutional validity of the State law. Another new provision,
Article 131A, gave the Supreme Court an exclusive jurisdiction to determine question relating
to the Constitutional validity of a central laws. Article 144A and Article 128A, the creatures
of the Constitutional Amendment Act made further innovation in the area of judicial review of
the Constitutionality of legislation. Under Article 144A, the minimum number of judges of the
Supreme Court to decide a question of Constitutional validity of a Central or State law was
fixed as at least seven and further, this required two-thirds majority of the judges sitting declare
law as unconstitutional. While the power of the High Court to enforce Fundamental Rights
remained untouched, several restrictions were imposed on its power to issue writs ‘for any other
purpose’.
Federalism: ​The Act added Article 257A in the Constitution to enable the Centre to deploy any
armed force of the Union, or any other force under its control for dealing with any grave
situation of law and order in any State.
Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles​: A major change that was made by42nd
Constitutional Amendment was to give primacy to all Directive Principles over the
Fundamental Rights contained in Articles 14, 19 or 31.
The 42nd Constitutional Amendment added a few more Directive Principles – free legal aid,
participations of workers in the management of industries, protection for environment and
protection of forests and wildlife of the country.
Fundamental Duties: ​The 42nd Amendment Act inserted Article 51-A to create a new
part called IV-A in the Constitution, which prescribed the Fundamental Duties to the
citizens.
Emergency​: Prior to the 42nd Amendment Act, the President could declare an emergency
under Article 352 throughout the country and not in a part of the country alone. The Act
authorized the President to proclaim emergency in any part of the country.

44th Amendment It is also one of the important amendments in the Indian Constitution, enacted by
Act, 1978 the Janata Government

52nd A new ​tenth Schedule was added providing for the anti-defection laws.
Amendment Act,
1985

61st Amendment The voting age was decreased from 21 to 18 for both Lok Sabha and
Act, 1989 Legislative Assemblies elections

65th Amendment A Multi-member National Commission for SC/ST was established and the
Act, 1990 office of a special officer for SCs and STs was removed.
69th Amendment Union Territory of Delhi was given the special status of ‘National Capital
Act, 1991 Territory of Delhi.’
70-member legislative assembly and a 7-member council of ministers were
established Delhi

73rd Panchayati Raj institutions were given constitutional status.

Amendment Act, A new Part-IX and 11th Schedule were added in the Indian Constitution to
1992 recognize Panchayati Raj Institutions and provisions related to them

74th Amendment Urban local bodies were granted constitutional status

Act, 1992 ​ art IX-A and 12th Schedule were added to the Indian Constitution
A new P

The Constitution This Amendment has ​added a new clause (4-a) to Article 16 of the Constitution
(77th which empowers the State to make any provisions for reservation in promotions
Amendment) in Government jobs in favour of SCs and STs, if it is of opinion that they are
Act, 1995 inadequately represented in the services under the State.
This has been​ done to nullify the effect of the Supreme Court Judgment in
the Mandal Commission Case (Indra Sawhney vs. Union of India) in which
the Court has held that reservation in promotions cannot be made.

The Constitution This Act ​amended Article 16 (4A) of the Constitution to provide for
(85th consequential seniority ​in the case of promotion by​ virtue of rule of
Amendment) reservation for Government servants​ belonging to the ​Scheduled Castes and
Act, 2001 the Scheduled Tribes.

86th Amendment With a view to​ making right to free and compulsory education a
Act, 2002 ​ rticle, namely, Article 21A
fundamental right​, the Act inserts a new A
conferring on all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years the right to free
and compulsory education.
The Act amends in Part-III, Part –IV and Part-IV(A) of the Constitution.

88th Amendment Provision of Service Tax was made under Article 268-A – Service tax levied by
Act, 2003 Union and collected and appropriated by the Union and the States

The Constitution The Act adds Article 338A and provides for the ​creation of a National
(89th Commission for Scheduled Tribes.
Amendment)
Act, 2003

The Constitution The Act makes provisions for limiting the size of the Council of Ministers at
(Ninety-one the Center and in the States and gives teeth to debar a defector from
Amendment) holding any remunerative political post for the remaining tenure of the
Act,2003 legislature unless reelected.

103rd Clause 5 to Article 15 was added.

Amendment Act,
2005
95th Amendment Extended the reservation of seats for the SCs and STs and special representation
Act, 2009 for the Anglo-Indians in the Lok Sabha and the state legislative assemblies for a
further period of ten years i.e., up to 2020 (Article 334).

97th Amendment In Part IIIof the constitution, after the words “or unions” the words “Cooperative
Act, 2011 Societies” was added.
In Part IVa new Article 43Bwas inserted, which says: The state shall endeavour
to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control
and professional management of the co-operative societies”.
After Part IXAof the constitution, a Part IXBwas inserted to accommodate state
vs centre roles

The Constitution The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) was established
(99th by the Union government of India by amending the constitution of India
Amendment) through the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 201
Act, 2014

101st Goods and Service Tax (GST) was introduced.

Amendment Act,
2016

102nd Constitutional Status was granted to National Commission for Backward

Amendment Act, Classes (NCBC)
2018

103rd A maximum of 10% Reservation for Economically Weaker Sections of citizens

Amendment Act, of classes other than the classes mentioned in clauses (4) and (5) of Article 15,
2019 i.e. Classes other than socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or
the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.

104th Extended the reservation of seats for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and
Amendment Act, states assemblies from Seventy years to Eighty.​ Removed the reserved seats
2020 for the Anglo-Indian community in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.
LANDMARK JUDGEMENTS:

A.K. Gopalan Case (1950) (​Interpreted key Fundamental Rights including Article 19
and 21) (Due process)

Shankari Prasad Case (1951) (Amendability of Fundamental Rights)

​“LAW” in article 13 must be taken to mean rules or
regulations made in the exercise of ordinary legislative power
and not amendments to the Constitution made in the exercise of
constituent power.
Article 13 (2) did not affect amendments made under article
368.

Champakam Dorairajan State of caste-based reservations were struck down ​by the court, as
Madras,1951 against Article 16(2) of the Constitution
case resulted in the First Amendment of the Constitution of
India.

Berubari Union case (1960) (Parliament's power to make amendments under Article 3
and Article 368)​ the 9th Amendment Act was passed to enforce
the Nehru-noon agreement. ​Pak-Bangla

Sajjan Singh case (1965) held that the ​Parliament can amend any part of the
Constitution including the Fundamental Rights.
Dissenting opinion

I. C. Golaknath case (1967) (​Validity of the First and Seventeenth Amendments and
described the scope of Article 13)
held that law made by the Parliament shall not be such that
infringes and takes away the fundamental rights of the citizen
which are provided by the Constitution of India.
judgement was ​overruled by the 24th amendment(changes to
13 and 368).
The judgement was ​restored and its scope was extended in
Kesavananda Bharati case.

Madhav Jiwaji Rao Scindia Union deals with Article 18 of the Constitution of India.
of India, 1970 It abolishes all special titles and privileges of India’s erstwhile
princely rulers.

Kesavananda Bharati case 1973 (Defined the Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution)
comprised 13 judges.largest bench till date)
referred as ​Fundamental rights case.

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj (Disputes relating to elections involving the Prime Minister
Narayan case 1975 of India)
added ​basic features of the constitution​ :
 Democracy, judicial review, rule of law.
Further, the court added jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under
Article 32, which deals with writs - basic structure .

Menaka Gandhi case 1978 (Significant towards the transformation of the judicial review
on Article 21)
new and highly varied interpretation of the meaning of ​‘life and
personal liberty’​ under Article 21 of the Constitution. Expanded
the horizons of​ freedom of speech and expression.
Inter-connections between the three Articles 14, 19 and 21.

ADM Jabalpur v Shivakant Shukla A step backward for India, DURING EMERGENCY.
Case) - 1976 Widely considered a violation of Fundamental Rights.
Right to move to the court for enforcement of fundamental
rights guaranteed under constitution stands suspended.
including Article 14, 21 and 22.
In a later amendment, it was held that Article 21 and 22 ​cannot
be suspended during the time of emergency.

Minerva mills case (1980) The validity of the 4​ 2nd amendment act was challenged as
violative of the ‘basic structure’ of the Constitution.
Strengthened Basic Structure- includes Parliament's power to
amend and the power of Judicial Review)
Social welfare laws should not infringe fundamental rights
The Constitution is the Supreme, not the Parliament.

Waman Rao Case (1981) (​Validity of 9th Schedule and demarcating the date of 24th
april 1973) i​mplications of the basic structure doctrine for
Article31-B were re-examined.
Constitutional validity of individual rights upheld

S. R. Bommai case (1994) : (Misuse of Article 356 of the Constitution of India)

CentreState Relations​.
The judgement attempted to curb ​blatant misuse of Article 356 of
the Constitution of India, which allowed President’s rule to be
imposed on state governments.
curtailed power of President under Article 356 of the
constitution of India.
It also held that ​secularism is the basic structure of the
Constitution.

Naz Foundation v Govt of NCT Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as
of Delhi) - July 2009 unconstitutional. ​The said section earlier criminalised sexual
activities “against the order of nature” which included
Suresh Kumar Koushal vs. Naz homosexual acts. This judgment however, ​was overturned by
Foundation 2013 the SC in December, 2013.

Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of FINALLY HELD UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

India

Vishaka v State of Rajasthan) - Foundation for a female workforce

1997 Definition of sexual harassment and guidelines to deal with it laid
down.

MC Mehta v Union Of India - Mounting environment-related concerns.

1986 Extended the scope of Article 21 and 32 of the Constitution of
India to ​include the right to healthy and pollution-free
environment
The case is also famous as the ​Bhopal Gas Tragedy.

D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal laid down ​detailed guidelines to be followed by the central and
state investigating agencies.
It related all cases dealing with ​arrest and detention
Court held that ​any form of torture or cruel inhuman or
degrading treatment e​ven it occurs during interrogation,
investigation or otherwise, falls within the ambit of Article 21.

Supreme Court Wrangle over Supreme Court judge appointments

Advocates-on-Record - National Judicial Appointments Commission Act and
Association and another versus Constitutional amendment Act passed in 2014 aimed at
Union of India) - 1993 replacing the collegium system of appointing Supreme Court
judges. ​The act was struck down as unconstitutional by the
Supreme Court in October 2015.
It overruled S P Gupta v. Union of India.
The case is named as the​ Second judge transfer case.
It was ​later overruled a committee called NJAC was appointed
for appointment and transfer of judges of Supreme Court and
High Courts.
It was ​again overruled and NJAC was held unconstitutional
in Supreme Court Advocates-on Record Association v. Union
of India, 2014

(Indra Sawhney v UOI November) Reservation in central government jobs

- 1992 Attempt to correct historic injustices constitutionally.
caste could be a factor for identifying backward classes.

(Mohd Ahmed Khan v Shah Bano Maintenance lawsuit sets precedent

Begum) - 1985 Shah Bano won the right to get alimony from her husband.
overturned this judgement by passing the Muslim Women
(Protection on Divorce Act), 1986, according to which
alimony need be given only during the iddat period (in tune
with the Muslim personal law)

I.R Coelho and State of Tamil if a law is included in the ​9th Schedule of the Indian
Nadu 2007 Constitution, it can still be examined and confronted in court.
The 9th Schedule of the Indian Constitution is a list of acts and
laws which cannot be challenged in a court of law.

Rajagopal V. State of Tamil Nadu, The right to privacy subsists even if a matter becomes one of
1994 public record and hence the right to be let alone is part of
personal liberty.
This comes under the purview of Article 21
 The case is also known as ​Auto Shankar case.

KM Nanavati v State of Jury decision overturned by High Court

Maharashtra) - 1961 Hardly an open-and-shut case, the nature of the crime garnered
media attention.

Best Bakery case - 2003 Miscarriage of justice as a large number of witnesses turn
hostile.
The Best Bakery was burned down, killing 14 people on March
1, 2002 as part of the 2002 Gujarat violence.

Justice K. S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) RIGHT TO PRIVACY is protected as a fundamental

and Anr. vs Union Of India And constitutional right under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the
Ors 2017 Constitution of India.

Subramanian swamy vs. Union of Constitutional Validity of Sections 499 to 502[[Chapter XXIl] of
India,2016 Indian Penal Code relating to Criminal Defamation

M Nagraj v UoI J Kapadia- overarching principles of basic structure of

constitution

Aruna Shanbaug case 2011 Active euthanasia is illegal. Right to die not included in right to
life.(blind, paralysed and deaf) for 42 years

Lily Thomas and Union Of India MLA, MLC or MP - found guilty of a crime and given a
(2013) minimum of 2 years imprisonment would cease to be a member
of the House with immediate effect.

National Legal Services recognition of transgender persons as a third gender.

Authority and Union of India instructed the government to​ treat them as minorities and
(2014) expand the reservations in education, jobs, education, etc

Sunil Batra v. Delhi Court​ rejected the 'hands-off' doctrine and ruled that
Administration (1978) 4 SCC 409 fundamental rights do not flee the person as he enters the
prison​ although they may suffer shrinkage necessitated by
incarceration.

A R Antulay v. RS Nayak SC has inherent powers to rectify its errors

T.M.A.Pai Foundation & Ors vs Rights of the minorities to establish educational institutions
State Of Karnataka & Ors

Bijoe Emmanuel versus State of National Anthem Case

Kerala

Vellore Citizen Welfare v. UoI Polluters Pay principle (Environment)

Bhikaji vs State of Madhya Doctrine of Eclipse

Pradesh.

Selvi and Ors v. State of Karnataka Lie detectors test (only if- voluntary +safeguards)
 (K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of Constitutionality of Aadhaar Act
india)

(Indian Young Lawyers Sabarimala Temple Entry

Association v. State of Kerala)

(Romila Thapar v. Union of India) Arrested Activists

(Joseph Shine v. Union of India) Decriminalisation of Adultery

(Jarnail Singh v. Lacchmi Narain Reservation in Promotion

Gupta)

(Public Interest Foundation v. Electoral Disqualification

Union of India)

(Shafin Jahan v. KM Ashokan) Hadiya Marriage

(Tehseen Poonawalla v. Union of Cow Vigilantism

India)

(Government of NCT of Delhi v. Special Status of Delhi

Union of India)

Sitaram Yechury v.​​ Union of India ‘Jammu and Kashmir Habeas Corpus Case
2019

Swiss Ribbons Pvt Ltd.​​ v.​​ Union of The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of
India 2019 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and​​ National Company
Law Tribunal​​ and held that it is not violative of Article 14 of the
Constitution.

Yashwant Sinha and others v. CBI The case is famously known as ‘the Rafale​​ case’.
and others 2019

M Siddiq (d) through LRs v. The case is famously known as ‘Ayodhya case’
Mahant Suresh Das and others
2019

Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India Supreme Court in this case held that​​ Right to internet forms a part
2020 of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)​​ (a)

S. Venkataraman v. Union Of India Double jeopardy

Union Of India & Anr vs Hemraj "The right of eligible employees to be considered for promotion
Singh Chauhan & Ors is virtually a part of their fundamental right guaranteed under
Article 16(Equality of opportunity in matter of public
employment) of the Constitution,"

CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers. Rule of harmonious construction

R.M.D.C v. UOI Doctrine of severability

The State of Bombay and another Doctrine of pith and substance

v. E.N. Balsara

State of Rajasthan v. Chawala AIR Doctrine of Incidental or Ancillary Powers

1959

M. Karunanidhi v. UOI, (1979) Doctrine of Repugnancy

K.C. Gaiapati Naravana Deo and Doctrine of colourable legislation

Other v. The State of Orissa.

Tata Iron Steel v. the State of Doctrine of territorial nexus

Bihar.

A.K.Gopalan v. State of Madras. Doctrine of judicial review

Ravindra Jain vs UOI Doctrine of laches

Jaswantsingh Mathurasingh & Anr. Doctrine of waiver

v. Ahmedabad Municipal
Corporation & Ors,

DOCTRINES IN THE CONSTITUTION:

Doctrine of It is widely believed that democracy, federalism, independence of the
Basic judiciary, secularism etc. are part of the basic features.
Structure: This doctrine was first expressed in ​Kesavananda Bharati v. The State of
Kerala (1973)

Rule of Constitutional provisions should not be construed in isolation from all other
Harmonious parts of the Constitution, but should be construed as to harmonize with those
Construction other parts.
brought about to bring harmony between the different lists mentioned in
Schedule 7 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court laid down five
principles of rule of Harmonious Construction in the landmark case of ​CIT v.
Hindustan Bulk Carriers.

Doctrine of This doctrine is applicable to pre-existing laws under Article 13(1).

Eclipse Article 13 provides that any law which was made before the commencement
of constitution must be consistent with the part III of the constitution. If any
statue is inconsistent with the provisions of part III of the constitution such
statue shall become void. At the same time such a statue should not be treated
as Dead unless it is abolished by Parliament. It will be treated as dormant or
 remains eclipsed to the extent it comes under the shadow of the fundamental
rights.
The Supreme Court first applied this doctrine in the case of ​Bhikaji v. State
of M.P, ​where it applied to pre-constitutional law. The extension to the
post-constitutional law was stated in the case of Dulare Lodh v. ADJ Kanpur.
Hari Singh v. V. Military Estate Officers Delhi AIR 1972- Supreme Court
held that Punjab Premises Act was inconsistent with Article 14 was void

Doctrine of When a statute is in part void, it will be enforced as regard the rest, if that is
severability severable from what is invalid,
Article 13 states that the portion that is invalid should be struck off and not
the entire one. The valid part can be kept. However, it should be kept in mind
that even after separation; the remaining part should not become ambiguous.
If the remaining part becomes ambiguous, then the whole statute would be
declared void and of no use.
R.M.D.C v. UOI​ is considered to be one of the most important cases on the
Doctrine of Severability.

Doctrine of Pith and Substance mean the true nature of law.

Pith and where the​ question arises of determining whether a particular law relates
Substance: to a particular subject (mentioned in one List or another), the court looks
to the substance of the matter.
The ​State of Bombay and another v. E.N. Balsara;​ is the first important
judgment of the Supreme Court that took recourse to the Doctrine of Pith and
Substance.

Doctrine of This principle is an addition to the doctrine of Pith and Substance.

Incidental or The doctrine established that​ the power to legislate on a subject also
Ancillary includes power to legislate on ancillary matters that are reasonably
Powers connected to that subject.
It was held in the case of ​State of Rajasthan v. Chawala AIR 1959​, the
power to legislate on a topic includes the power to legislate on an ancillary
matter which can be said to be reasonably included in the topics.

Doctrine of The term ​“repugnancy” means inconsistency between state made law and
Repugnancy Union made law.
Article 254 establishes the “Doctrine of Repugnancy” which act as a
safeguard to solve disputes arising between the States and Union.
M. Karunanidhi v. UOI, ​(1979), is one of the most authoritative judgments
on Doctrine of Repugnancy, SC summarized, test and principles of
repugnancy.

Doctrine of The literal meaning of Colorable Legislation is that under the ‘color’ or
Colorable ‘guise’ of power conferred for one particular purpose, the legislature can’t
Legislation seek to achieve some other purpose which it is otherwise not competent to
legislate on.
This Doctrine also traces its origin to a Latin Maxim: ​“Quando aliquid
 prohibetur ex directo, prohibrtur ET per obliquum.” (​ Whatever legislature
can’t do directly, it can ‘t do indirectly.)
One of the most cogent and lucid explanations relating to this doctrine was
give in the case of​ K.C. Gaiapati Naravana Deo and Other v. The State of
Orissa.

Doctrine of Article 245 states a state legislation can make laws on the territory of the
Territorial state and not on extraterritorial laws provided there is nexus or connection
Nexus between the state and the object of the legislation.
Article 245(1) states that the Parliament of India can make laws for the
whole or any territory of India. Similarly, a state legislation can do the same.
Such laws can’t be declared invalid on the growth that they are extraterritorial
according to Article 245(2). To determine whether a particular legislation is
within the territorial nexus or not, this doctrine is applied.
Supreme Court applied this doctrine in the case of​ Tata Iron Steel v. the
State of Bihar.

Doctrine of Article 13 Judicial Review refers to the ​power of the judiciary to interpret
Judicial the constitution and to declare any such law or order of the legislature
Review and executive void, if it finds them in conflict the Constitution of India.
Judicial Review Power is ​used by both the Supreme Court and High
Courts.
Judicial Review can’t be conducted in respect of the incorporated in the 9th
Schedule of the Constitution.
The foundation of Indian SC review power was laid firmly in ​A.K.Gopalan
v. State of Madras.

Doctrine of Laches means delay. ​It is based on the maxim that ​“equity aids the vigilant
Laches and not those who slumber on their rights.”​It means ​that a legal right or
claim will not be upheld or permitted if a long delay in asserting the right
or claim has prejudiced the adverse party. ​Anybody who wants remedy
must come within a reasonable time before the court.
The question arises whether, on the ground of delay, fundamental rights can
be denied under Article 32.
Fundamental rights cannot be denied only on the basis of delay as it is
unjustified. It is necessary for the development of the individual.
In ​Ravindra Jain vs UOI,​ the supreme court stated that on grounds of
unreasonable delay, the remedy under article 32 can be denied. However,
there has been no case to overrule the above-mentioned case law by the
Supreme Court order.

Doctrine of In this, a ​person intentionally gives up his right or privilege or chooses not
Waiver to exercise his right or privilege which are conferred on him by the state.
In ​Basheshar Nath v. Commissioner of Income Tax​, the Supreme Court
held that​ fundamental rights of a person cannot be waived.
Jaswant Singh Mathura Singh & Anr. v. Ahmedabad Municipal
 Corporation & Ors​ the court said that everyone has the right to waive an
advantage or protection that seeks to give him. For instance, in the case of a
tenant-owner dispute, if a notice is issued and no representation is made either
by the owner, tenant or sub-tenant, it would be a waiver of opportunity and
that person can not be allowed to turn around at a later stage.

Doctrine of It not only examines that there is any law to deny life and individual freedom
Due process of but a​ lso checks if the law made is reasonable, just and not arbitrary.
law If the Supreme Court finds any law to be not fair, it will declare it void.
Individual rights can be treated more fairly with the help of this doctrine.
Under this doctrine, the state should respect all the legal rights owed to a
person by the state as it is a legal requirement and laws that states enact must
conform to the laws of the land like – fairness, fundamental rights, liberty,
etc.
In ​Maneka Gandhi vs Union of India​, the court while delivering the
judgement used “Procedure established by law” instead of “Due process of
law” however it must be ‘ right and fair and fair ‘ and ‘ not arbitrary, fanciful
or oppressive, ‘ otherwise it would not be a procedure at all and the
requirement of Article 21 would not be met.

The doctrine The doctrine of constitutional morality is an​ emphatic guarantee that the
of Supreme Court of India is committed to protecting all minorities, despite
Constitutional opposition from majoritarian governments.
Morality Second, the doctrine of constitutional morality led the Court to hold that it
plays a counter-majoritarian role within the constitutional scheme

Due Process of Law = Procedure Established by Law + The procedure should be fair and
just and not arbitrary
Writs Explained:
1. Habeas Corpus-‘To have the body of.’
2. Mandamus-’We command.’
3. Prohibition-‘To forbid.’only against judicial and quasi judicial authorities
4. Certiorari-‘To be certified’ or ‘To be informed.’
5. Quo-Warranto-‘By what authority or warrant.

PREAMBLE:
IMPORTANT STATEMENTS:

N.A PALKIWALA Preamble is the identity card of the constitution

K.N MUNSHI Horoscope of sovereign democratic republic is the preamble

SHUBHASH KASHYAP If constitution is the body then preamble is the soul

J SUBBA RAO Preamble contains the ideals and the aspirations

CONTEXT:
FRENCH REVOLUTION Liberty, equality, and fraternity

PANDIT NEHRU Objective resolution: aims and objectives

USA Idea

AUSTRALIA Language

RUSSIA (USSR) Justice- social, economic and political

NATURE OF THE TEXT:

1. Talks about the source of the authority( WE THE PEOPLE….)
2. It explains the type and character of the government and the state/polity (SOVEREIGN
SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC AND REPUBLIC)
3. It talks about the goals of the nation (JUSTICE,LIBERTY,EQUALITY,FRATERNITY)
4. Presents the date of adoption (26th of NOVEMBER 1949)
OVERALL THE ​“THE BASIC STRUCTURE OF THE CONSTITUTION​”
42nd AMENDMENT 1976:( MINI CONSTITUTION)
3 words added-
● SOCIALISM
● SECULARISM
● INTEGRITY
AMENDMENT ; word means change in the constitution without changing the basic structure of
the constitution and preamble reflects the basic structure of the constitution.

Whether preamble is a part of the constitution?

CASE LAW HELD

IN RE BERU BARI CASE Agreement between india and pakistan over some sand, land was
given to pakistan.
Held; preamble not a part of the constitution, as gives no substantial
power.

MADAN BHAI ISHWAR Regarding the transfer of land it said can't do this like this but only
BHAI PATEL V. UOI via amendment

KESHWANANDA BHARTI In case of ambiguity preamble is to be used, legitimate aid in

construction
Preamble of an act Preamble of the constitution

Not part of an act Enacted

Not enacted Adopted
Nor adopted by enacting party And passed
Not introduced or discussed By the same procedure as the
rest of the provision of the
constitution

Thus, an ESSENTIAL PART

Thus can even be AMENDED

STATE OF UP V. DISHA Observed same as above

NATH SHUKLA

CHARAN LAL SAHU V. UOI Recognition of preamble as essential part makes it a legal a nd
valuable aid in the construction of the provision
S. R BOMAI CASE Held same.

LIC V CONSUMER AND EDU Essential part of the constitution

RESEARCH CENTRE

U Can Fix Deposit From United States Polly Has Certified ManneQuins
Using Pre Mature Special Rate. P– Prohibition
U – Union H-Habeas Corpus
C – Citizenship C– Certiorari
F – Fundamental rights Man– Mandamus
D – Directive Principles Qu– Quo Warranto
F – Fundamental Duties
U – Union
S – States
U – Union Territories
P – Panchayat
M – Municipality
S – Scheduled
R– Relation between Union and State

​ Part Contains Articles

● Part I Union and its Territory 1 to 4
● Part II Citizenship 5 to 11
● Part III Fundamental Rights 12 to 35
● Part IV Directive Principles of State Policy 36 to 51
● Part IVA Fundamental Duties 51A
● Part V The Union 52 to 151
● Part VI The States 152 to 237
● Part VII States in the B part of the First schedule (repealed by 7th Amendment)
● Part VIII The Union Territories 239 to 242
● Part IX The Panchayats 243 to 243O
● Part IXA The Municipalities 243P to 243ZG
● Part IXB The Co-operative Societies 243ZH to 243ZT
● Part X The scheduled and Tribal Areas 244 to 244A
● Part XI Relations between the Union and the States 245 to 263
● Part XII Finance, Property, Contracts and Suits 264 to 300A
● Part XIII Trade and Commerce within the territory of India 301 to 307
● Part XIV Services Under the Union, the States 308 to 323
● Part XIVA Tribunals 323A to 323B
● Part XV Elections 324 to 329A
● Part XVI Special Provisions Relating to certain Classes 330 to 342
● Part XVII Languages 343 to 351
● Part XVIII Emergency Provisions 352 to 360
● Part XIX Miscellaneous 361 to 367
● Part XX Amendment of the Constitution 368
● Part XXI Temporary, Transitional and Special Provisions 369 to 392
● Part XXII Short title, date of commencement, etc. 393 to 395