11.Fundamental Rights – Article 14 and Basic Structure Doctrine

Question 1

What was the purpose of inserting laws in the IX Schedule of the Constitution?

Answer 1

The laws were inserted in the IX Schedule to prevent them from being subjected to judicial review.

Question 2

What did the IX Schedule protect?

Answer 2

The IX Schedule protected the laws of State Legislatures and Parliament from judicial review.

Question 3

What was the ruling in the Sajjan Singh Case (1965)?

Answer 3

The Supreme Court upheld the ruling of the Shankari Prasad Case, stating that Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights.

Question 4

What did the Seventeenth Amendment Act, 1964 prohibit?

Answer 4

The Seventeenth Amendment Act prohibited the acquisition of land under personal cultivation unless the market value of the land is paid as compensation.

Question 5

What laws did the State of Punjab pass in relation to land reforms?

Answer 5

The State of Punjab passed the Land Ceiling Act and Tenancy Act to acquire land and implement land reforms.

Question 6

What question regarding fundamental rights was raised in the I.C. Golaknath vs State of Punjab Case?

Answer 6

The question raised was whether the parliament has the power to take away fundamental rights.

Question 7

What happened to the surplus land of the Golaknath family?

Answer 7

The surplus land of the Golaknath family was taken away by the state under the Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act.

Question 8

What argument did the petitioner make regarding the Constitution of India?

Answer 8

The petitioner argued that the Constitution of India, drafted by the Constituent Assembly, is of a permanent nature and cannot be changed or altered.

Question 9

How did the petitioner interpret the word “amendment” in question?

Answer 9

The petitioner argued that the word “amendment” implies a change in accordance with the basic structure of the Constitution, rather than introducing an entirely new idea.

Question 10

What argument did the petitioner make regarding the Parliament’s power to take away fundamental rights?

Answer 10

The petitioner argued that the fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution cannot be taken away by the Parliament.

Question 11

How did the petitioner describe the importance of fundamental rights in the Constitution?

Answer 11

The petitioner argued that fundamental rights are an essential and integral part of the Constitution, likening them to the soul of the Constitution.

Question 12

What argument did the petitioner make regarding Article 368 of the Constitution?

Answer 12

The petitioner argued that Article 368, which defines the procedure for amending the Constitution, does not grant the power to the Parliament to amend the Constitution itself.

Question 13

What action did the petitioner seek in relation to the seventeenth amendment?

Answer 13

The petitioner sought to have the seventeenth amendment, which placed the Punjab Act in the Ninth Schedule, declared ultra vires, beyond the powers of the Parliament.

Question 14

What was the Supreme Court’s ruling in the I.C. Golaknath vs State of Punjab Case?

Answer 14

The Supreme Court held that the Parliament cannot amend the Constitution, specifically with regard to fundamental rights. The court also stated that to amend the fundamental rights, a new constituent assembly would have to be formed. Additionally, the court implemented the judgment prospectively, meaning it would apply to future cases.

Question 15

Can Fundamental Rights be amended?

Answer 15

No, Fundamental Rights cannot be amended.

Question 16

Does Parliament have the power to amend the Constitution via Article 368?

Answer 16

Article 368 does not grant power to the Parliament to amend the constitution.

Question 17

Does the word ‘law’ under Article 13(3) include an amendment under Article 368?

Answer 17

Yes, the court said the word ‘law’ under Article 13(3) includes amendment under Article 368.

Question 18

What was the judgment in the Shankari Prasad Case?

Answer 18

Fundamental Rights can be amended.

Question 19

What was the judgment in the Sajjan Singh Case?

Answer 19

Fundamental Rights can be amended.

Question 20

What was the judgment in the I C Golaknath Case?

Answer 20

Fundamental Rights cannot be amended. Article 368 does not grant power to the Parliament to amend the constitution. Court held that Fundamental Rights are Supreme.

Question 21

What was the significance of the 24th Amendment, 1971?

Answer 21

The Parliament added clause 4 to Article 13 and clause 4 to Article 368, which ensured that the amendment done by Parliament will not apply to the fundamental rights chapter.

Question 22

What was the purpose of the 24th Amendment Act of 1971?

Answer 22

The purpose was to ensure that amendments made by Parliament do not apply to the fundamental rights chapter.

Question 23

What clauses were added to Article 13 and Article 368 through the 24th Amendment?

Answer 23

Clause 4 was added to both Article 13 and Article 368.

Question 24

What did the 24th Amendment ensure regarding the amendments made by Parliament?

Answer 24

It ensured that the amendments made by Parliament would not apply to the fundamental rights chapter.

Question 25

What restrictions were imposed by the 25th Constitutional Amendment of 1971?

Answer 25

The amendment restricted property rights and compensation in case the State takes away property rights.

Question 26

Which case challenged both the 24th and 25th Amendments?

Answer 26

The Keshavananda Bharti Case in 1973 challenged both amendments.

Question 27

What was the outcome of the Keshavananda Bharti Case regarding the challenged amendments?

Answer 27

The outcome of the case determined the validity of the challenged amendments and had significant implications for the interpretation of the Constitution.

Question 28

What was the relief sought in the Keshavananda Bharati case?

Answer 28

Relief was sought against the Kerala government’s implementation of state land reform laws that imposed restrictions on the management of religious property.

Question 29

Under which article was the Keshavananda Bharati case challenged?

Answer 29

The case was challenged under Article 26, which concerns the right to manage religiously owned property without government interference.

Question 30

What was the key question before the Supreme Court in the Keshavananda Bharati case?

Answer 30

The key question was whether the power of Parliament to amend the constitution is unlimited and whether Parliament can take away fundamental rights by amendment.

Question 31

What is the “Basic Structure Doctrine”?

Answer 31

It is a doctrine that holds that while Parliament has the power to amend the constitution, it must adhere to certain basic structure principles of the Constitution.

Question 32

Name some features included in the “Basic Structure Doctrine.”

Answer 32

The features include the Supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, independence of the judiciary, the doctrine of separation of powers, a sovereign democratic republic, the parliamentary system of government, the principle of free and fair elections, and the idea of a welfare state.

Question 33

What elements were identified as part of the Basic Structure by Justice Sikri?

Answer 33

The elements include the supremacy of the Constitution, republican and democratic forms of government, the secular nature of the Constitution, separation of powers, federal character, the mandate to build a welfare state, and the unity and integrity of the nation.

Question 34

In which case did the court hold that federalism is a basic structure?

Answer 34

In the SR Bommai Case, the court held that federalism is a basic structure.

Question 35

Which case settled that judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution?

Answer 35

The L. Chandra Kumar Case settled that judicial review is a basic feature.

Question 36

According to the Kihoto Hollohon case, what is considered a basic structure?

Answer 36

The Kihoto Hollohon case stated that democracy is a basic structure.

Question 37

What can happen if the basic structure is not upheld?

Answer 37

If the basic structure is not preserved, the government can become despotic.

Question 38

Who was Raj Narain in opposition to in the 1971 election?

Answer 38

Raj Narain was in opposition to Indira Gandhi in the 1971 election.

Question 39

What allegation did Raj Narain make against Indira Gandhi?

Answer 39

Raj Narain alleged that Indira Gandhi had misused her powers to win the elections.

Question 40

What decision did the Allahabad Court make regarding Indira Gandhi’s election?

Answer 40

The Allahabad Court declared on 12 June 1975 that Indira Gandhi’s election was null and void.

Question 41

What action was taken in response to the Allahabad Court’s decision?

Answer 41

The judgment was put on hold by the Supreme Court.

Question 42

When was the emergency declared?

Answer 42

The emergency was declared on 26th June 1975.

Question 43

What did the Parliament do on August 10th, 1975, regarding the Allahabad High Court’s decision?

Answer 43

The Parliament passed the 39th Amendment to nullify the decision of the Allahabad High Court and added Article 329 (A), which stated that the election of the Prime Minister and the Speaker cannot be challenged.

Question 44

What was the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Indira Gandhi’s election?

Answer 44

The Supreme Court upheld the election of Indira Gandhi.

Question 45

What was the Supreme Court’s view on Article 329A?

Answer 45

The Supreme Court declared that Article 329A was against the rule of law and against the principle of natural justice.

Question 46

What did the Supreme Court determine about the 39th Amendment?

Answer 46

The Supreme Court held that the 39th Amendment violated the basic structural principles of ‘free and fair elections’ and ‘judicial review’.

Question 47

Which justice struck down the Article in the Indira Gandhi case?

Answer 47

Justice Chandrachud struck down the Article.

Question 48

How did Justice Chandrachud expand the scope of the basic structure?

Answer 48

Justice Chandrachud expanded the scope of the basic structure by identifying four basic features.

Question 49

What are the four basic features identified by Justice Chandrachud?

Answer 49

The four basic features identified are:

*Sovereign, Democratic, and Republic status
*Equality
*Secularism, freedom of conscience, and religion
*Government of laws and not of men

Question 50

What does “government of laws and not of men” mean?

Answer 50

“Government of laws and not of men” means that in a free society, the government rules must be fixed and understandable. Laws should not be so complicated that they prevent average citizens from exercising basic liberties.

Question 51

What was the Minerva Mills case about?

Answer 51

The Minerva Mills case involved the nationalization of cotton mills, with Minerva Mills being one of the mills affected.

Question 52

How long after the Keshavananda Bharti Case did the Minerva Mills case come before the court?

Answer 52

The Minerva Mills case came before the court 7 years after the Keshavananda Bharti Case.

Question 53

What were the questions presented before the court in the Minerva Mills case?

Answer 53

*Can the Directive Principles be given more importance than fundamental rights?
*Can Articles 39 (b) and (c) of the Constitution be given primacy over Articles 14 and 19, which are Fundamental Rights?
*Does the insertion made under Article 31C and Article 368 through sections 4 and 55 of the 42nd Amendment hinder the basic structure doctrine?

Question 54

What power does the Parliament have in amending the Constitution?

Answer 54

The Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution, but this power is limited to the ‘Basic Structure’.

Question 55

According to the Court, what is the relationship between the Parliament and the Constitution?

Answer 55

The Constitution is supreme, and the Parliament, being created by the Constitution, is subject to its authority.

Question 56

How did the Court view the conflict between Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights?

Answer 56

The Court emphasized the need for harmony between Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights and stated that Directive Principles cannot be forced upon Fundamental Rights.

Question 57

What were the additional features added to the ‘basic structure’ list in this case?

Answer 57

The additional features added were judicial review and the balance between Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights.

Question 58

According to the judgment, what is considered a basic feature of the Constitution?

Answer 58

The Court ruled that a limited amending power itself is a basic feature of the Constitution.