Major Amendments — Set 18

Correct Answer: C. Special majority (2/3rd present and voting + more than 50% of total membership)

Most provisions of the Constitution can be amended by a special majority under Article 368, which requires a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting in each House of Parliament, provided that the majority also represents more than half the total membership of each House. This combination is called 'special majority'. Bills to amend the Constitution must be passed in both Houses of Parliament separately; there is no provision for a joint sitting. The President's assent is mandatory after both Houses pass the Bill.

Correct Answer: C. Federal provisions like election of President, distribution of legislative powers

Certain provisions of the Constitution that affect the federal structure require, in addition to a special majority in Parliament, ratification by the Legislatures of not less than one-half of the States. These provisions include those relating to the election of the President, the extent of executive power of the Union and States, the Supreme Court, the High Courts, distribution of legislative powers, the representation of States in Parliament, and Article 368 itself. Once the required State Legislatures ratify the Bill, it is presented to the President for assent. This category of amendments is the most stringent.

Correct Answer: B. Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

In Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), the Supreme Court by a 7:6 majority held that while Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution under Article 368, it cannot alter the 'Basic Structure' or essential features of the Constitution. This doctrine of Basic Structure limits Parliament's constituent power. Justice H.R. Khanna cast the decisive vote by supporting the basic structure doctrine. Elements of basic structure include supremacy of the Constitution, republican and democratic form of government, secularism, federalism, separation of powers, and judicial review.

Correct Answer: B. Fundamental Rights

In Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), the Supreme Court by a majority of 6:5 held that Parliament has no power to curtail or take away any of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution. The court ruled that Article 368 only lays down the procedure for amendment and does not confer any substantive power on Parliament to amend Fundamental Rights. However, this view was overruled in Keshavananda Bharati case (1973), which held that Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights but cannot destroy their essential features that form part of the basic structure.

Correct Answer: B. Clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 and expanded Article 31C

In Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), the Supreme Court struck down clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368, which had been inserted by the 42nd Amendment to immunize constitutional amendments from judicial review. The court also struck down the expanded version of Article 31C that gave unlimited precedence to all Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights. The court reaffirmed the basic structure doctrine and held that the Constitution's harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is itself part of the basic structure. The judgment preserved the role of the judiciary as the guardian of the Constitution.

Correct Answer: C. 52nd Amendment

The 52nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1985 added the Tenth Schedule to the Constitution, which contains the Anti-Defection Law. This law provides for the disqualification of members of Parliament and State Legislatures on grounds of defection from one political party to another. A member is disqualified if he voluntarily gives up membership of his party or votes contrary to the direction of his party. The Tenth Schedule also originally allowed a split (1/3rd members) as an exception, but this was removed by the 91st Amendment of 2003.

Correct Answer: B. State List

The 42nd Amendment of 1976 transferred five subjects from the State List to the Concurrent List: education, forests, weights and measures, protection of wild animals and birds, and administration of justice. This effectively shifted legislative power over these important subjects from the States to Parliament, centralizing power further. The amendment was part of the broader centralizing thrust of the 42nd Amendment which strengthened the Union government at the expense of the States. This change was controversial as it altered the federal balance established by the original Constitution.

Correct Answer: B. 42nd Amendment

The 42nd Constitutional Amendment of 1976 inserted Articles 323A and 323B into the Constitution providing for the establishment of Administrative Tribunals and other Tribunals respectively. Article 323A enables Parliament to provide by law for the adjudication or trial of disputes relating to recruitment and service conditions of public servants. Article 323B enables Parliament and State Legislatures to provide for tribunals for certain other disputes. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was established under this provision through the Administrative Tribunals Act of 1985.

Correct Answer: C. Article 19 freedoms including press freedom cannot be suspended under Article 352 Emergency

The 44th Amendment made an important change regarding press freedom during Emergency. Under the original provision (Article 358), when a National Emergency is proclaimed under Article 352, Article 19 freedoms (including freedom of press) automatically stood suspended. The 44th Amendment modified this to provide that only freedoms under Article 19(1)(a) to (l) that are inconsistent with the Emergency provisions can be suspended, and importantly, any law or executive action must be challenged if it is based on the grounds of Emergency. This reduced the automatic suspension of Article 19 rights during Emergency.

Correct Answer: B. 8 paragraphs

The Tenth Schedule added by the 52nd Amendment of 1985 originally contained 8 paragraphs. These paragraphs dealt with disqualification on the grounds of defection, exceptions for mergers and splits, decision-making authority (Speaker/Chairman), bar of jurisdiction of Courts, rules under the Schedule, and application to certain persons. The provision for splits (Paragraph 3) was removed by the 91st Amendment of 2003. The Supreme Court in Kihoto Hollohan case (1992) upheld the Tenth Schedule but ruled that the Speaker's decision on disqualification is subject to judicial review.