Q 12. Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution. (UPSC 2025, 15 Marks, 250 Words)

EN ह

The Indian Constitution grants amending power to the Parliament, subject to procedural and substantive limitations. As per Article 368, amendments require a special majority, and in some cases, ratification by half of the state legislatures. Granville Austin highlights the balance between rigidity and flexibility, ensuring stability while allowing necessary changes. The Supreme Court's doctrine of the Basic Structure limits amendments that alter the Constitution's fundamental framework, safeguarding democratic principles and rights.

Procedural Limitations on Amending Power:
  ● Article 368: The procedure for amending the Constitution is laid out in Article 368. It requires a special majority of the Parliament, which means a majority of the total membership of each House and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting.  
  ● Ratification by States: Certain amendments, particularly those affecting the federal structure, require ratification by at least half of the state legislatures. For example, amendments related to the election of the President, the extent of the executive power of the Union and the states, and the representation of states in Parliament.  
  ● Bicameral Approval: Both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha must approve the amendment. If there is a disagreement, the amendment cannot proceed, as there is no provision for a joint sitting in the case of constitutional amendments.  
 Substantive Limitations on Amending Power:
  ● Basic Structure Doctrine: The Supreme Court, in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), established the Basic Structure Doctrine, which holds that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution. This includes elements like the supremacy of the Constitution, the rule of law, the principle of separation of powers, and the objectives set out in the Preamble.  
  ● Judicial Review: Amendments are subject to judicial review to ensure they do not violate the basic structure. For instance, the Minerva Mills case (1980) reaffirmed that the power to amend is not absolute and is subject to the basic structure doctrine.  
  ● Fundamental Rights: While Parliament can amend fundamental rights, it cannot abrogate or take away these rights entirely. The Golak Nath case (1967) initially held that fundamental rights are beyond the amending power of Parliament, although this was later modified by the 24th Amendment.  
  ● Federal Structure: Amendments that alter the federal balance between the Union and the states are scrutinized to ensure they do not undermine the federal character of the Constitution. The SR Bommai case (1994) emphasized the importance of federalism as part of the basic structure.  
  ● Democratic Principles: Amendments must uphold the democratic principles enshrined in the Constitution. Any attempt to alter the democratic framework, such as by extending the term of the Lok Sabha beyond five years without a valid reason, would be considered unconstitutional.  
 Examples and Data:
  ● 42nd Amendment (1976): Known as the "mini-Constitution," it attempted to reduce the power of the judiciary and enhance the power of the Parliament. However, parts of it were later struck down or modified by subsequent amendments and judicial review.  
  ● 44th Amendment (1978): This amendment was enacted to undo many changes made by the 42nd Amendment, particularly those affecting fundamental rights and the power of judicial review.  
  ● 99th Amendment (2014): This amendment, which sought to establish the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015 as it was seen to violate the independence of the judiciary, a part of the basic structure. 

The Indian Constitution grants amending power to Parliament, subject to procedural and substantive limitations. Procedurally, amendments require a special majority in both Houses and, for certain provisions, ratification by half of the state legislatures. Substantively, the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case established the "basic structure doctrine," ensuring amendments do not alter the Constitution's fundamental framework. As B.R. Ambedkar emphasized, the Constitution is a "living document," necessitating a balance between flexibility and safeguarding core principles.