Question map
Not attempted Correct Incorrect ★ Bookmarked
Loading…
Q5 (IAS/2018) Polity & Governance › Constitutional Basics & Evolution › Ninth Schedule Official Key

Consider the following statements : 1. The Parliament of India can place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India. 2. The validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule cannot be examined by any court and no judgement can be made on it. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?

Result
Your answer: —  ·  Correct: A
Explanation

The correct answer is option A (Statement 1 only).

**Statement 1 is correct:** Article 31B along with the Ninth Schedule was added by the 1st Constitutional Amendment Act of 1951.[1] The Parliament has the constitutional power to add laws to the Ninth Schedule through constitutional amendments, as evidenced by the fact that originally (in 1951), the Ninth Schedule contained only 13 acts and regulations but at present their number is 282.[1]

**Statement 2 is incorrect:** While the Ninth Schedule was designed to protect laws from judicial review, this protection is not absolute. In the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court ruled that the acts and regulations that are included in the Ninth Schedule are open to challenge on the grounds of being violative of the basic structure of the constitution.[1] This position was reaffirmed when the court ruled that there could not be any blanket immunity from judicial review of the laws included in the Ninth Schedule. It held that judicial review is a 'basic feature' of the constitution and it could not be taken away by putting a law under the Ninth Schedule.[2]

Therefore, only Statement 1 is correct.

Sources
  1. [1] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
  2. [2] Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
How others answered
Each bar shows the % of students who chose that option. Green bar = correct answer, blue outline = your choice.
Community Performance
Out of everyone who attempted this question.
59%
got it right
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full view
Don’t just practise – reverse-engineer the question. This panel shows where this PYQ came from (books / web), how the examiner broke it into hidden statements, and which nearby micro-concepts you were supposed to learn from it. Treat it like an autopsy of the question: what might have triggered it, which exact lines in the book matter, and what linked ideas you should carry forward to future questions.
Q. Consider the following statements : 1. The Parliament of India can place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of In…
At a glance
Origin: Books + Current Affairs Fairness: Moderate fairness Books / CA: 5/10 · 5/10

This is a classic 'Static Polity' question derived directly from the evolution of the Basic Structure doctrine. It tests the I.R. Coelho (2007) judgment, which is a staple in standard texts like Laxmikanth. If you understand that Judicial Review is part of the Basic Structure, Statement 2 becomes obviously false.

How this question is built

This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.

Statement 1
Can the Parliament of India place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
Presence: 5/5
“Article 31B saves the acts and regulations included in the Ninth Schedule from being challenged and invalidated on the ground of contravention of any of the Fundamental Rights. Article 31B along with the Ninth Schedule was added by the 1st Constitutional Amendment Act of 1951. Originally (in 1951), the Ninth Schedule contained only 13 acts and regulations but at present their number is 282.‎ Of these, the acts and regulations of the state legislature deal with land reforms and abolition of the zamindari system and that of the Parliament deal with other matters. However, in the Kesavananda Bharati case<sup>12</sup> (1973), the Supreme Court rules that the acts and regulations that are included In the Ninth Schedule are open to challenge on the grounds of being violative of the basic structure of the constitution.”
Why this source?
  • Explicitly states Article 31B saves acts/regulations included in the Ninth Schedule from challenge.
  • Notes that acts/regulations of Parliament are among those included in the Ninth Schedule (i.e., Parliamental enactments have been placed there).
  • Identifies Ninth Schedule as a mechanism created by constitutional amendment (1st Amendment) to shelter specified laws.
Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 12: Basic Structure of the Constitution > EMERGENCE OF THE BASIC STRUCTURE > p. 127
Presence: 5/5
“But in the Golak Nath case (1967), the Supreme Court reversed its earlier stand. In this case, the constitutional validity of the Seventeenth Amendment Act (1964), which inserted certain state acts in the Ninth Schedule, was challenged. A 'transcendental and immutable' position, and hence the Parliament cannot abridge or take away any of these rights. A constitutional amendment act is also a law within the meaning of Article 13 and hence would be void for violating any of the Fundamental Rights. The Parliament reacted to the Supreme Court's judgement in the Golak Nath case (1967) by enacting the 24th Amendment Act (1971).”
Why this source?
  • Describes the Seventeenth Amendment (1964) as having inserted certain state acts in the Ninth Schedule — showing constitutional amendments were used to place laws into the Schedule.
  • Explains Parliament's legislative response (24th Amendment) to court rulings, indicating Parliament exercises amendment power affecting Ninth Schedule entries.
Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
Presence: 5/5
“Again, in the I.R. Coelho case (2007), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the above view. In this case, the court ruled that there could not be any blanket immunity from judicial review of the laws included in the Ninth Schedule. It held that judicial review is a 'basic feature' of the constitution and it could not be taken away by putting a law under the Ninth Schedule. Originally (in 1951), the Ninth Schedule contained only 13 acts and regulations but at present, their number is 282. 20 Of these, the acts and regulations of the state legislature deal with land reforms and abolition of the zamindari system and that of the Parliament deal with other matters.”
Why this source?
  • I.R. Coelho (2007) holding: there is no blanket immunity for Ninth Schedule laws — courts retain judicial review.
  • Clarifies that while laws are placed in the Ninth Schedule, their protection is subject to the 'basic feature' doctrine (i.e., placement is not absolute).
Statement 2
Is the validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India immune from judicial review, i.e., cannot be examined by any court or be subject to any judgment?
Origin: Web / Current Affairs Fairness: CA heavy Web-answerable

Web source
Presence: 5/5
"While the Ninth Schedule provides the law with a “safe harbour” from judicial review, the protection is not blanket. When the Tamil Nadu law was challenged in 2007 (I R Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu), the Supreme Court ruled in a unanimous nine-judge verdict that while laws placed under Ninth Schedule cannot be challenged on the grounds of violation of fundamental rights, they can be challenged on the ground of violating the basic structure of the Constitution."
Why this source?
  • Directly addresses whether Ninth Schedule laws are completely exempt and states the protection is not blanket.
  • Cites I R Coelho ruling that such laws can be challenged for violating the Constitution's basic structure.
Web source
Presence: 4/5
"The Ninth Schedule provides the law with a “safe harbour” from judicial review under Article 31A of the Constitution. Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule cannot be challenged for reasons of violating any fundamental right protected under the Constitution."
Why this source?
  • States the common view that the Ninth Schedule gives a 'safe harbour' from judicial review.
  • Specifically says laws placed in the Ninth Schedule cannot be challenged for violating fundamental rights (showing the scope of the claimed immunity).
Web source
Presence: 5/5
"The Court held that any law inserted in the Ninth Schedule on or after April 24, 1973 (date on which Keshavananda was pronounced) can be subject to judicial review and will be struck down if it violates the basic structure doctrine."
Why this source?
  • States the key judicial limitation: laws inserted in the Ninth Schedule on or after April 24, 1973 are subject to judicial review.
  • Links Ninth Schedule immunity to the basic-structure doctrine and potential striking down by courts.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
Strength: 5/5
“This was later clarified by the court in the Waman Rao case<sup>13</sup> (1980) wherein it held that the various acts and regulations included in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April, 1973 (date of judgement in the Kesavananda Bharati case) are valid only if they do not damage the basic structure of the constitution. Again, in the I.R. Coelho case<sup>14</sup> (2007), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the above view. In this case, the court ruled that there could not be any blanket immunity from judicial review of the laws included in the Ninth Schedule. It held that judicial review is a 'basic feature' of the constitution and it could not be taken away putting a law under the Ninth Schedule While delivering the above judgement, the Supreme Court made the following conclusions: 1.”
Why relevant

States the Supreme Court (I.R. Coelho) ruled there could not be any blanket immunity for laws in the Ninth Schedule and that judicial review is a 'basic feature' of the Constitution.

How to extend

A student could check whether a challenged Ninth Schedule law was added before/after key judgments and thus infer whether courts would consider it under basic-structure review.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
Strength: 4/5
“Again, in the I.R. Coelho case (2007), the Supreme Court reaffirmed the above view. In this case, the court ruled that there could not be any blanket immunity from judicial review of the laws included in the Ninth Schedule. It held that judicial review is a 'basic feature' of the constitution and it could not be taken away by putting a law under the Ninth Schedule. Originally (in 1951), the Ninth Schedule contained only 13 acts and regulations but at present, their number is 282. 20 Of these, the acts and regulations of the state legislature deal with land reforms and abolition of the zamindari system and that of the Parliament deal with other matters.”
Why relevant

Repeats that I.R. Coelho reaffirmed no blanket immunity and links Ninth Schedule entries (originally 1951 entries v. many later additions) to judicial review concerns.

How to extend

One could list when a specific law was placed in the Ninth Schedule (original 1951 vs later) and combine that with case law timing to predict susceptibility to challenge.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 300
Strength: 5/5
“thereof would be the determinative factor. • 2. The majority judgement in the Kesavanand Bharati Case read with Indira Gandhi's judgment requires the validity of each new constitutional Amendment to be judged on its own merits. The actual effect and impact of the law on the rights guaranteed under Part III has to be taken into account for determining whether or not it destroys basic structure. The impact test would determine the validity of the challenge.• 3 As held in the Indira Gandhi Case. 6• Applying the above test to the Ninth Schedule laws, if the infraction affects the basic structure, then such a law or laws will not get the protection of the Ninth Schedule.”
Why relevant

Explains the 'impact test' from Kesavananda Bharati/Indira Gandhi lines: validity must be judged on actual effect on Part III rights and whether it destroys basic structure.

How to extend

A student could apply the impact test to a particular Ninth Schedule law (examine its effects on fundamental rights) to judge whether courts would review it.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > I.R. COELHO CASE (2007) > p. 637
Strength: 5/5
“Landmark judgements and Their Impact 637 • Related /bpic/: Issue Related Article/judicial review of the: ninth schedule 31 B & Ninth Schedul e • Related /bpic/: Schedule/judicial review of the: Supreme Court Judgement: It reaffirmed its judgement delivered in the Wamall Rao case 1980. Therefore, it held that the amendments to the Constitution made on or after 24 April 1973 (i.e., the date of verdict in the Kesavananda Bharati case 22) by which the Ninth Schedule is amended by inclusion of various laws therein would be open to challenge on the ground that they damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.”
Why relevant

Summarises that I.R. Coelho reaffirmed Waman Rao and that amendments/inclusions on or after 24 April 1973 are open to challenge if they damage the Constitution's basic structure.

How to extend

Using the known date (24 April 1973) a student can classify a Ninth Schedule entry as pre- or post- that date to predict likely reviewability.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 34: High Court > fll Power of Judicial Review > p. 360
Strength: 4/5
“Judicial review is the power of a high court to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orde rs of both the Central and state governments. On examination, if they are found to be violative of the Constitution (ultra-vires), they can be declared as illegal, unconstitutional and invalid (null and void) by the high court. Consequently, they cannot be enforced by the government. Though the phrase 'judicial review' has no where been used in the Constitution, the provisions of Articles 13 and ZZ6 explicitly confer the power of judicial review on a high court.”
Why relevant

Defines judicial review as the power of High Courts to examine constitutionality of legislation and declare acts ultra-vires if violative of the Constitution.

How to extend

A student can use this general scope (infringement of fundamental rights/competence/repugnancy) to identify legal grounds by which a Ninth Schedule law might be challenged.

Pattern takeaway: UPSC Polity questions prioritize 'Constitutional Interpretation' over raw text. They don't just ask what the Ninth Schedule *is*; they ask about its *legal standing* vis-à-vis the Supreme Court. Always study the 'limitations' of legislative power.
How you should have studied
  1. [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Direct hit from Laxmikanth (Chapter: Basic Structure / Judicial Review).
  2. [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: The tug-of-war between Parliamentary Sovereignty (Article 368) and Judicial Supremacy (Basic Structure).
  3. [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the 'Judicial Review Timeline': 1st Amendment (1951) → Shankari Prasad → Golaknath (1967) → Kesavananda Bharati (April 24, 1973) → Minerva Mills (1980) → I.R. Coelho (2007). Key takeaway: Laws added after April 24, 1973, are open to scrutiny.
  4. [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: Never memorize a Constitutional 'immunity' (like Art 31B, Art 105, Art 361) without asking 'What is the exception?'. In Indian Polity, the Supreme Court rarely allows a 'blanket ban' on its own powers.
Concept hooks from this question
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Article 31B and Ninth Schedule protection
💡 The insight

References show Article 31B plus the Ninth Schedule were created to shield specified enactments from Fundamental Rights challenges.

High-yield for UPSC: explains how certain laws can be given constitutional protection; links Fundamental Rights, special constitutional provisions and amendment history. Useful for questions on state power vs. rights and for analyses of specific amendments.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > own and to dispose it freely, limited only by: (a) reasonable I. The Constitution restrictions to serve the exigencies of public welfare; and (b) of 1949. any other reasonable restrictions that may be imposed by > p. 148
🔗 Anchor: "Can the Parliament of India place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the ..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Use of constitutional amendments to place laws in the Ninth Schedule
💡 The insight

Evidence records the Seventeenth/24th Amendments inserting laws into the Ninth Schedule, showing Parliament uses amendment power to add entries.

High-yield because it connects amendment procedure, legislative strategy and historical practice; helps answer 'how' laws are sheltered and frames debates on Parliament's amendment scope. Enables questions on amendment examples and legal consequences.

📚 Reading List :
  • Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 12: Basic Structure of the Constitution > EMERGENCE OF THE BASIC STRUCTURE > p. 127
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
🔗 Anchor: "Can the Parliament of India place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the ..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Basic-structure judicial review as a limit on Ninth Schedule immunity
💡 The insight

Cases cited (Kesavananda, I.R. Coelho) indicate Ninth Schedule entries remain subject to the basic-structure test and judicial review.

Crucial for UPSC candidates: explains constitutional checks on parliamentary power, tying together landmark judgments, doctrine of basic structure, and Ninth Schedule jurisprudence — frequent exam topic in Polity and Governance.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
  • Laxmikanth, M. Indian Polity. 7th ed., McGraw Hill. > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 300
🔗 Anchor: "Can the Parliament of India place a particular law in the Ninth Schedule of the ..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Ninth Schedule is not a blanket shield from judicial review
💡 The insight

Waman Rao (1980) and I.R. Coelho (2007) (as cited) explicitly reject blanket immunity for Ninth Schedule laws and reaffirm judicial review as a basic feature.

High-yield for UPSC polity: questions often probe limits of Parliament's power to protect laws via schedules. Mastering this clarifies how judicial review operates despite legislative attempts to insulate laws. It links Constitutional law, landmark judgments, and Fundamental Rights — enabling answers on scope, checks and balances, and recent case law implications.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > I.R. COELHO CASE (2007) > p. 637
🔗 Anchor: "Is the validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of Ind..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Basic Structure Doctrine & the 24 April 1973 cut-off
💡 The insight

References state that laws added to the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 (Kesavananda Bharati date) can be tested against the basic structure.

Crucial doctrinal point: UPSC often asks about Kesavananda Bharati implications and judicial tests. Knowing the 24-4-1973 cut-off and its role helps answer questions on constitution-amendment limits and retrospective protection claims. Connects to amendment jurisprudence and separation of powers.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 299
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 300
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > I.R. COELHO CASE (2007) > p. 637
🔗 Anchor: "Is the validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of Ind..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Impact test — assessing effect on Part III (Fundamental Rights)
💡 The insight

References reference the 'impact test' and that validity depends on whether the law's actual effect destroys the basic structure or infringes Part III rights.

Useful for analytical UPSC answers: questions require explaining how courts evaluate constitutional validity (not just formal placement in Ninth Schedule). Mastery aids in framing answers on judicial review grounds, remedy types, and interaction between Fundamental Rights and constitutional amendments.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE NINTH SCHEDULE > p. 300
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 27: Judicial Review > SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW > p. 298
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > F Validation of Certain Acts and Regulations > p. 103
🔗 Anchor: "Is the validity of a law placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of Ind..."
🌑 The Hidden Trap

The 'Golden Triangle' Test: Post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws are not just checked for Basic Structure generally, but specifically tested against Articles 14, 19, and 21. Also, remember the specific cutoff date: April 24, 1973 (Judgment date of Kesavananda Bharati).

⚡ Elimination Cheat Code

The 'Absolutist Trap' in Polity. Statement 2 claims validity 'cannot be examined by ANY court' and 'NO judgement can be made'. In a constitutional democracy where Judicial Review is a Basic Feature, such absolute exclusion is logically impossible. Extreme wording = Wrong.

🔗 Mains Connection

Mains GS-2 (Separation of Powers): The Ninth Schedule is the prime case study for 'Legislative Overreach' vs. 'Judicial Activism'. Use it to argue how the Basic Structure doctrine prevents the Constitution from becoming a plaything of the ruling majority.

✓ Thank you! We'll review this.

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

CDS-I · 2015 · Q54 Relevance score: 5.91

Which of the following statement(s) is/are not correct for the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India ? 1. It was inserted by the first amendment in 195 1. 2. It includes those laws which are beyond the purview of judicial review. 3. It was inserted by the 42nd Amendment. 4. The laws in the Ninth Schedule are primarily those which pertain to the matters of national security. Select the correct answer using the code given below :

CDS-II · 2016 · Q114 Relevance score: 5.80

Which one of the following statements with regard to the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution of India is not correct?

IAS · 2005 · Q70 Relevance score: 4.39

Consider the following statements: 1. The Constitution of India has 20 parts. 2. There are 390 articles in the Constitution of India in all. 3. Ninth, Tenth, Eleventh and Twelfth Schedules were added to the Constitution of India by the Constitution (Amendment) Acts. Which of the statements is/are correct?

CDS-I · 2012 · Q62 Relevance score: 4.33

Suppose a legislation was passed by the Parliament imposing certain restrictions on news- papers. These included page ceiling, price and advertisements. The legislation is included in the Ninth Schedule to the Consti- tution of India. In this context, which one among the following statements is correct ?

IAS · 2020 · Q90 Relevance score: 3.94

Consider the following statements : 1. The President of India can summon a session of the Parliament at such place as he/she thinks fit. 2. The Constitution of India provides for three sessions of the Parliament in a year, but it is not mandatory to conduct all three sessions. 3. There is no minimum number of days that the Parliament is required to meet in a year. Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?