Question map
Not attempted Correct Incorrect ★ Bookmarked
Loading…
Q34 (IAS/2023) Polity & Governance › Fundamental Rights, DPSP & Fundamental Duties › Fundamental Rights framework Official Key

In India, which one of the following Constitutional Amendments was widely believed to be enacted to overcome the judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?

Explanation

The correct answer is Option 1 (1st Amendment).

The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 was specifically enacted to overcome judicial roadblocks created by landmark judgments such as State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh and Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras. These rulings had invalidated land reform legislations and certain restrictions on free speech based on Fundamental Rights.

Key features of this amendment included:

  • Insertion of Articles 31A and 31B to protect agrarian reforms from judicial review.
  • Creation of the Ninth Schedule to insulate specific laws from being challenged on the grounds of violating Fundamental Rights.
  • Adding "public order," "friendly relations with foreign states," and "incitement to an offence" as reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2).

While the 42nd Amendment significantly altered the Constitution, the 1st Amendment remains the historic precedent specifically designed to reconcile legislative goals with judicial interpretations of Fundamental Rights.

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. In India, which one of the following Constitutional Amendments was widely believed to be enacted to overcome the judicial interpretations…
At a glance
Origin: Mixed / unclear origin Fairness: Moderate fairness Books / CA: 7.5/10 · 0/10

This is a classic 'Sitter' sourced directly from standard texts (Laxmikanth/NCERT). It tests the 'Why' behind the amendment rather than just the 'What'. The question relies on the historical narrative of the Parliament-Judiciary tussle over Property Rights and Reservations that began immediately after 1950.

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
In India, was the 1st Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enacted to overcome judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > SHANKARI PRASAD CASE (1951) > p. 625
Presence: 4/5
“Supreme Court Judgment: It held that the parliament's amending power under Article 368 also includes the power to amend the fundamental rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution. Further, it said that a constitutional amendment act enacted to abridge or take away the fundamental rights is not void under Article 13(2). Therefore, the court upheld the validity of the 1st Amendment Act (1951), which curtailed the right to property by inserting Articles 31A and 31B. Impac t of the Judgement: In this judgement, the Suprem e Court made a distinction between the legislative law (ordinary law) and the con stituent law (constitutional amendme nt law).”
Why this source?
  • Names the 1st Amendment (1951) and notes it curtailed the right to property by inserting Articles 31A and 31B.
  • Records the Supreme Court's validation of the 1st Amendment, implying the amendment functioned as a legislative response affecting judicially-adjudicated rights.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
Presence: 5/5
“Until the case of Golak Nath,<sup>21</sup> the Supreme Court had held that no part of our Constitution was unamendable and that Parliament might, by passing a Constitution Amendment Act, in compliance with the requirements of Article 368, amend any provision of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights and Article 368 itself.<sup>22</sup> According to this earlier view, thus, the courts could act as the guardian of fundamental rights only so long as they were not amended by the Parliament of India by the required majority of votes. In fact, some of the amendments of the Constitution so far made were effected with a view to superseding judicial pronouncements which had invalidated social or economic legislation on the ground of contravention of fundamental rights.”
Why this source?
  • States that some constitutional amendments were effected specifically to supersede judicial pronouncements that had invalidated social or economic legislation on grounds of Fundamental Rights.
  • Directly links the motive for certain amendments to overcoming judicial rulings about Fundamental Rights.
Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: CONSTITUTION AS A LIVING DOCUMENT > Differing Interpretations > p. 208
Presence: 5/5
“A number of amendments are a product of different interpretations of the Constitution given by the judiciary and the government of the day. When these clashed, the Parliament had to insert an amendment underlining one particular interpretation as the authentic one. It is part of the democratic politics that various institutions would interpret the Constitution and particularly the scope of their own powers in a different manner. Many times, the Parliament did not agree with the judicial interpretation and therefore, sought to amend the Constitution to overcome the ruling of the judiciary. In the period between 1970 and 1975 this situation arose frequently.”
Why this source?
  • Explains that Parliament has inserted amendments when it disagreed with judicial interpretation, seeking to make a particular interpretation authoritative.
  • Frames constitutional amendment as the means used by Parliament to overcome rulings of the judiciary.
Statement 2
In India, was the 42nd Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enacted to overcome judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 10: Procedure for Amendment > Nothing in ehiJ artido (io, Art/cio 1.3), shall apply to Any amendmfmt made under Artiel, 368. > p. 196
Presence: 5/5
“The 42nd Amend- The Indira Gandhi Government sought to an·est these ment. implications of Kesh(J1lananda, and cut the fetters sought to be imposed on the sovereignty of Parliament (as a constituent body)! by inserting two clauses (4)-(5) in Article 368, by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 The foregoing attempt to preclude judicial review of Constitution Amending Acts has, however, been nullified by the Supreme Court, by striking down clauses (4)-(5) as inserted in Article 368 by the 42nd Amendment Act, by its decision in the Minerva Mills case," on the ground that judicial review is a "basic feature" of the Indian Constitutional system which cannot be taken away even by amending the Constitution.”
Why this source?
  • Explicitly says the Indira Gandhi government sought to arrest the implications of Keshavananda by inserting clauses in Article 368 via the 42nd Amendment.
  • Frames the amendment as an attempt to cut fetters on Parliamentary sovereignty and to preclude judicial review of amendment Acts.
Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: CONSTITUTION AS A LIVING DOCUMENT > Controversial Amendments > p. 210
Presence: 4/5
“In the chapter on Rights, you have read about Fundamental Duties. They were included in the Constitution by this amendment act. The 42nd amendment also put restrictions on the review powers of the Judiciary. It was said at that time that this amendment was practically a rewriting of many parts of the original Constitution. Do you know that this amendment made changes to the Preamble, to the seventh schedule of the Constitution and to 53 articles of the Constitution? Many MPs belonging to the opposition parties were in jail when this amendment was passed in Parliament. In this backdrop, elections were held in 1977 and the ruling party (Congress) was defeated.”
Why this source?
  • States the 42nd Amendment put restrictions on the review powers of the judiciary.
  • Characterises the amendment as a near-rewriting of many parts of the Constitution, a formulation that reflects contemporary widespread perception.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
Presence: 3/5
“Until the case of Golak Nath,<sup>21</sup> the Supreme Court had held that no part of our Constitution was unamendable and that Parliament might, by passing a Constitution Amendment Act, in compliance with the requirements of Article 368, amend any provision of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights and Article 368 itself.<sup>22</sup> According to this earlier view, thus, the courts could act as the guardian of fundamental rights only so long as they were not amended by the Parliament of India by the required majority of votes. In fact, some of the amendments of the Constitution so far made were effected with a view to superseding judicial pronouncements which had invalidated social or economic legislation on the ground of contravention of fundamental rights.”
Why this source?
  • Explains that some constitutional amendments were effected specifically to supersede judicial pronouncements that had invalidated legislation on grounds of contravening Fundamental Rights.
  • Provides historical pattern showing amendments used to override judicial interpretations of Fundamental Rights.
Statement 3
In India, was the 44th Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enacted to overcome judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
Presence: 5/5
“Until the case of Golak Nath,<sup>21</sup> the Supreme Court had held that no part of our Constitution was unamendable and that Parliament might, by passing a Constitution Amendment Act, in compliance with the requirements of Article 368, amend any provision of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights and Article 368 itself.<sup>22</sup> According to this earlier view, thus, the courts could act as the guardian of fundamental rights only so long as they were not amended by the Parliament of India by the required majority of votes. In fact, some of the amendments of the Constitution so far made were effected with a view to superseding judicial pronouncements which had invalidated social or economic legislation on the ground of contravention of fundamental rights.”
Why this source?
  • States that some constitutional amendments were effected expressly to supersede judicial pronouncements that had invalidated legislation on grounds of contravention of fundamental rights.
  • Frames a general pattern of Parliament using amendments to override or respond to Supreme Court interpretations of Fundamental Rights.
Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 39: After Nehru... > Developments in the Political System > p. 684
Presence: 5/5
“Act was put in place that authorised Parliament to amend any provision of the Constitution; this was to overcome the restrictions placed by the Supreme Court on Parliament regarding amendment of fundamental rights (Golaknath case). In 1972 came the Twenty-fifth Constitutional Amendment Act providing that giving effect to certain directive principles could not be challenged in court on the grounds of their being inconsistent with certain fundamental rights. In 1973, the practice of appointing the senior most Supreme Court judge as the Chief Justice of India was set side, and Justice A.N. Ray was made Chief Justice of India though there were three other judges senior to him.”
Why this source?
  • Explicitly records that the 24th Amendment was enacted to overcome restrictions placed by the Supreme Court (Golaknath) on Parliament regarding amendment of fundamental rights.
  • Shows a concrete precedent of constitutional amendments being used to nullify judicial limitations on Parliament’s power over Fundamental Rights.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 10: Procedure for Amendment > p. 199
Presence: 4/5
“" (ii) The changes made by the 44th Amendment Act are more extensive: (a) It not only omitted some more of the Articles which had been inserted by the 42nd, eg, Articles 257A, and 329A; but also made amendments in other Articles in order to restore those provisions to their ante-1976 text, eg, Article 226. (b) Apart from combating the mischiefs introduced by the 42nd Amendment, the 44th Amendment Act introduced additional changes, eg, by omitting the Fundamental Right to Property in Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31(2). (c) Since the Janata Government failed to secure the passage of a number of clauses of the 45th Amending Bill, the stamp of the 42nd Amendment on various provisions, such as Article 368, still remains.”
Why this source?
  • Describes the 44th Amendment as introducing extensive changes, including omitting the Fundamental Right to Property and restoring certain provisions to their ante-1976 text.
  • Notes the 44th was aimed at 'combating the mischiefs introduced by the 42nd Amendment', indicating a corrective/reactionary legislative intent consistent with overriding prior legal effects.
Statement 4
In India, was the 86th Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enacted to overcome judicial interpretations of the Fundamental Rights?
Origin: Weak / unclear Fairness: Borderline / guessy
Indirect textbook clues
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
Strength: 5/5
“Until the case of Golak Nath,<sup>21</sup> the Supreme Court had held that no part of our Constitution was unamendable and that Parliament might, by passing a Constitution Amendment Act, in compliance with the requirements of Article 368, amend any provision of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights and Article 368 itself.<sup>22</sup> According to this earlier view, thus, the courts could act as the guardian of fundamental rights only so long as they were not amended by the Parliament of India by the required majority of votes. In fact, some of the amendments of the Constitution so far made were effected with a view to superseding judicial pronouncements which had invalidated social or economic legislation on the ground of contravention of fundamental rights.”
Why relevant

States a general pattern that some constitutional amendments were effected to supersede judicial pronouncements which had invalidated social or economic legislation on grounds of contravention of fundamental rights.

How to extend

A student could check whether the 86th Amendment was enacted soon after a Supreme Court decision affecting fundamental rights or social/economic legislation, matching this historical pattern.

Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 9: Directive Principles of State Policy > CONFLICT BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES > p. 114
Strength: 5/5
“The Constitution. In the Champakam Dorairajan case (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that in case of any conflict between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles, the former would prevail. It declared that the Directive Principles have to conform to and run as subsidiary to the Fundamental Rights. But, it also held that the Fundamental Rights could be amended by Parliament by enacting constitutional amendment acts. The Parliament reacted to the Supreme Court's judgement in the Golaknath Case (1967) by enacting the 24th Amendment Act (1971) and the 25th Amendment Act (1971). The 24th Amendment Act declared that the Parliament has the power to abridge or take away any of the Fundamental Rights by enacting Constitutional Amendment Acts.”
Why relevant

Explains specific historical instance (Golak Nath → Parliament reacted with 24th/25th Amendments) showing Parliament has amended the Constitution to overturn Supreme Court interpretations on fundamental rights.

How to extend

Compare the trigger and stated purpose of the 86th Amendment with the Golak Nath–24th/25th pattern to see if it similarly responds to a judicial ruling.

Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: CONSTITUTION AS A LIVING DOCUMENT > Differing Interpretations > p. 208
Strength: 4/5
“A number of amendments are a product of different interpretations of the Constitution given by the judiciary and the government of the day. When these clashed, the Parliament had to insert an amendment underlining one particular interpretation as the authentic one. It is part of the democratic politics that various institutions would interpret the Constitution and particularly the scope of their own powers in a different manner. Many times, the Parliament did not agree with the judicial interpretation and therefore, sought to amend the Constitution to overcome the ruling of the judiciary. In the period between 1970 and 1975 this situation arose frequently.”
Why relevant

Sets a general rule: Parliament has sometimes inserted amendments to assert one interpretation over a conflicting judicial interpretation; many amendments arise from such clashes (notably 1970–75).

How to extend

Use this rule to ask whether contemporary commentary or parliamentary debates describe the 86th Amendment as resolving a judicial–parliamentary interpretive clash.

Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 39: After Nehru... > Developments in the Political System > p. 684
Strength: 4/5
“Act was put in place that authorised Parliament to amend any provision of the Constitution; this was to overcome the restrictions placed by the Supreme Court on Parliament regarding amendment of fundamental rights (Golaknath case). In 1972 came the Twenty-fifth Constitutional Amendment Act providing that giving effect to certain directive principles could not be challenged in court on the grounds of their being inconsistent with certain fundamental rights. In 1973, the practice of appointing the senior most Supreme Court judge as the Chief Justice of India was set side, and Justice A.N. Ray was made Chief Justice of India though there were three other judges senior to him.”
Why relevant

Gives an example where amendments (e.g., 25th) and later acts were expressly to overcome restrictions placed by the Supreme Court regarding amendment of fundamental rights.

How to extend

A student could look for analogous language in the legislative history or media coverage of the 86th Amendment indicating it was aimed at nullifying a court restriction.

Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > CHAP. 8 Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties 97 > p. 97
Strength: 3/5
“CHAP. 8J Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties 97 Sajjan Singh's cases, the Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights, embodied in Part III, had been given a "transcendental position"; by the Constitution, so that no authority functioning under the Constitution, including Parliament exercising the amending power under Article 368, was competent to amend the Fundamental Rights. C. But \:.-y the 24th Amendment Act, 1971, Articles 13 and 368 were amended to make it clear that Fundamental Rights were amendable under the procedure laid down in Article 368, thus overriding the majority decision of the Supreme Court in Golak Nath v State of Punjab.”
Why relevant

Notes that the 24th Amendment amended Articles 13 and 368 to make clear fundamental rights were amendable, i.e., Parliament changing constitutional text to negate a judicial view on rights.

How to extend

Check whether the 86th Amendment similarly alters constitutional text or citation in ways that appear directed at prior judicial interpretations of Part III.

Pattern takeaway: UPSC frames questions on Constitutional History by focusing on the 'intent' or 'narrative' behind the law. The phrase 'widely believed to be enacted to overcome...' signals that you need to know the political-legal context (the story), not just the bare text of the Article.
How you should have studied
  1. [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Directly available in Laxmikanth (Chapter: Amendment of the Constitution / Landmark Cases) and NCERT Class XI (Constitution at Work).
  2. [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: The 'Parliament vs. Judiciary' conflict theme. Specifically, the tension between Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles (Part IV) leading to amendments.
  3. [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the 'Judgement-Amendment' pairs: Romesh Thappar/Champakam Dorairajan → 1st Amd; Golaknath → 24th Amd; Kesavananda Bharati → 42nd Amd; Indra Sawhney → 77th, 81st, 82nd, 85th Amds; Shah Bano → Muslim Women Act (statutory, not constitutional, but similar logic).
  4. [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: Do not view Amendments as isolated numbers. Study them as 'Legislative Reactions' to 'Judicial Roadblocks'. If the SC blocks a government policy (like Land Reforms), the Parliament often responds with an Amendment. The 1st Amendment was the very first instance of this pattern.
Concept hooks from this question
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Parliamentary power to amend Fundamental Rights (Article 368)
💡 The insight

Parliament's amendment power was invoked to alter Fundamental Rights, a central issue in the 1st Amendment and related cases.

High-yield for UPSC: explains the scope of Article 368 and its interplay with judicial review; connects to landmark cases and later amendments that shaped amendment jurisprudence; useful for questions on separation of powers and constitutional amendment doctrine.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > SHANKARI PRASAD CASE (1951) > p. 625
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 91: Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation > III Meaning of the Doctrine > p. 665
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > CHAP. 8 Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Duties 97 > p. 97
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 1st Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enac..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Constitutional amendments as instruments to override judicial rulings
💡 The insight

Amendments were used deliberately to supersede or endorse particular interpretations when Parliament disagreed with courts.

Crucial for UPSC: illuminates the political-constitutional dynamic between Parliament and judiciary, relevant for essays and polity mains questions on checks and balances, directive principles vs Fundamental Rights, and historical amendment episodes.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
  • Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: CONSTITUTION AS A LIVING DOCUMENT > Differing Interpretations > p. 208
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 34: HOW THE CONSTITUTION HAS WORKED > B_ Privileges of Legislat ures. > p. 479
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 1st Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enac..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 1st Amendment and right to property
💡 The insight

The 1st Amendment specifically curtailed the right to property via Articles 31A and 31B, reflecting legislative response to rights-based judicial constraints on socio-economic laws.

Important for UPSC: links land reform, Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights; appears in questions on social justice, land policy, and constitutional history; helps answer questions about why early amendments focused on property.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 90: Landmark Judgements and Their Impact > SHANKARI PRASAD CASE (1951) > p. 625
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 34: HOW THE CONSTITUTION HAS WORKED > B_ Privileges of Legislat ures. > p. 479
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 1st Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been enac..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Parliamentary sovereignty vs Judicial review (Basic Structure tension)
💡 The insight

The 42nd Amendment is centrally about shifting the balance between Parliament's amending power and the courts' power of judicial review.

High-yield for UPSC: questions commonly probe the basic structure doctrine, landmark cases and the institutional balance. Mastering this links constitutional theory to amendment politics and to case-law questions (e.g., Keshavananda, Minerva). It enables answers on limits of amendment power and the role of judiciary in protecting Fundamental Rights.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 10: Procedure for Amendment > Nothing in ehiJ artido (io, Art/cio 1.3), shall apply to Any amendmfmt made under Artiel, 368. > p. 196
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 4: OUTSTANDING FEATURES OF OUR CONSTITUTION > OUTSTANDING FEATURES OF OUR CONSTITUTION > p. 46
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 91: Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation > III Important Cases > p. 649
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 42nd Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been ena..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Article 368 and limits on amending power
💡 The insight

The 42nd Amendment amended Article 368 to try to curtail judicial review, making Article 368 central to debates about amendment limits.

Directly examinable: UPSC asks about amendment procedure and its constraints. Understanding Article 368 helps answer questions on constitution amendment mechanics, judicial responses (e.g., striking down excesses), and legislative strategies to insulate amendments from review.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 10: Procedure for Amendment > Nothing in ehiJ artido (io, Art/cio 1.3), shall apply to Any amendmfmt made under Artiel, 368. > p. 196
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 91: Important Doctrines of Constitutional Interpretation > III Important Cases > p. 649
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 42nd Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been ena..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Use of constitutional amendments to override judicial rulings
💡 The insight

There is a documented pattern of Parliament enacting amendments specifically to nullify judicial decisions that struck down legislation on Fundamental Rights grounds.

Important for essay and polity mains questions: explains legislature–judiciary interplay, examples of remedial amendments, and political context of amendments. Mastery helps in evaluating constitutional safeguards and historical instances where amendments changed legal outcomes.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 30: THE SERVICES AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS > CHAP. 30] THE SERVICES AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS 435 > p. 436
  • Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 9: CONSTITUTION AS A LIVING DOCUMENT > Controversial Amendments > p. 210
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 42nd Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been ena..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S3
👉 Parliamentary amendments used to override judicial interpretations
💡 The insight

Parliament has enacted constitutional amendments specifically to nullify or bypass Supreme Court rulings on Fundamental Rights, establishing a legislative mechanism to respond to judicial interpretations.

High-yield for constitutional law questions: explains the dynamic between judiciary and legislature, links to amendment procedure and landmark cases, and helps answer questions on why and how Parliament alters Fundamental Rights. Mastering this enables tackling questions on separation of powers, judicial review, and amendment jurisprudence.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 96
  • Rajiv Ahir. A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.). SPECTRUM. > Chapter 39: After Nehru... > Developments in the Political System > p. 684
🔗 Anchor: "In India, was the 44th Constitutional Amendment widely believed to have been ena..."
🌑 The Hidden Trap

Since they asked about the 1st Amendment (reaction to Champakam Dorairajan/Romesh Thappar), the next logical question is the 77th Amendment (1995), which was enacted to overcome the Supreme Court's ruling in 'Indra Sawhney' regarding reservation in promotions.

⚡ Elimination Cheat Code

Use 'Chronological Necessity'. The question implies a foundational conflict ('judicial interpretations of Fundamental Rights'). This conflict arose immediately regarding Land Reforms and Free Speech in 1950-51. The 1st Amendment is the only option that fits the 'start' of this tug-of-war. 42nd was about supremacy, 44th was restoration, 86th was welfare.

🔗 Mains Connection

Mains GS-1 & GS-3 Link: The 1st Amendment is the legal backbone of 'Post-Independence Land Reforms'. Without the 9th Schedule (introduced by the 1st Amd), the abolition of Zamindari would have been struck down as a violation of the Right to Property. This connects Polity to Economic History.

✓ Thank you! We'll review this.

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

CDS-II · 2021 · Q76 Relevance score: 4.15

Which one of the following amendments in the Constitution of India made a Proclamation of Emergency immune from judicial review ?

CDS-I · 2007 · Q67 Relevance score: 3.48

The right to property was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights enlisted, in the Constitution of India through which one of the following Amendments ?

CDS-II · 2017 · Q65 Relevance score: 2.80

The Fundamental Rights guaranteed in the Constitution of India can be suspended only by

NDA-I · 2015 · Q97 Relevance score: 2.47

Which among the following is not a basic feature of the Constitution of India ?

CDS-II · 2016 · Q68 Relevance score: 2.31

Which of the following fundamental rights as enshrined in the Constitution of India belong only to the citizens? 1. Article 19 (Protection of right to freedom of speech) 2. Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) 3. Article 15 (Prohibition of discri¬mination) 4. Article 16 (Equality of opportunity) Select the correct answer using the code given below.