Constitutional Amendments & Structure

The Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha, the two houses of India's Parliament, have different powers and functions. While the Lok Sabha is the lower house with members directly elected by the people, the Rajya Sabha is the upper house with members indirectly elected by the states. However, when it comes to amending the Constitution, both houses have equal powers. According to Article 368 of the Indian Constitution, any amendment to the Constitution requires the approval of both the Rajya Sabha and the Lok Sabha. Therefore, for a constitutional amendment to be valid, it must be approved by both houses of Parliament, giving them equal powers in the process.

Statement 1 is incorrect: The term "basic structure" is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, there are certain features of the Constitution that form its basic structure and cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by Parliament. Although the basic structure doctrine includes elements such as federalism, secularism, democracy, and fundamental rights, these features are not explicitly listed as the 'basic structure' in the Constitution itself. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention the power of judicial review. Instead, this power is derived from various provisions, particularly Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions, ensuring they do not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. This power is essential in maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting citizens' rights. Hence, neither of the statements is correct.

Statement 1 is incorrect. High Courts have the power to declare central laws unconstitutional. This power is derived from their inherent jurisdiction to uphold the Constitution. Statement 2 is incorrect. While the Supreme Court cannot question the amending power of the Parliament, it can review the constitutional validity of an amendment. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the doctrine of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. Any amendment that violates this basic structure can be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

The Ninth Schedule was introduced by the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 to protect certain laws, particularly those related to land reforms, from judicial review. Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru introduced the Constitution (First Amendment) Bill in the Lok Sabha in 1951. This amendment aimed to safeguard progressive socio-economic legislation from being struck down by courts on the grounds of violating fundamental rights, particularly the right to property under Article 31 (which was later repealed by the 44th Amendment in 1978).

The Fifth Schedule of the Indian Constitution deals with the administration and governance of Scheduled Areas, which are regions with a significant tribal population. It aims to safeguard the rights, culture, and land of tribal communities while preventing their exploitation. Under this Schedule, the Governor of a state with Scheduled Areas has special powers, including the authority to: - Declare any law related to the transfer of tribal land as null and void if it is found to violate the interests of the tribal population. - Prohibit or regulate the transfer of tribal land to non-tribals, ensuring that tribal communities retain control over their ancestral land and resources. These provisions act as a protective mechanism, preventing tribal communities from being forced or manipulated into selling their land for activities like mining, industries, or large-scale projects without adequate safeguards.

Statement 1 is Incorrect: The 44th Amendment actually aimed to reverse the provision introduced by the 39th Amendment, which had placed the elections of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and Speaker of the Lok Sabha beyond judicial review. The 44th Amendment restored the power of judicial review for these elections. Statement 2 is Correct: The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, in 2015 in the case of Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India. This amendment sought to replace the Collegium system with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) for appointing judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. The Court held that the NJAC undermined judicial independence, a part of the basic structure doctrine, and was therefore unconstitutional.

The Charter Act of 1813 was a significant legislation: - Company’s rule and trade monopoly in India was extended to another 20 years. Monopoly was ended except for the trade in tea and with China.
- This asserted the Crown’s sovereignty over British India by defining the constitutional position of the British in India. - This act also empowered the local governments to impose taxes on the persons subject to the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. - The European British subjects were also strengthened in India over the power of the provincial governments and courts.
- Financial provision was made to encourage a revival in Indian literature and for the promotion of science.
- This act also envisages that missionaries can go and spread the Christianity in India.

Statement 1 is correct: The Ninth Schedule was introduced through the First Constitutional Amendment (1951) to protect certain laws from judicial review, even if they violated Fundamental Rights (Part III of the Constitution). Statement 2 is incorrect: The protection under the Ninth Schedule is not absolute. As per the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) and reaffirmed in the I.R. Coelho case (2007), laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, can still be challenged if they violate the "Basic Structure" of the Constitution. Thus, while the Ninth Schedule provides a degree of protection, the Supreme Court retains the power to review laws that undermine the Constitution’s core principles. Hence, the correct answer is option (a) 1 only.

Local self-government is a key aspect of democratic decentralization, ensuring governance at the grassroots level. In India, local self-government refers to governing bodies operating below the state level, forming the third tier of governance in the federal structure. The 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendments provide constitutional status and protection to Panchayati Raj Institutions (rural) and Urban Local Bodies (urban), respectively. Additionally, each state enacts its own legislation to regulate local governance. Democratic decentralization is the foundation of local self-government, emphasizing: - Democracy: Local citizens actively participate in governance through elected representatives, ensuring direct engagement in decision-making. - Decentralization: Authority and responsibilities are transferred from central and state governments to local bodies, empowering communities to address region-specific issues and enhance efficient governance. Thus, local self-government in India strengthens grassroots democracy, fosters self-reliance, and ensures better service delivery to the people.

The Preamble of the Indian Constitution guarantees justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity, but economic liberty is not explicitly mentioned. It specifically ensures liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith, and worship, but does not directly state economic freedom. However, various constitutional provisions, such as those related to Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV), promote economic activities and social justice, indirectly contributing to economic freedom. Yet, since economic liberty is not explicitly stated in the Preamble, it is not one of the guaranteed liberties under it.