Babulal Parate v State of Bombay

Facts

• Parliament enacted a law under Art.3 altering state boundaries and reorganising certain areas, requiring consequential changes to the First Schedule
• The validity was challenged on the ground that any change affecting constitutional Schedules amounts to a constitutional amendment requiring Art.368 special procedure

Issue

1. Whether a law under Art.3 (formation of new states, alteration of boundaries) which consequentially amends the Schedules under Art.4 must follow the Art.368 amending procedure, or can be enacted as ordinary legislation.

Held

• Laws under Art.3 and consequential provisions under Art.4 are not amendments to the Constitution within Art.368
• Art.4 expressly provides that such laws shall not be deemed an amendment for Art.368 purposes
• Such legislation can be passed by simple majority, following the ordinary legislative process

Ratio Decidendi

Legislation under Art.3, reorganising states or altering boundaries, together with consequential amendments to Schedules under Art.4, is expressly carved out from the definition of a constitutional "amendment" under Art.368, and can be enacted through ordinary legislative process by simple majority.