Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
Rule established
Parliament's amending power under Article 368 cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
Facts
- Kerala Land Reforms Act challenged as violating fundamental rights
- The 25th Amendment (inserting land reform laws into the Ninth Schedule to immunise them from judicial review) was challenged
- Question: whether Parliament's amending power is unlimited
- Case heard by a 13-judge Constitution Bench
Issue
- Whether Parliament's amending power under Article 368 is unlimited, or whether there are implicit limitations on what constitutional amendments may alter.
Held
- Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, including fundamental rights
- However, Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution
- Basic structure includes:
- Supremacy of the Constitution
- Republican and democratic form of government
Ratio Decidendi
The amending power in Article 368 is wide but not unlimited. It is a power to amend, not to destroy. The identity of the Constitution lies in its basic structure, which Parliament cannot abrogate through the amendment process. The Ninth Schedule does not provide absolute immunity if the amendment violates basic structure.
How to use it in an exam
- Part A: Anchor case for any question on constitutional amendment limitations or Ninth Schedule protection.
- Part B: Pair with I.R. Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu (2007) for the post-Kesavananda position on Ninth Schedule review.
- Key line: "Parliament's amending power is wide but not unlimited; constitutional amendments that destroy or abrogate the basic structure are void."
Test your recall
Quick quiz
What is the precise holding of Kesavananda Bharati?
In an exam, which fact makes Kesavananda the anchor authority to cite?
Source
Source: AIR 1973 SC 1461; verified via Manupatra, SCC Online, SC Observer
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.