Question

In the case of "Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala" (1973), the Supreme Court of India ruled that:

• A. The Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution
• B. The Constitution has a "basic structure" that cannot be amended
• C. The right to property is a fundamental right
• D. The President has the power to dissolve the Parliament

Hint:

The "basic structure doctrine" is a crucial concept in Indian constitutional law—use it to evaluate amendments in exam questions.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

Step 1: Understand the Kesavananda Bharati case
The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case is a landmark judgment in Indian constitutional law, addressing the extent of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.
Step 2: Analyze each option
- Option (1): The ruling limited Parliament's amendment power, so it cannot amend any part without restrictions.
- Option (2): The Supreme Court introduced the "basic structure doctrine," stating that certain fundamental features of the Constitution (like democracy, secularism, and judicial review) cannot be amended.
- Option (3): The right to property was later removed as a fundamental right by the 44th Amendment in 1978, and this was not the focus of the case.
- Option (4): The case did not address the President's power to dissolve Parliament.
Step 3: Conclusion
The key ruling was that the Constitution has a "basic structure" that cannot be amended, establishing a balance between parliamentary power and judicial oversight.