Amendment of the Constitution and Basic Structure Questions and Answers

Answer: B

Provisions 1 and 2 can be amended by a simple majority, so the answer is 1 and 2 only.

The admission or establishment of new States (Articles 2 to 4) and the delimitation of constituencies are among the matters Parliament changes by ordinary law, by a simple majority, outside the procedure of Article 368.

Fundamental Rights can be amended only by a special majority of Parliament under Article 368. The distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States is a federal provision: it needs a special majority and ratification by half the State legislatures. That rules out the options that include 3 or 4.

Answer: A

Only pair 1 is correctly matched.

The 42nd Amendment (1976) added the Directive Principles in Article 39A (equal justice and free legal aid), Article 43A (workers' participation in management) and Article 48A (environment and forests).

The special status of Delhi as the National Capital Territory came with the 69th Amendment (1991), not the 79th. One-third reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies was enacted as the 106th Amendment (2023), the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam; the 108th Amendment Bill of 2008 lapsed.

Answer: D

The accurate statement is that the President must give assent and can neither withhold it nor return the bill.

Since the 24th Amendment (1971), Article 368(2) says that when a constitutional amendment bill is presented after passage, the President shall give his assent, so no veto or return for reconsideration applies.

The others are wrong. An amendment bill may be introduced by a minister or a private member but needs no prior permission of the President. There is no joint sitting for a constitutional amendment; each House must pass it separately by a special majority. And amendments to federal provisions need ratification by at least half of the state legislatures, by a simple majority, not by all of them.

Answer: D

The answer is Acts & Regulations enlisted in Schedule IX of the Constitution.

Article 31B, inserted by the First Amendment in 1951, protects the Acts and Regulations specified in the Ninth Schedule from being declared void on the ground that they are inconsistent with or take away any fundamental right. That is the protection the question describes.

The protection is now qualified: in I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) the Supreme Court held that laws added to the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 can still be tested against the basic structure. Schedule VII contains the legislative lists, not protected laws, and no general immunity attaches to laws about Scheduled Castes and Tribes or about Parliament.

Answer: D

The case is I.R. Coelho v State of Tamil Nadu.

In January 2007 a nine-judge bench held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973, the date of the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, are open to judicial review, and can be struck down if they violate the basic structure, including the rights in Articles 14, 19 and 21. So there is no blanket immunity under Article 31B.

Maneka Gandhi (1978) concerned personal liberty and Article 21, ADM Jabalpur (1976) habeas corpus during the Emergency, and Kihoto Hollohan (1992) the anti-defection law.

Answer: D

The 24th Amendment overruled Golak Nath v. State of Punjab.

In Golak Nath (1967) the Supreme Court held that Parliament could not amend the Constitution to take away or abridge fundamental rights, treating an amending Act as 'law' under Article 13. The 24th Amendment (1971) inserted Article 13(4), declaring that nothing in Article 13 applies to amendments under Article 368, and amended Article 368 to confirm Parliament's power.

Sajjan Singh (1965) had upheld Parliament's power, and Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and Minerva Mills (1980) came after the amendment.

Answer: C

The basic structure doctrine was laid down in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala.

In 1973 a 13-judge bench held by 7 to 6 that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot alter or destroy its basic structure. (The stem's 'attend' is a slip for 'altered'.)

Golak Nath (1967) held that Fundamental Rights could not be amended at all, Sajjan Singh (1965) upheld Parliament's amending power, and Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) applied the doctrine after it had been laid down.

Answer: A

A Metropolitan area is an area having a population of 10 lakhs or more.

The 74th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1992 added Article 243P, whose clause (c) defines a Metropolitan area as an area with a population of ten lakhs (one million) or more, in one or more districts, with two or more Municipalities or Panchayats, which the Governor specifies by notification. Such areas get a Metropolitan Planning Committee under Article 243ZE.

Figures of 5 lakhs, or below 5 or 3 lakhs, do not appear in this definition.

Answer: A

It was the 70th Amendment Act.

The Constitution (Seventieth Amendment) Act, 1992 added an Explanation to Article 54 so that the elected members of the Legislative Assemblies of the National Capital Territory of Delhi and the Union Territory of Pondicherry are part of the electoral college for the President.

The 69th Amendment (1991) gave Delhi its own Legislative Assembly as the National Capital Territory, which is why the 70th was needed. The 74th (1992) dealt with municipalities, and the 64th was not about presidential elections.

Answer: C

A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) dealt with preventive detention, and not with the basic structure, so option C is the case that did not deal with it.

Kesavananda Bharati (1973), Minerva Mills (1980) and Golaknath (1967) all concerned the amending power and the basic structure of the Constitution.

The basic structure doctrine was developed in Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and applied in Minerva Mills (1980), and Golaknath (1967) dealt with whether fundamental rights can be amended. A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) decided on the validity of the National Security Ordinance and preventive detention, so it did not deal with the basic structure.