Scribd
Upload
10 views

(I) Factual Matrix

This document provides background context on the case involving challenges to amendments made by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976. Specifically, it discusses challenges made to Section 4 which amended Article 31C related to laws securing principles in Part IV, and Section 55 which inserted sub-sections in Article 368 stating no amendment could be challenged in court. The case involved determining whether these amendments were consistent with the basic structure doctrine established in Keshavanand Bharti v State of Kerala.

Uploaded by

Nishith Mishra
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
10 views

(I) Factual Matrix

This document provides background context on the case involving challenges to amendments made by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976. Specifically, it discusses challenges made to Section 4 which amended Article 31C related to laws securing principles in Part IV, and Section 55 which inserted sub-sections in Article 368 stating no amendment could be challenged in court. The case involved determining whether these amendments were consistent with the basic structure doctrine established in Keshavanand Bharti v State of Kerala.

Uploaded by

Nishith Mishra
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

(I) Factual Matrix

In the aftermath of the enunciation of the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution by the

Supreme Court in the case of Keshavanandha Bharti v. State of Kerala 1, this case involved
challenge to the constitutionality of Section 4 of the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976,
which amended Article 31C of the Constitution by substituting the words and figures "all or any
of the principles laid down in Part IV” for the words and figures "the principles specified in
Clause (b) or Clause (c) of Article 39". Article 31C, as amended reads thus:

31C. Notwithstanding anything contained in Article 31. no law giving effect to the policy of the
State towards securing all or any of the principles laid down in Part IV shall be deemed to be
void on the ground that it is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights
conferred by Article 14, Article 19 or Article 31, and no law containing a declaration that it is for
giving effect to such policy shall be called in question in any court on the ground that ft does not
give effect to such policy:

Provided that where such law is made by the Legislature of a State, the provisions of this article
shall not apply thereto unless such law, having been reserved for the consideration of the
President, has received his assent.

A second challenge was mounted on Section 55 of the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act,
1976, which inserted Sub-sections (4) and (5) of Article 368 which read thus:

(4) No amendment of this Constitution (including the provisions of Part III; made for purporting
to have been made under this article (whether before or after the commencement of Section 55 of
the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976) shall be called in question in any court
on any ground.

1
(1973) 4 SCC 225.

You might also like