This case is about the power of the legislature to amend the Constitution of India For more detail, visit https://judicialeconomist.blogspot.com/

1. Keshavananda Bharati Case, 1973

2. Introduction
 The petitioner of this case, Kesavananda Bharati
Sripadagalvaru was a spiritual leader of a math in Kerala
 The stated petitioner of the Kesavananda Bharati Vs. State of
Kerala case challenged the Constitution (29th Amendment)
Act, 1972 for putting the Kerala Land Reforms Act (1963) into
the Schedule XI of the Constitution of India. In order to make
the jurisdiction of the case, a bench of 13 honorable judges
was formed.

3. Factsof theKesavanandaBharatiVs. The
stateof KeralaandAnr 24thApril1973
case
• The petitioner of the aforementioned
case filed a writ petition against the
attempt of the Government of Kerala
to impose restriction over the
management of the property owned
by the Hindu Math, of which, the
petitioner was the head
• Nanabhoy Palkivala, a senior lawyer
(then), convinced the petitioner
Shree Keshavananda Bharati to file a
writ petition under Article 32 for the
violation of Article 26

4. Previous Amendments made by the Government of India
• Clause 4 in Article 13 were introduced through The Constitution
(24th Amendment) Act 1971. This was made in order to protect
Article 368 from any action as prescribed in Article 13 of the Indian
Constitution.
• In order to restrict the scopes of Article 13 of the Constitution of
India, two additional clauses, clause 1 and clause 3 were also
introduced.
• A modification in Article 31 of the Indian Constitution has also been
made through The Constitution (25th Amendment) Act, 1971. The
objective of this modification was to enhance the power of the
government to make compulsory or normal acquisition of the private
properties.
• The Constitution (26th Amendment) Act, 1971 was also enacted to
abolish the financial privileges provided to the Princely States.

5. Issue of KesavanandaBharati Vs. State of Kerala
Whether the Constitution (24th
Amendment) Act, 1971 and 29th
amendment are valid?
Whether the amended provisions of
368 is valid?
Whether 2(a), 2(b) & 3 of the
Constitution (25th Amendment) Act,
1971 is valid?

6. Judgment
 The amendments made by the Indian
Government were held as constitutionally
valid.
 The judgment made by the Supreme Court of
India in Golaknath Case was over-ruled.
 It was clearly opined by the Supreme Court that
the parliament has the power to make
constitutional amendments. However, the
BASIC SPIRIT of the Constitution of India
CANNOT BE CHANGED by parliament.
 A new concept of Doctrine of the Basic
structure was introduced by the apex court of
the country, and it was held that the parliament
can make amendments, however, it cannot
violate the basic structure of the Constitution.

7. Conclusions
• The Supreme Court in the
Keshavananda Case introduced
the concept of the basic
structure of the Constitution of
India. According to the judgment,
the parliament shall have the
power of amending the
constitution as long as it violates
the basic structure.
Basic structure of the
Constitution
• The Constitution's supremacy
• Secular nature of the Constitution
• Democratic and Republic form of
government
• Separation of power between the executive,
judiciary and legislative
• Federal characteristic of the Constitution
• The mandate of building a welfare state
• Sovereignty
• Unity and integrity of the state
• Democratic nature of the polity
• Country's unity
• Individual freedom and rights for the citizen.

8. Thank You…
judicialeconomist.blogspot.com