Abstract:
This paper will include the discussion on how the 24th constitutional amendment act stands as a pivotal in nation’s legislative history, we will discuss on what was the need or what is the reason or what were the circumstances that were created leading to the 24th amendment in the Indian constitution.
We will talk about the Golaknath case and then how it’s effect was countered by the parliament, the crisis that occurred after the judgement of the case. And how the parliament passed the amendment Act to regain its authority in a comprehensive manner.
Key words:
Amendment, constitution, parliament, constituent assembly, fundamental rights.
Introduction:
The 24th constitutional amendment act was passed by the Indian parliament in 1971 . its primary objective was to counter the supreme courts judgement in the Golaknath case and subsequent cases. Due to the judgement of this case the power of the parliament to amend fundamental rights was limited under article 368 of the constitution. To address those , the 24th amendment led several crucial changes.
Review of literature:
The 24th amendment of the Indian constitution, passed in 1971, was significant in Indian legal history. Its primary purpose was to restore the parliamentary power to amend any part of the constitution, including fundamental rights without any judicial scrutiny under article 13.
The scene starts from the very known Golaknath Case (1967), the 24th amendment was a response to it. In this case surplus land of Golaknath family was taken by the Punjab state under the Punjab security and Land Tenures Act, the petitioner in this case argued that the constitution of India was drafted by the Constituent Assembly . In this regard supreme court of India had some questions , can anyone has the power to amend the constitution other than the Constituent Assembly . Also, it was a question before the court that Article 13 clearly in a sense prohibits to amend fundamental right or does parliament has unlimited power to amend constitution . It was also a point of discussion that what is the actual meaning of amendment. It was contested in this case that Article 368 doesn’t says power to amend the constitution but says procedure to amend the constitution. Due to the difficulties created by the Golaknath case, the parliament passed the 24th amendment act and made significant changes to Article 368 and Article 13 and nullified the Golaknath effect.
The result of the judgement is that parliament is considered to have no power to take away or curtail any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by part third of the constitution even if it become necessary to da so for giving effect to the DPSP anf for the attainment of the objectives set out in the preamble to the constitution. But in country like India with developing times it will require to amend constitution.
In response to it , parliament passed the 24th amendment Act , 1971 amended Article 13 and 368.
It declared that the parliament has the power to abridge or take away any of the Fundamental Right under Article 368and such an Act, will not be a law under the meaning of Article 13. It also made it compulsory for the president to give his assent to a constitutional amendment bill. In Article 13 , after clause (3) inserted,
Nothing in this article shall apply to any amendment if this constitution made under Article 368.
It actually separated Article 13 and 368 completely, it also added the word power and procedure to the heading of Article 368 to make it very clear. It says,
Poer of the parliament to amend the constitution and procedure thereof.
The 24th amendment effectively restored parliament’s authority to amend the constitution comprehensively, thereby settling the debate of amending powers vis-à-vis Fundamental Rights.
Grandville Austin has exclaimed in this context that, “the 24th amendment has deprived the Indian judiciary of its most powerful legislative weapon.
Similarly, in the words of Upendra Baxi, it reflects the intent of the political class to limit the extent of judicial review and affirm parliament’s power to amend the constitution.
Effect of 24th amendment act:
Restoration of parliamentary supremacy,
The amendment in a way gave explicit power to the parliament as it gave the parliament to amend any part of the constitution including fundamental rights and such amendments would not be subject to judicial review.
Overturning of judicial decision,
In the Golaknath case the supreme court had limited the power of the parliament to amend the constitution it was overturned by this amendment.
This caused a lot of controversies and criticisms in the whole nation.
Research methodology:
The research methodology proposed to be used in this research paper is descriptive in nature and the research is based on the secondary sources for the deep analysis of the 24th constitutional Amendment Act : history and effects. the secondary sources like newspaper, research paper and articles are used for it.
Related cases:
Kesavananda Bharti v. state of Kerala
This case is also known as the basic doctrine case as it gave the very meaning of it, in this case the 24th amendment act was challenged and the basic structure doctrine was introduced.
Minerva mill ltd. V. union of India
This case challenged the validity of 24th amendment act , one of the amendments in question was related to article 368 itself, which had been amended by the 24th amendment to remove judicial review of the amendment.
Kumari Priya
S.S. Khanna Girls’ Degree College