KESAVANANDA BHARTI CASE

KESAVANANDA BHARTI CASE

Mains Examination: General Studies 2

(Indian Polity)

In News:

  • The landmark judgment delivered by a 13 member bench of the Supreme Court on 24 April 1973 in the case 'KesavanandaBharati vs State of Kerala', recently completed 50 years.

About Kesavananda Bharti:

  • KesavanandaBharati, born in 1940 and made head of the Edneer Math in 1961, is considered to belong to the tradition of Totkacharya, one of the first four disciples of AdiShankaracharya.
  • He challenged the Constitution (29th Amendment) Act, 1972, which placed the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and its Amendment Act in the 9th Schedule of the Constitution.
  • 9th Schedule:The 9th Schedule was added to the Constitution by the first amendment in 1951 with Article 31-B to provide "safeguards" to prevent land reform laws from being challenged in court.
  • They argued that the action violated their fundamental right to religion (Article 25), freedom of religious practice (Article 26) and right to property (Article 31).

KesavanandaBharathi vs. State of Kerala (1973) Case:

  • It involved a property dispute that was decided by a special bench of the Supreme Court of India consisting of 13 judges, which passed a 7-6 majority on April 24, 1973.

Court's Decision:

  • The Court upheld the challenged land ceiling laws, striking down a part of the 25th Amendment (1972) which said that if a law is passed, it should be governed by the Directive Principles of State Policy but shall not be deemed to be void if it takes away or abridges any of the rights contained in Articles 14, 19 or 31".
  • The Court held that what is known as the "Basic Structure of the Constitution" cannot be abrogated even by constitutional amendment.

About 'Basic Structure' :

  • The term 'Basic Structure' was first recognized by the Supreme Court in 1973 in the landmark case of KesavanandaBharathi Vs State of Kerala.
  • Indian courts define basic structure as the inherent features which are built upon the basic foundation, ie dignity and liberty of the individual and of paramount importance which cannot be destroyed by any kind of constitutional amendment.
  • Any law or amendment that violates these principles can be struck down by the Supreme Court on the ground that they distort the basic structure of the Constitution.

Important Features/Basic Structure of the Constitution:

  • Supremacy of the Constitution;
  • Republican and Democratic forms of government;
  • Secular character of the Constitution;
  • Separation of powers between the legislature, executive and judiciary;
  • Federal character of the Constitution;
  • The rule of law;
  • Judicial review;
  • Parliamentary system;
  • Law of equality;
  • Harmony and balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles;
  • Free and fair elections;
  • Limited power of Parliament to amend the Constitution;
  • Power of Supreme Court of India under Articles 32, 136, 142 and 147;
  • Power of High Court under Articles 226 and 227.

Wide Impact of this Decision:

  • Since 1973, the year of the Kesavananda Bharti judgment, the Constitution has been amended more than 60 times. In these five decades, the Supreme Court has tested constitutional amendments against the basic structure doctrine in at least 16 cases.
  • In nine of these 16 cases, the Supreme Court has upheld constitutional amendments that were challenged on the grounds of violation of the Basic Structure doctrine. Six of these cases pertain to reservations – including quotas for Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) and reservation in promotions.
  • The Supreme Court has struck down a constitutional amendment outright only once – the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014, which set up the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), the body responsible for appointment and transfer of judges.
  • The amendment was struck down by a five-judge constitution bench in 2015 on the grounds that it threatened "judicial independence", which the court described as a basic feature of the constitution.
  • In six cases since 1973, including Kesavananda's own judgment, the Supreme Court has "partially struck down" a constitutional amendment. In all these cases, the provision that was struck down pertained to the denial of judicial review.
  • Only one of these six judgments involved an amendment which was not done during the Indira Gandhi era – in KihotoHolohan, which pertained to the Tenth Schedule.
  • KihotoHolohan v. Zachilhu and others (1992): The Supreme Court upheld the Constitution (92nd Amendment) Act which introduced the Tenth Schedule or the so-called "anti-defection law" to the Constitution. The only part of the amendment that was repealed was that the Speaker's decisions regarding disqualification were not subject to judicial review.
  • In 2021, a three-judge bench of the court struck down a part of the Constitution (97th Amendment) Act, 2011. This amendment changed the legal regime for cooperatives, and the court ruled that cooperatives within a state, as opposed to inter-state, would fall under the state list, meaning that a constitutional amendment related to this would be halved. Must be ratified by the state according to the constitution. (Union of India v. Rajendra N. Shah, 2021)
  • Indira Gandhi v. Rajnarayan (1975): The Supreme Court applied the principles laid down in the Kesavananda judgment for the first time in this case. It repealed the Constitution (39th Amendment) Act, 1975, which barred the Supreme Court from hearing challenges to the election of the President, Prime Minister, Vice President and Speaker of the Lok Sabha.
  • Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): The Supreme Court struck down a clause inserted in Article 368 (which gives power to amend the Constitution and lays down procedure),which said that "there shall be no limitation on the power of the Constitution to amend Parliament by way of adding, altering or repealing the provisions of this Constitution.
  • P Sambamurthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1986): The Supreme Court struck down a part of the 32nd Amendment (1973) that set up an Administrative Tribunal for Andhra Pradesh for service matters, taking away the jurisdiction of the High Court.
  • L Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997): The apex court struck down a part of the 42nd amendment that had established administrative tribunals barring judicial review by high courts.

Conclusion:

  • Several constitutional amendments have been made by the Parliament, but the concept derived from the Kesavanand Bharti case is still relevant in the constitution due to its basic structure. No other decision has contributed as much as the decision of the Kesavananda Bharti case has played in protecting the fundamental rights of the citizens for the last 50 years. A specialty of this decision is that for many years to come, this decision will remain a milestone in terms of protection of civil rights.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Mains Exam Question

What is Kesavananda Bharathi vs. State of Kerala (1973) case? Is this case still relevant to uphold the fundamental rights of the citizens?