Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few…

Question

Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Parliament amends the Constitution under Article 368 through a special majority and, for federal provisions, ratification by half the states, but cannot destroy its basic structure. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) set this substantive limit, and Minerva Mills (1980) barred Parliament from enlarging its power.

**Introduction**

Article 368 vests the amending power in the ordinary Parliament, with no referendum as in Switzerland and no three-fourths state approval as in the USA. Still, the 131st Amendment Bill failed in April 2026 with 298 votes against the 352 needed, showing that the procedural hurdles are real, while the deeper limits are substantive.

**Procedural Limitations on the Amending Power**

SKETCH: tree | Limits on Article 368
- Procedural limits
  - Special majority
  - State ratification
- Substantive limits
  - Basic structure
  - Judicial review

1. **Special majority**: Each House must pass the Bill separately by a majority of total membership and two-thirds present and voting, with no joint sitting.
2. **Federal ratification**: Amendments to federal provisions such as the Seventh Schedule or Article 368 need ratification by half the states; Kihoto Hollohan (1992) struck down paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule for lacking it.
3. **Assent and initiation**: Only Parliament initiates, and the President must assent since the 24th Amendment.

**Substantive Limitations Evolved by the Judiciary**

1. **Basic structure**: Kesavananda Bharati (1973) allowed amendment of any part but not destruction of basic features.
2. **No self-enlargement**: Minerva Mills (1980) struck down Article 368(4) and (5), as a limited power cannot be made absolute.
3. **Core values protected**: Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) protected free elections, NJAC (2015) judicial independence, and I.R. Coelho (2007) opened post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws to review.

**Way Forward**

1. **Deliberation and restraint**: Committee scrutiny of amendment Bills and consultation with states, matched by judicial restraint as in Janhit Abhiyan (2022).

**Conclusion**

Parliament amends with light procedure but under firm substantive limits, acting as trustee, not master, of the Constitution.

Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.

Model answer

Practise this question

Amendments & Basic Structure4 questions

Ghissu