Constitution(42nd) Amendment

Constitutional (42nd) Amendment Act 1976: A critical Appraisal

Submitted to: Dr. Ashutosh Ahire Asst. Professor (H.N.L.U)

Submitted by: Sanket Jamuar Sem- III, Sec- B Roll No - 128 Date of Submission – 3rd Sept, 2019

Hidayatullah National Law University

Declaration I, hereby declare that the project work titled “Constitutional (42nd) Amendment Act 1976: A critical Appraisal” is my own work and represents my own ideas and where others’ ideas or words have been included, I have adequately cited and referenced the original sources. I also declare that I have adhered to all principles of academic honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any idea/data/fact/source in my submission. It is a record of bona fide project work carried out by me under the guidance of Dr. Ashutosh Ahire, Professor, Sociology, H.N.L.U, Raipur. I further declare that the project has not been submitted, either in part or in full, for the award of any other degree or diploma in any other institute or university.

Sanket Jamuar Semester-III, Section-B Roll no.-128

Acknowledgement

First and foremost, I would like to thank Ashutosh sir for offering this topic and for her valuable guidance and advice. he inspired me greatly to work in this project. His willingness to motivate me contributed tremendously to my project. I also would like to thank his for showing me some example that related to the topic of my project. Besides, I would like to thank the Hidayatullah National Law University for providing me with a good environment and facilities to complete this project. Last but not least, my friends who helped me do this project by sharing their ideas when we combined and held productive deliberations together.

Sanket Jamuar

Table of contents Introduction…………………………………………………………………..1 Background of the Amendment........................................................................3 Important Prior Amendment…….……………………………………………5 The 42nd Amendment……………………...…………………………………6 Changes Brought……………..……………………………………………….7 Aftermath…………………...……...……………………………………..….13 Legal Challenges………………………………………………………..…...16 Conclusion…………….……………………………………………………..17 References……………………………………………………………………18

Research methodology Definition of Research: The term ‘research’ is derived from a French word ‘recerch’ meaning to ‘to search’ and a Latin word ‘circare’ meaning ‘to go round in a circle’1. In research1 – ‘R’ stands for ‘rational way of thinking’ ‘E’ stands for ‘expert and exhaustive treatment’ ‘S’ stands for ‘search for solutions’ ‘E’ stands for ‘exactness’. ‘A’ stands for ‘analytical analysis of adequate data’ ‘R’ stands for ‘relationship between facts and theories’ ‘C’ stands for ‘(a) constructive attitude; (b) critical evaluation; (c) condensed and compactly stated generalisation; (d) cautious and careful recording’. ‘H’ stands for ‘honesty and hard work in all aspects of the treatment of data’. Various definitions as stated by the jurists are as follows: Manheim, says “research is the careful, diligent and exhaustive investigation of a specific subject-matter, which has its aim the advancement of mankind’s knowledge.”2 Redman and Mary defines research as “systematised efforts to gain knowledge”.3 1 Dr. S.R. Myneni, “Legal Research Methodology” 1 (Allahabad Law Agency, 5th ed. 2012) 1

2 Dr. S.R. Myneni, “Legal Research Methodology” 2 (Allahabad Law Agency, 5th ed. 2012) 2

Introduction 42nd Amendment “is responsive to the aspirations of the people, and reflects the realities of the present time and the future.” With these words in her speech, Indira Gandhi introduced the most criticized amendment to the Indian Constitution. If the average of the total amendments in the Indian Constitution is taken out, then it is almost two amendments per year. According to law experts, the Amendments to the Indian Constitution have strengthened it over time. But this was the first instance when the amendment had wholly come up with personal ambitions at the period of Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi. She changed the Constitution to such an extent that the “Constitution of India” was started being called as “Constitution of Indira”. What were the changes 42nd Amendment brought, what were the consequences of these changes and how the Constitution was brought back to its original form? These questions make the most essential part of the syllabus of Indian Constitution in law schools. Let’s start finding these answers from the time when these all started. The 42nd amendment to Constitution of India, officially known as The Constitution (Fortysecond amendment) Act, 1976, was enacted during the Emergency (25 June 1975 – 21 March 1977) by the Indian National Congress government headed by Indira Gandhi. Most provisions of the amendment came into effect on 3 January 1977, others were enforced from 1 February and Section 27 came into force on 1 April 1977. The 42nd Amendment is regarded as the most controversial constitutional amendment in Indian history. This was the first instance when the amendment had wholly come up with personal ambitions at the period of Emergency imposed by Indira Gandhi. It attempted to reduce the power of the Supreme Court and High Courts to pronounce upon the constitutional validity of laws. It laid down the Fundamental Duties of Indian citizens to the nation. This amendment brought about the most widespread changes to the Constitution in its history, and is sometimes called a "mini-Constitution" or the "Constitution of Indira".

1|Page

Almost all parts of the Constitution, including the Preamble and amending clause, were changed by the 42nd Amendment, and some new articles and sections were inserted. The amendment's fifty-nine clauses stripped the Supreme Court of many of its powers and moved the political system toward parliamentary sovereignty. It curtailed democratic rights in the country, and gave sweeping powers to the Prime Minister's Office. The amendment gave Parliament unrestrained power to amend any parts of the Constitution, without judicial review. It transferred more power from the state governments to the central government, eroding India's federal structure. The 42nd Amendment also amended Preamble and changed the description of India from "sovereign democratic republic" to a "sovereign, socialist secular democratic republic", and also changed the words "unity of the nation" to "unity and integrity of the nation". The Emergency era had been widely unpopular, and the 42nd Amendment was the most controversial issue. The clampdown on civil liberties and widespread abuse of human rights by police angered the public. The Janata Party which had promised to "restore the Constitution to the condition it was in before the Emergency", won the 1977 general elections. The Janata government then brought about the 43rd and 44th Amendments in 1977 and 1978 respectively, to restore the pre-1976 position to some extent. However, the Janata Party was not able to fully achieve its objectives. On 31 July 1980, in its judgement on Minerva Mills v. Union of India, the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional two provisions of the 42nd Amendment which prevent any constitutional amendment from being "called in question in any Court on any ground" and accord precedence to the Directive Principles of State Policy over the Fundamental Rights of individuals respectively. This respectively amends mostly of whole constitution, hence is called as mini constitution.

2|Page

Background of the amendment On March 19, 1975, Indira Gandhi had to visit the Court for her witness in an election plea. It was the first instance where a Prime Minister had to visit the Court during its tenure. It was also for the first time after Independence where Seven and a half lakh people under the leadership of Jai Prakash Narayan were chanting slogans like ‘ससिंहासन खाली करो सक जनता आती है’ and ‘जनता का सिल बोल रहा है , इिं सिरा का आसन डोल रहा है’ and agitating against the government. Massive rallies were being organized against the Prime Minister, and the whole country was against her. Describing emergency time as the need of the hour, Indira Gandhi constantly revised several constitutional provisions in that period. 42th Amendment was passed after the change of several provisions of the Constitution through the 40th and 41st Amendments. Shortly after that, June 12, 1975, became a historic day in Indian history where the Allahabad High court canceled the election of Indira Gandhi. Soon after that, on June 25, Emergency was declared in the country. It initiated the phase when the government started changing the soul of the Indian republic through the Constitutional Amendments. Then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi set up a committee in 1976 under the Chairmanship of then Minister of External Affairs Swaran Singh "to study the question of amendment of the Constitution in the light of experience". The bill for the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 1 September 1976, as the Constitution (Forty-Second Amendment) Bill, 1976 (Bill No. 91 of 1976). It was introduced by H. R. Gokhale, then Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs. It sought to amend the Preamble and articles 31, 31C, 39, 55, 74, 77, 81, 82, 83, 100, 102, 103, 105, 118, 145, 150, 166, 170, 172, 189, 191, 192, 194, 208, 217, 225, 226, 227, 228, 311, 312, 330, 352, 353, 356, 357, 358, 359, 366, 368 and 371F and the Seventh Schedule. It also sought to substitute articles 103, 150, 192 and 226; and insert new Parts IVA and XIVA and new articles 31D, 32A, 39A, 43A, 48A, 131A, 139A, 144A, 226A, 228A and 257A in the

3|Page

Constitution. In a speech in the Lok Sabha on 27 October 1976, Gandhi claimed that the amendment "is responsive to the aspirations of the people, and reflects the realities of the present time and the future". The bill was debated by the Lok Sabha from 25 to 30 October and 1 and 2 November. Clauses 2 to 4, 6 to 16, 18 to 20, 22 to 28, 31 to 33, 35 to 41, 43 to 50 and 56 to 59 were adopted in their original form. The remaining clauses were all amended in the Lok Sabha before being passed. Clause 1 of the bill was adopted by the Lok Sabha on 1 November and amended to replace the name "Forty-fourth" with "Forty-second", and a similar amendment was made on 28 October to Clause 5 which sought to introduce a new article 31D to the Constitution. Amendments to all the other clauses were adopted on 1 November and the bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on 2 November 1976. It was then debated by the Rajya Sabha on 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 11 November. All amendments made by the Lok Sabha were adopted by the Rajya Sabha on 10 November, and the bill was passed on 11 November 1976. The bill, after ratification by the States, received assent from then President Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed on 18 December 1976, and was notified in The Gazette of India on the same date. Sections 2 to 5, 7 to 17, 20, 28, 29, 30, 33, 36, 43 to 53, 55, 56, 57 and 59 of the 42nd amendment came into force from 3 January 1977. Sections 6, 23 to 26, 37 to 42, 54 and 58 went into effect from 1 February 1977 and Section 27 from 1 April 1977.

4|Page

Important Prior amendments 38th Amendment to the Constitution was passed on July 22, 1975, first time after the Emergency, where the Judiciary was stripped of the right to make judicial review of the Emergency. Soon after two months of this amendment, the 39th Amendment to the Constitution was introduced with the intent to keep the Prime Minister’s post for Indira Gandhi. Since the Allahabad High Court had canceled the election of Indira Gandhi, 39th amendment stripped off the right of High Courts to investigate the election of a person appointed to the post of Prime Minister of the country. As per the amendment, the inquiry and investigation of Prime Minister’ election could only be done by the committee constituted by the Parliament. The series of amendments did not stop here. Claiming Emergency as the need of the hour, Indira Gandhi continuously made many constitutional amendments in that period. After changing several provisions through 41st and 42nd Amendments to the Constitution, the 42nd amendment was introduced, which made the joke of Indian Constitution. This amendment led to the position where people started calling the Constitution as the “Constitution of Indira” instead of “Constitution of India” or “mini-Constitution”. This Amendment Act even changed the provisions of the Preamble of the Constitution.

5|Page

The 42nd amendment The Constitutional (Forty-second) Amendment Act, 1976, was primarily a handicap of Congress Party, majorly based on the proposals made by Swaran Committee. The Amendment amended the Preamble of the Constitution, 40 Articles [article 31, article 31C, 39, 55, 74, 77, 81, 82, 83, 100, 102, 103, 105, 118, 145, 150, 166, 170, 172, 189, 191, 192, 194, 208, 217, 225, 226, 227, 228, 311, 312, 330, 352, 353, 356, 357, 358, 359, 366, article 368 and article 371F], Seventh Schedule and added 14 New Articles [articles 31D, 32A, 39A, 43A, 48A, 131A, 139A, 144A, 226A, 228A and 257A and parts 4A and 14A] to the Constitution. As it was undertaken at the time of Emergency, when most of the opposition leaders were detained in preventive detention, so it became more or less a party affair of Indian National Congress instead of National Interest. The Act introduced several changes, most of which sought to tilt the power in the favour of executive away from the Judiciary.1

1

https://ccrd.vidhiaagaz.com/42nd-amendment-of-indian-constitution/

6|Page

Changes brought forward through the amendment Almost all parts of the Constitution, including the Preamble and amending clause, were changed by the 42nd Amendment, and some new articles and sections were inserted.[14][15][16] Some of these changes are described below. The Parliament was given unrestrained power to amend any parts of the Constitution,without judicial review. This essentially invalidated the Supreme Court's ruling in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala in 1973. The amendment to article 368, prevented any constitutional amendment from being "called in question in any Court on any ground". It also declared that there would be no limitation whatever on the constituent power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. The 42nd Amendment also restricted the power of the courts to issue stay orders or injunctions. The 42nd Amendment revoked the courts' power to determine what constituted an office of profit. A new article 228A was inserted in the Constitution which would give High Courts the authority to "determine all questions as to the constitutional validity of any State law". The amendment's fifty-nine clauses stripped the Supreme Court of many of its powers and moved the political system toward parliamentary sovereignty. The 43rd and 44th Amendments reversed these changes. Article 74 was amended and it was explicitly stipulated that "the President shall act in accordance with the advice of the Council of Ministers".Governors of states were not included in this article. The interval at which a proclamation of Emergency under Article 356 required approval from Parliament was extended from six months to one year. Article 357 was amended so as to ensure that laws made for a State, while it was under Article 356 emergency, would not cease immediately after the expiry of the emergency, but would instead continue to be in effect until the law was changed by the State Legislature.[Articles 358 and 359 were amended, to allow suspension of Fundamental Rights, and suspension of enforcement of any of the rights conferred by the Constitution during an Emergency. The 42nd Amendment added new Directive Principles, viz Article 39A, Article 43A and Article 48A.The 42nd Amendment gave primacy to the Directive Principles, by stating that "no law implementing any of the Directive Principles could be declared unconstitutional on the grounds 7|Page

that it violated any of the Fundamental Rights". The Amendment simultaneously stated that laws prohibiting "anti-national activities" or the formation of "anti-national associations" could not be invalidated because they infringed on any of the Fundamental Rights. The 43rd and 44th Amendments repealed the 42nd Amendment's provision that Directive Principles take precedence over Fundamental Rights, and also curbed Parliament's power to legislate against "anti-national activities". The 42nd Amendment also added a new section to the Article on "Fundamental Duties" in the Constitution. The new section required citizens "to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood among all the people of India, transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities." The 42nd Amendment granted power to the President, in consultation with the Election Commission, to disqualify members of State Legislatures. Prior to the Amendment, this power was power vested in the Governor of the State. Article 105 was amended so as to grant each House of Parliament, its members and committees the right to "evolve" their "powers, privileges and immunities", "from time to time". Article 194 was amended to grant the same rights as Clause 21 to State Legislatures, its members and committees. Two new clauses 4A and 26A were inserted into article 366 of the Constitution, which defined the meaning of the terms "Central Law" and "State Law" by inserting two new clauses 4A and 26A into article 366 of the Constitution. The 42nd Amendment froze any delimitation of constituencies for elections to Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies until after the 2001 Census of India, by amending article 170 (relating to composition of Legislative Assemblies). The total number of seats in the Lok Sabha and the Assemblies remained the same until the 91st Amendment, passed in 2003, extended the freeze up to 2026. The number of seats reserved for the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies was also frozen.The amendment extended the term of Lok Sabha and Legislative Assemblies members from five to six years, by amending article 172 (relating to MLAs) and Clause(2) of Article 83 (for MPs). The 44th Amendment repealed this change, shortening the term of the aforementioned assemblies back to the original 5 years.

8|Page

Article 312, which makes the provision for All India Services was amended to include the AllIndia Judicial Service.

In Preamble Two changes were made in the Preamble. Firstly, the Characterisation of India as “Sovereign democratic republic” has been changed to “Sovereign socialist, secular democratic republic” and Secondly, the words “unity of nation‘ were changed to “unity and integrity of the nation“. The Act of adding these words were severely criticized by H.M Seervai as these words were ambiguous and should not have been inserted in the Preamble without reason. The 42nd Amendment changed the description of India from a "sovereign democratic republic" to a "sovereign, socialist secular democratic republic", and also changed the words "unity of the nation" to "unity and integrity of the nation". B. R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Constitution, was opposed to declaring India's social and economic structure in the Constitution. During the Constituent Assembly debates on framing the Constitution in 1946, K.T. Shah proposed an amendment seeking to declare India as a "Secular, Federal, Socialist" nation. In his opposition to the amendment, Ambedkar stated, "My objections, stated briefly are two. In the first place the Constitution... is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State. It is not a mechanism where by particular members or particular parties are installed in office. What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether. If you state in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall take a particular form, you are, in my judgment, taking away the liberty of the people to decide what should be the social organisation in which they wish to live. It is perfectly possible today, for the majority people to hold that the socialist organisation of society is better than the capitalist organisation of society. But it would be perfectly possible for thinking people to devise some other form of 9|Page

social organisation which might be better than the socialist organisation of today or of tomorrow. I do not see therefore why the Constitution should tie down the people to live in a particular form and not leave it to the people themselves to decide it for themselves. This is one reason why the amendment should be opposed." Ambedkar's second objection was that the amendment was "purely superfluous" and "unnecessary", as "socialist principles are already embodied in our Constitution" through Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy. Referring to the Directive Principles, he asked Shah, "If these directive principles to which I have drawn attention are not socialistic in their direction and in their content, I fail to understand what more socialism can be". Shah's amendment failed to pass, and the Preamble remained unchanged until the 42nd Amendment.

Parliament and State Legislature Further of 42nd Amendment provided for the readjustment in constituencies for election to Lok Sabha, and State Legislative Assemblies, after every census held after ten years at the point of 1971 census till the holding of the first census after the year 2000. The Number of seats for SC and ST tribes in Lok Sabha was also frozen. A person holding an ‘office of profit’ is disqualified from the membership of Parliament or a State Legislature and the court’s power to declare what was an office of profit was ceased. The boundation of President under Article 103 to follow the opinion of Election commission was also removed.

Judiciary Earlier to 42nd Amendment, Indian Judiciary was unified, but the amendment restricted the power of High Court to only adjudicate upon the validity of State legislation and Supreme court on Central legislation. A new provision was added as Article 131A, providing only Supreme court exclusive jurisdiction to determine the question relating to central legislation. Article 226A 10 | P a g e

and Article 228A restricted the high courts. It was also added through Article 144A and 228A that at least seven judge bench would sit to decide a question of the constitutional validity of Central Law and the legislation can be held unconstitutional only with a two-thirds majority.

Emergency Provisions Article 352 was amended to authorize the President to declare Emergency not only throughout the country and but also in any part. For this, some necessary changes were made in Article 353, Article 358, and Article 359. Earlier the proclamation of Emergency under Article 356 needed parliamentary approval to operate at the end of every six years, but now this period was extended to one year.

Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles Through the change in Article 31-C, an attempt was made to give primacy to DPSP over Fundamental rights. Though no change was made directly in the articles related to fundamental rights. A certain changes were made to dilute its effect. The article 31-D was added to enable Parliament to make the law to prevent and prohibit Anti-national activities. Also, the laws made under article 31-D was forbidden to be held void for being violative of Article 14, 19 or 31. The amendment added few more Directive Principles, viz Article 39-A, Article 43-A, Article 48A. Article 39 (f) was also redrafted. Article 31C was amended and provided that no law giving effect to Directive Principles will be held void for being inconsistent with any of the rights conferred by Article 14, article 19, or article 31. It was one of the most controversial provisions of the amendment – Prioritizing state policy director principles in comparison to fundamental rights

Amendment When another notorious provision of the 42nd amendment was about the ‘amendment to the Constitution’. A few years back Supreme Court declared the historic Judgement in 11 | P a g e

Keshavananda Bharati Case. Where it set a scale to amend the Constitution, but the 42nd Amendment also squeezed these scales. After this amendment, the constitutional amendments made by the legislature could not be challenged in the Court on any grounds. Also, the membership of MPs and MLAs could not be challenged in the Court. In case of any dispute. The right to decide on his membership was given to the President only, and the tenure of the Parliament was extended from five years to six years.

Some Positive Perspectives Not all the provisions of the 42nd Amendment were negative. The addition of words like ‘socialist’, ‘secular’ and ‘integrity’ and the inclusion of fundamental duties. Are some example of the positive provisions, that were added through the 42nd amendment itself. It is the only reason that still after 43 years of the 42nd Amendment, these provisions are an integral part of the Constitution of India.

12 | P a g e

Aftermath of 42nd Amendment Indira Gandhi faced her worst defeat in the elections that followed Post-emergency. And for the first time in Indian history, a non-congress led government was formed in India. In the leadership of Morarji Desai, Janta Party Government started the work of reforming the Constitution. The government felt the need of introducing some more amendments to amend the Constitution. which was damaged by the amendments. The powers of the Supreme Court and High Courts were provided back to them through the 43rd Amendment. With the strengthening of the Judiciary and removing the 42nd amendment, the 44th Amendment has also done the task of strengthening the Constitution even more than ever. This amendment did many changes to escape the situation like the 42nd Amendment in the future. The term “Armed Rebellion” was added in the place of “Internal Unrest” in Emergency related provisions. Along with this, this amendment also strengthened the fundamental rights. During the Emergency, Indira Gandhi implemented a 20-point program of economic reforms that resulted in greater economic growth, aided by the absence of strikes and trade union conflicts. Encouraged by these positive signs and distorted and biased information from her party supporters, Gandhi called for elections in May 1977. However, the Emergency era had been widely unpopular. The 42nd Amendment was widely criticised, and the clampdown on civil liberties and widespread abuse of human rights by police angered the public. In its election manifesto for the 1977 elections, the Janata Party promised to "restore the Constitution to the condition it was in before the Emergency and to put rigorous restrictions on the executive's emergency and analogous powers". The election ended the control of the Congress (Congress (R) from 1969) over the executive and legislature for the first time since independence. After winning the elections, the Moraji Desai government attempted to repeal the 42nd Amendment. However, Gandhi's Congress party held 163 seats in the 250 seat Rajya Sabha, and vetoed the government's repeal bill.

13 | P a g e

The Janata government then brought about the 43rd and 44th Amendments in 1977 and 1978 respectively, to restore the pre-1976 position to some extent. Among other changes, the amendments revoked the 42nd Amendment's provision that Directive Principles take precedence over Fundamental Rights, and also curbed Parliament's power to legislate against "antinational activities". However, the Janata Party was not able to fully achieve its objective of restoring the Constitution to the condition it was in before the Emergency. The constitutionality of sections 4 and 55 of the 42nd Amendment were challenged in Minerva Mills v. Union of India, when Charan Singh was caretaker Prime Minister. Section 4 of the 42nd Amendment, had amended Article 31C of the Constitution to accord precedence to the Directive Principles of State Policy articulated in Part IV of the Constitution over the Fundamental Rights of individuals articulated in Part III. Section 55 prevented any constitutional amendment from being "called in question in any Court on any ground". It also declared that there would be no limitation whatever on the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. After the 1980 Indian general election, the Supreme Court declared sections 4 and 55 of the 42nd amendment as unconstitutional. It further endorsed and evolved the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution. In the judgement on Section 4, Chief Justice Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud wrote: Three Articles of our Constitution, and only three, stand between the heaven of freedom into which Tagore wanted his country to awake and the abyss of unrestrained power. They are Articles 14, 19 and 21. Article 31C has removed two sides of that golden triangle which affords to the people of this country an assurance that the promise held forth by the preamble will be performed by ushering an egalitarian era through the discipline of fundamental rights, that is, without emasculation of the rights to liberty and equality which alone can help preserve the dignity of the individual. On Section 4, Chandrachud wrote, "Since the Constitution had conferred a limited amending power on the Parliament, the Parliament cannot under the exercise of that limited power enlarge that very power into an absolute power. Indeed, a limited amending power is one of the basic features of our Constitution and therefore, the limitations on that power can not be destroyed. In other words, Parliament can not, under Article 368, expand its amending power so as to acquire for itself the right to repeal or abrogate the Constitution or to destroy its basic and essential 14 | P a g e

features. The donee of a limited power cannot by the exercise of that power convert the limited power into an unlimited one." The ruling was widely welcomed in India, and Gandhi did not challenge the verdict. The Supreme Court's position on constitutional amendments laid out in its judgements in Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala and the Minvera Mills case, is that Parliament can amend the Constitution but cannot destroy its "basic structure". On 8 January 2008, a petition, filed by Sanjiv Agarwal of the NGO Good Governance India Foundation, challenged the validity of Section 2 of the 42nd Amendment, which inserted the word "socialist" in the Preamble to the Constitution. In its first hearing of the case, Chief Justice K. G. Balakrishnan, who headed the three-judge bench, observed, "Why do you take socialism in a narrow sense defined by communists? In broader sense, it means welfare measures for the citizens. It is a facet of democracy. It hasn't got any definite meaning. It gets different meanings in different times." Justice Kapadia stated that no political party had, so far, challenged the amendment and everyone had subscribed to it. The court would consider it only when any political party challenged the EC. The petition was withdrawn on 12 July 2010 after the Supreme Court declared the issue to be

15 | P a g e

Legal Challenges of Amendment The constitutionality of sections 4 and 55 of the 42nd amendment was challenged in Minerva Mills v. Union of India. When Charan Singh was caretaker Prime Minister. Article 31C of the Constitution was amended by Section 4 of the 42nd Amendment to accord supremacy of the Directive Principles of State. The policy articulated in Part IV of the Constitution over the Fundamental Rights of individuals articulated in Part III. Section 55 prevented any constitutional amendment from being “called in question in any Court on any ground”. It also declared that there would be no limitation whatever on the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. After the 1980 Indian general election, the Supreme Court declared sections 4 and 55 of the 42nd amendment as unconstitutional. It further endorsed and evolved the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution.

16 | P a g e

Conclusion Regardless of the goals and objectives of this constitutional amendment. Told by the then ruling class, the main aim of this constitutional amendment was the main focus of the power in the hands of the Prime Minister and the Executive. During the election of the sixth Lok Sabha, under the political program of election manifesto. Which was published by the Janata Party. Cancelling the 42nd constitutional amendment was the primary thing written. But after obtaining power a viable approach was adopted. Based on virtue about this, instead of canceling all the provisions of the 42nd amendment. The 43rd and 44th constitutional amendments were introduced to remove the harmful provisions introduced through 42nd Amendment.

17 | P a g e

References  Hart, Henry C. (April 1980). "The Indian Constitution: Political Development and Decay". Asia Survey, Vol. 20, No. 4, Apr., 1980. University of California Press. JSTOR i345360.

 Admin, The (14 July 2019). "42nd Amendment, Was it India's or Indira's Constitution? CCRD". Centre for Constitutional Research and Development. Retrieved 14 July 2019.  Dev, Nitish. "Constitutional Amendments of India". PublishYourArticles.org. Retrieved 12 April 2012.  John R. Walker (21 June 1977). "Janata's flaws shown by wins in northern India". The Calgary Herald. Southam News Services. Retrieved 21 November 2013.  "The bill finally cometh". The Sunday Indian. 21 August 2011. Retrieved 23 November 2013.  R.C. Bhardwaj, ed. (1 January 1995). Constitution Amendment in India (Sixth ed.). New Delhi: Northern Book Centre. pp. 76–84, 190–196. ISBN 9788172110659. Retrieved 21 November 2013.  "Forty Second Amendment". Indiacode.nic.in. Retrieved 26 November 2013. incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain. 

This article

Lok Sabha Debates, Fifth Series, vol. 65, no.3, cols.141-2.

 "Parliament Has Unfettered Right". Indira Gandhi, Selected Speeches and Writings, vol.3. pp. 283–91.  "The Constitution (Amendment) Acts". Constitution.org. Retrieved 25 November 2013. article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.

This

 "When in doubt, amend". Indian Express. 21 August 2009. Retrieved 23 November 2013.  Granville, Austin. Working A Democratic Constitution - The Indian Experience. p. 371.  "'Issue too academic', so PIL on socialism in statute withdrawn". The Indian Express. 13 July 2010. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   "The Rise of Indira Gandhi". Library of Congress Country Studies. Retrieved 27 June 2009.   "A living legend". The Indian Express. 24 January 1998. Archived from the original on 3 December 2013. Retrieved 21 November 2014. 18 | P a g e

  Admin, The (14 July 2019). "42nd Amendment, Was it India's or Indira's Constitution? CCRD". Centre for Constitutional Research and Development. Retrieved 14 July 2019.   "Indian Constitution: Sixty years of our faith". The Indian Express. 2 February 2010. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   Prateek Deol. "42nd Constitutional Amendment: A Draconion Act Of Parliament - Gujarat National Law University". Legalserviceindia.com. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   "India - The Constitution". Countrystudies.us. Retrieved 23 November 2013. incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.

This article

  "Delimitation of constituencies". The Hindu. 17 September 2001. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   "We don't need career judges India". The Indian Express. 5 January 2019. Retrieved 28 February 2019.   "CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY OF INDIA - VOLUME VII". NIC. 15 November 1948. Retrieved 23 November 2013. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.   Paul R. Brass (1994). The Politics of India Since Independence. Cambridge University Press. pp. 40–50. ISBN 978-0-521-45970-9.   Raghav Sharma (16 April 2008). "Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors: A Jurisprudential Perspective". Social Science Research Network. SSRN 1121817. Missing or empty |url= (help)   "Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors". Open Archive. Archived from the original on 4 April 2012. Retrieved 2012-07-17. This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain.   "Front Page : 'Socialist' tag in statute challenged". The Hindu. 9 January 2008. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   "India a socialist nation? SC says keep the tag". Ibnlive.in.com. 8 January 2008. Retrieved 23 November 2013.   J. Venkatesan (13 July 2010). "Petition against term "socialist" in Constitution rejected". The Hindu. Retrieved 23 November 2013.  "New book flays Indira Gandhi's decision to impose Emergency". IBN Live News. 30 May 2011. Retrieved 23 November 2013.

19 | P a g e