Consider the following statements regarding the Golaknath case and the Kesavananda Bharati case:

1. In the Golaknath case, the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot amend the Fundamental Rights.
2. In the Kesavananda Bharati case, a 13-judge bench overturned the Golaknath case ruling and established the concept of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution.

Question

Consider the following statements regarding the Golaknath case and the Kesavananda Bharati case:

1. In the Golaknath case, the Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot amend the Fundamental Rights.
2. In the Kesavananda Bharati case, a 13-judge bench overturned the Golaknath case ruling and established the concept of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution.

Accepted Answer

Both statements 1 and 2 are correct. In the Golaknath case (1967), an 11-judge bench ruled that Fundamental Rights are transcendental and cannot be amended by Parliament under Article 368. This decision was later reversed by a larger 13-judge bench in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which upheld the constitutional validity of the 24th Amendment Act allowing parliament to amend Fundamental Rights, but introduced the limitation of the 'Basic Structure' doctrine.

Answer

Answer