In which case did the Supreme Court held that an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 was law within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution of India?
Table of Contents
- 1 In which case did the Supreme Court held that an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 was law within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution of India?
- 2 In which case did the Supreme Court held that the preamble was not a part of the Constitution?
- 3 What is Minerva Mills case UPSC?
- 4 Who is known as the Father of Indian Constitution?
- 5 Why is Kesavananda Bharati case called fundamental right case?
- 6 Who was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court?
- 7 Which is the largest ever constitution bench in India?
- 8 How many judges were present in the Supreme Court case?
In which case did the Supreme Court held that an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 was law within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution of India?
Kesavananda Bharati v.
This was done by amending articles 13 and 368 to exclude amendments made under article 368, from article 13’s prohibition of any law abridging or taking away any of the Fundamental Rights. In 1973, the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v.
In which case did the Supreme Court held that the preamble was not a part of the Constitution?
Kesavananda Bharati Case
Supreme Court also held the view that Preamble cannot be a part of the constitution but later in Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973), the Supreme Court gave a comprehensive verdict.
Which case is known as the fundamental rights case?
Kesavananda Bharati v. State
In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225, the Full Bench of thirteen Judges of the Supreme Court of India gave its verdict on the most prolonged and contested case on a matter of utmost importance to the Nation.
In which case Supreme Court held that the term law does not include constitutional amendment under Article 13?
Considered for the first time in Shankari Prasad v U.O.I. – held- word Law under Art. 13(2) does not include Constitutional amendments/law made by Parliament under Art. 368.
What is Minerva Mills case UPSC?
In the Minerva Mills case, the Supreme Court provided key clarifications on the interpretation of the basic structure doctrine. The court ruled that the power of the parliament to amend the constitution is limited by the constitution.
Who is known as the Father of Indian Constitution?
BR Ambedkar
Ambedkar Jayanti 2021: Interesting facts you need to know about BR Ambedkar, ‘Father of Indian Constitution’
What is Beru Bari case?
Berubari case was the Presidential Reference Under Art. 143(1) of the Constitution of India on the implementation of the Indo-Pak agreement relating to Berubari union and exchange of enclaves which come up for consideration by a bench consisting of eight judges headed by B.P. Sinha, C.J.
Who wrote preamble of India?
Jawaharlal Nehru
Jawaharlal Nehru – The preamble of India was derived from its draft which was called the ‘Objective Resolutions’. This draft was written and introduced to the Constituent Assembly by Jawaharlal Nehru on 13th December 1946. The Constituent Assembly adopted this draft on 22 January 1947.
Why is Kesavananda Bharati case called fundamental right case?
He challenged the Kerala land reforms legislation in 1970, which imposed restrictions on the management of religious property. The case was challenged under Article 26, concerning the right to manage religiously owned property without government interference.
Who was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court?
Justice Fathima Beevi
From 1950, when the Supreme Court was established, it took 39 years for Justice Fathima Beevi to be appointed the country’s first female Supreme Court judge in 1989.
What is Article 17 of the Indian Constitution?
Article 17. Abolition of Untouchability. -“Untouchability” is abolished and its practice in any form is forbidden. The enforcement of any disability arising out of “Untouchability” shall be an offence punishable in accordance with law.
What was Waman Rao case?
Waman Rao Case (1981) In the Kesavananda Bharati case, the petitioner had challenged the Constitution (29th Amendment) Act, 1972, which placed the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 and its amending Act into the 9th Schedule of the Constitution.
Which is the largest ever constitution bench in India?
State of Kerala (Citation: AIR 1973 SC 1461) was heard by the largest ever Constitution bench comprising of 13 Supreme Court judges.
How many judges were present in the Supreme Court case?
The case was heard by the largest ever Constitution Bench of 13 Judges. The bench gave eleven separate judgments, which agreed on some points and differed on others, implying that there is no clear indication of what the Supreme Court actually held.
What is the Kesavananda Bharati case in India?
In India, the Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala was heard by tha largest ever constitution bench of 13 supreme court judges. This case was heard in 68 days. This case outlined the Basic Structure doctrine of the Constitution. Law: What is the Kesavananda Bharati case and why is it famous?
Why did Swami Kesavananda file a petition in Supreme Court?
This adversely affected Swami Kesavananda and under the persuasion of his counsel & renowned Indian jurist Nanabhoy Palkhivala, he filed a petition in the apex court, under article 26 of the Constitution, concerning the privilege to oversee religiously claimed property without government obstruction.