Press Enter

Share with your friends and help them crack UPSC!

Or Share on

Answer

Correct Option is 2 and 3

In the Golaknath case (1967), the Supreme Court held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights, and this power would be only with a Constituent Assembly. The Court held that an amendment under Article 368 is "law" within the meaning of Article 13 of the Constitution and therefore if an amendment "takes away or abridges" a Fundamental Right conferred by Part III, it is void. To get over the judgments of the Supreme Court in the Golaknath case (1967), RC Cooper case (1970), and Madhavrao Scindia case (1970), the then government headed by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had enacted major amendments to the Constitution (the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th). All the four amendments brought by the government were challenged in the Kesavananda Bharati case.

Get access to all of our verified questions