Original Indian Constitution, when adopted by Constituent Assembly in 1949, had 395 articles and 22 parts. Many other articles and three other parts were added to it by subsequent constitutional amendments. As of now, the Indian constitution has about 450 articles in 25 parts.

The Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution

Introduction
The debate on the 'basic structure' of the Constitution, lying somnolent in the archives of India's constitutional history during the last decade of the 20th century, has reappeared in the public realm.While setting up the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (the Commission), the National Democratic Alliance government (formed by a coalition of 24 national and regional level parties) stated that the basic structure of the Constitution would not be tampered with. Justice M.N. Venkatachalaiah, Chairman of the Commission, has emphasised on several occasions that an inquiry into the basic structure of the Constitution lay beyond the scope of the Commission's work.

Several political parties -- notably the Congress (I) and the two Communist parties which are in the opposition -- have made it clear that the review exercise was the government's ploy to seek legitimacy for its design to adopt radical constitutional reforms thus destroying the basic structure of the document.

Much of the public debate has been a victim of partial amnesia as even literate circles of urban India are unsure of the ramifications of this concept, which was hotly debated during the 1970s and 1980s. The following discussion is an attempt to chart the waters of that period rendered turbulent by the power struggle between the legislative and the judicial arms of the State.

The pre-Kesavanada position

Parliament's authority to amend the Constitution, particularly the chapter on the fundamental rights of citizens, was challenged as early as in 1951. After independence, several laws were enacted in the states with the aim of reforming land ownership and tenancy structures. This was in keeping with the ruling Congress party's electoral promise of implementing the socialistic goals of the Constitution[contained in Article 39 (b) and (c) of the Directive Principles of State Policy] that required equitable distribution of resources of production among all citizens and prevention of concentration of wealth in the hands of a few. Property owners -- adversely affected by these laws -- petitioned the courts. The courts struck down the land reforms laws saying that they transgressed the fundamental right to property guaranteed by the Constitution. Piqued by the unfavourable judgements, Parliament placed these laws in the Ninth Schedule of [2] the Constitution through the First and Fourth amendments (1951 and 1952 respectively), thereby effectively removing them from the scope of judicial review.

[Parliament added the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution through the very first amendment in 1951as a means of immunising certain laws against judicial review. Under the provisions of Article 31,which themselves were amended several times later, laws placed in the Ninth Schedule -- pertaining to acquisition of private property and compensation payable for such acquisition -- cannot be challenged in a court of law on the ground that they violated the fundamental rights of citizens. This protective umbrella covers more than 250 laws passed by state legislatures with the aim of regulating the size of land holdings and abolishing various tenancy systems. The Ninth Schedule was created with the primary objective of preventing the judiciary - which upheld the citizens' right to property on several occasions - from derailing the Congress party led government's agenda for a social revolution.[3] ]

Property owners again challenged the constitutional amendments which placed land reforms laws inthe Ninth Schedule before the Supreme Court, saying that they violated Article 13 (2) of the Constitution.

Article 13 (2) provides for the protection of the fundamental rights of the citizen.[4] Parliament and thestate legislatures are clearly prohibited from making laws that may take away or abridge the fundamental rights guaranteed to the citizen. They argued that any amendment to the Constitution had the status of a law as understood by Article 13 (2). In 1952 (Sankari Prasad Singh Deo v. Unionof India [5]) and 1955 (Sajjan Singh v. Rajasthan[6]), the Supreme Court rejected both arguments and upheld the power of Parliament to amend any part of the Constitution including that which affects the fundamental rights of citizens. Significantly though, two dissenting judges in Sajjan Singh v.Rajasthan case raised doubts whether the fundamental rights of citizens could become a plaything of the majority party in Parliament.

The Golaknath verdict

In 1967 an eleven-judge bench of the Supreme Court reversed its position. Delivering its 6:5 majority judgement in the Golaknath v. State of Punjab case [7], Chief Justice Subba Rao put forth the curious position that Article 368, that contained provisions related to the amendment of the Constitution,merely laid down the amending procedure. Article 368 did not confer upon Parliament the power to amend the Constitution. The amending power (constituent power) of Parliament arose from other provisions contained in the Constitution (Articles 245, 246, 248) which gave it the power to make laws (plenary legislative power). Thus, the apex court held that the amending power and legislative powers of Parliament were essentially the same. Therefore, any amendment of the Constitution must be deemed law as understood in Article 13 (2).

The majority judgement invoked the concept of implied limitations on Parliament's power to amend the Constitution. This view held that the Constitution gives a place of permanence to the fundamental freedoms of the citizen. In giving the Constitution to themselves, the people had reserved the fundamental rights for themselves. Article 13, according to the majority view, expressed this limitation on the powers of Parliament. Parliament could not modify, restrict or impair fundamental freedoms due to this very scheme of the Constitution and the nature of the freedoms granted under it. The judges stated that the fundamental rights were so sacrosanct and transcendental in importance that they could not be restricted even if such a move were to receive unanimous approval of both houses of Parliament. They observed that a Constituent Assembly migh tbe summoned by Parliament for the purpose of amending the fundamental rights if necessary.

In other words, the apex court held that some features of the Constitution lay at its core and required much more than the usual procedures to change them.

The phrase 'basic structure' was introduced for the first time by M.K. Nambiar and other counsels while arguing for the petitioners in the Golaknath case, but it was only in 1973 that the concept surfaced in the text of the apex court's verdict.

Emergence of the Basic Structure Concept- the Kesavanada milestone

Inevitably, the constitutional validity of these amendments was challenged before a full bench of the Supreme Court (thirteen judges). Their verdict can be found in eleven separate judgements.[13] Nine judges signed a summary statement which records the most important conclusions reached by them in this case. Granville Austin notes that there are several discrepancies between the points contained in the summary signed by the judges and the opinions expressed by them in their separate judgements.[14] Nevertheless, the seminal concept of 'basic structure' of the Constitution gained recognition in the majority verdict.

All judges upheld the validity of the Twenty-fourth amendment saying that Parliament had the power to amend any or all provisions of the Constitution. All signatories to the summary held that the Golaknath case had been decided wrongly and that Article 368 contained both the power and the procedure for amending the Constitution.

However they were clear that an amendment to the Constitution was not the same as a law as understood by Article 13 (2).

[It is necessary to point out the subtle difference that exists between two kinds of functions performed by the Indian Parliament:

a) it can make laws for the country by exercising its legislative power[15] and

b) it can amend the Constitution by exercising its constituent power.

Basic structure doctrine reaffirmed- the Minerva Mills and Waman Rao cases
Within less than two years of the restoration of Parliament's amending powers to near absolute terms,the Forty-second amendment was challenged before the Supreme Court by the owners of MinervaMills (Bangalore) a sick industrial firm which was nationalised by the government in 1974.[23]

Mr. N.A. Palkhivala, renowned constitutional lawyer and counsel for the petitioners, chose not tochallenge the government's action merely in terms of an infringement of the fundamental right toproperty. Instead, he framed the challenge in terms of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution.

Mr. Palkhivala argued that Section 55 of the amendment[24] had placed unlimited amending power in the hands of Parliament. The attempt to immunise constitutional amendments against judicial review violated the doctrine of basic structure which had been recognised by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati and Indira Gandhi Election Cases. He further contended that the amended Article 31C was constitutionally bad as it violated the Preamble of the Constitution and thefundamental rights of citizens. It also took away the power of judicial review.

Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, delivering the majority judgement (4:1), upheld both contentions.The majority view upheld the power of judicial review of constitutional amendments. They maintained that clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 conferred unlimited power on Parliament to amend the Constitution. They said that this deprived courts of the ability to question the amendment even if it damaged or destroyed the Constitution's basic structure.

The judges, who concurred with Chandrachud, C.J. ruled that a limited amending power itselfis a basic feature of the Constitution.

Bhagwati, J. the dissenting judge also agreed with this view stating that no authority howsoever lofty, could claim to be the sole judge of its power and actions under the Constitution[25].

The majority held the amendment to Article 31C unconstitutional as it destroyed the harmony and balance between fundamental rights and directive principles which is an essential or basic feature of the Constitution.[26] The amendment to Article 31C remains a dead letter as it has notbeen repealed or deleted by Parliament. Nevertheless cases under it are decided as it existed prior tothe Forty-second amendment. 

In another case relating to a similar dispute involving agricultural property the apex court, held that all constitutional amendments made after the date of the Kesavananda Bharati judgement were open to judicial review.[27] All laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after the date of the Kesavananda Bharatijudgement were also open to review in the courts. They can be challenged on the ground that theyare beyond Parliament's constituent power or that they have damaged the basic structure of theConstitution. In essence, the Supreme Court struck a balance between its authority to interpret the Constitution and Parliament's power to amend it. 

Important Articles of the Indian Constitution
 

Part 1 – Art. 1 to art. 4

Article 1- Name and territory of the union.
Article 2 – Admission and Establishment of the new state.
Article 3 – Formation of new states and alteration of areas, boundaries, and the name of existing states.
 

Part 2 – Art. 5 to art. 11

Article 5 – Citizenship at the commencement of the constitution.
Article 6- Rights of citizenship of a certain person who has migrated to India from Pakistan.
Article 10- continuance of rights of citizenship.
Article 11- Parliament to regulate the right of citizenship by law.

Part 3 – Art.12 to art.35

Article 12- Definition of the state
Article 13 Laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights.
Originally, the constitution provided for 7 basic fundamental rights, now there are only six rights, one Right to property U/A 31 was deleted from the list of fundamental rights by 44th amendment act 1978. It made a legal right U/A 300-A in Part XII of the constitution.

Some important Fundamental Rights are:

RIGHT TO EQUALITY: ART. 14 TO ART. 18
Article 14- Equality before the law.
Article 15- Prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex. Or place of birth.
Article 16- Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.
Article 17- Abolition of the untouchability.
Article 18- Abolition of titles

RIGHT TO FREEDOM: ART. 19 TO ART. 22
Art.19 guarantees to all the citizens the six rights
· (a) Right to freedom of speech and expression.
· (b) Right to assemble peacefully and without arms.
· (c) Right to form associations or unions.
· (d) Right to move freely throughout the territory of India.
· (e) Right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India.
· (f) Right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation, trade, and business.
Article 20- Protection in respect of conviction for offences.
Article 21-Protection of life and personal liberty.
Article 21A –  Right to education
Article 22- Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.

RIGHT AGAINST EXPLOITATION: ART.23 & ART. 24
Article 23- Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.
Article 24- Prohibition of employment of children in factories and mines under age of 14.

RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF RELIGION: ART.25 TO ART. 28
Article 25- Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.
Article 26- Freedom to manage religious affairs.
Article 27- Freedom as to pay taxes for promotion of any particular religion.
Article 28- Freedom from attending religious instruction.

CULTURAL AND EDUCATIONAL RIGHTS: ART.29 & ART. 30
Article 29- Protection of interest of minorities.
Article 30- Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.
Article 32- Remedies for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Part.4 Directive Principal of states Policy: Art 36 to art. 51

Article 36- Definition
Article 37- Application of DPSP
Article 39A- Equal justice and free legal aid
Article 40- Organisation of village panchayat
Article 41- Right to work, to education, and to public assistance in certain cases
Article 43- Living Wages, etc. for Workers.
Article 43A- Participation of workers in management of industries.
Article 44- Uniform civil code.( applicable in Goa only)
Article 45- Provision for free and compulsory education for children.
Article 46- Promotion of educational and economic interest of scheduled castes, ST, and OBC.
Article 47-Duty of the state to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health.
Article 48-Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry.
Article 49- Protection of monuments and places and objects of natural importance.
Article 50- Separation of judiciary from the executive.
Article 51- Promotion of international peace and security.

Fundamental Duties: Part IV-A- Art 51A

It contains, originally 10 duties, now it contains 11 duties by 86th amendments act 2002.

Part 5 – Union ( 52-151)

Article 52- The President of India
Article 53- Executive Power of the union.
Article 54- Election of President
Article 61- Procedure for Impeachment of the President.
Article 63- The Vice-president of India.
Article 64- The Vice-President to be ex-officio chairman the Council of States.
Article 66-Election of Vice-president.
Article 72-Pardoning powers of President.
Article 74- Council of Ministers to aid and advise the President.
Article 76- Attorney-General for India.
Article 79- Constitution of Parliament
Article 80- Composition of Rajya Sabha.
Article 81- Composition of Lok Sabha.
Article 83- Duration of Houses of Parliament.
Article 93- The speakers and Deputy speakers of the house of the people.
Article 105- Powers, Privileges, etc of the House of Parliament.
Article 109- Special procedure in respect of money bills
Article 110- Definition of “Money Bills”.
Article 112- Annual Financial Budget.
Article 114-Appropriation Bills.
Article 123- Powers of the President to promulgate Ordinances during recess of parliament.
Article 124- Establishment of Supreme Court.
Article 125- Salaries of Judges.
Article 126- Appointment of acting Chief justice.
Article 127- Appointment of ad-hoc judges.
Article 128-Attendance of a retired judge at sitting of the Supreme Court.
Article 129- Supreme court to be a court of Record.
Article 130- Seat of the Supreme court.
Article 136- Special leaves for appeal to the Supreme Court.
Article 137- Review of judgement or orders by the Supreme court.
Article 141-Decision of the Supreme Court binding on all the courts.
Article 148- Comptroller and Auditor- General of India
Article 149- Duties and Powers of CAG.

Part 6 – States ( 152-237)
Article 153- Governors of State
Article 154- Executive Powers of Governor.
Article 161- Pardoning powers of the Governor.
Article 165- Advocate-General of the State.
Article 213- Power of Governor to promulgate ordinances.
Article 214- High Courts for states.
Article 215- High Courts to be a court of record.
Article 226- Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.
Article 233- Appointment of District judges.
Article 235- Control over Sub-ordinate Courts.

Part 7 – 238 – Repealed
Part 8 – 239-242 – Union Territories

Part 9 – 243-243 O – Panchayats

Article 243A- Gram Sabha
Article 243B- Constitution of Panchayats

Part 9A – 243 P-243 ZG – Municipalities

Part 9B – 243 ZH-243 ZT- Co-operative Societies

Part 10: Scheduled and Tribal Areas -244

Part 11: Center- State Relations 245 – 263

Part 12: Finance, Property, Contracts and Suits (264 – 300A)

Article 266- Consolidated Fund and Public Accounts Fund
Article 267- Contingency Fund of India
Article 280- Finance Commission
Article 300-A- Right to property.
 

Part 13: Trade, Commerce and Intercourse within the territories of India (301-307)

Article 301-Freedom to trade, commerce, and intercourse.
Article 302- Power of Parliament to impose restrictions on trade, commerce, and intercourse.

Part 14: Services Under Center and State (308-323)

Article 312- All- India-Service.
Article 315- Public service commissions for the union and for the states
Article 320- Functions of Public Service Commission.
 

Part 14A: Tribunals (323 A – 323 B)

Article 323A- Administrative Tribunals
 

Part 15 : Elections (324 – 329)

Article 324-Superintendence, direction and control of Elections to be vested in an Election Commission.
Article 325- No person to be ineligible for inclusion in or to claim to be included in a special, electoral roll on grounds of religion, race, caste, or sex.
Article 326- Elections to the house of the people and to the legislative assemblies of states to be on the basis of adult suffrage.

Part 16: Special Provisions to SC, ST, OBC, Minorities etc (330 -342)

Article 338- National Commission for the SC, & ST.
Article 340- Appointment of a commission to investigate the conditions of backward classes.

Part 17: Official Language (343- 351)
Article 343- Official languages of the Union.
Article 345- Official languages or languages of states.
Article 348- Languages to be used in the Supreme Court and in the High Courts.
Article 351-Directive for development of the Hindi languages.
 

Part 18: Emergency (352-360)

Article 352- Proclamation of emergency ( National Emergency).
Article 356- State Emergency (President’s Rule)
Article 360- Financial Emergency
 

Part 19: Miscellaneous (361-367)
Article 361- Protection of President and Governors

Part 20: Amendment of Constitution (368)
Article 368- Powers of Parliaments to amend the constitution.

Part 21: Special, Transitional and Temporary Provisions (369 – 392)
Article 370 – Special provision of J&K.
Article 371A –  Special provision with respect to the State of Nagaland
Article 371-J: Special Status for Hyderabad-Karnataka region

Part 22: Short Text, Commencement, Authoritative Text in Hindi and Repeals (392 – 395)
Article 393 – Short title – This Constitution may be called the Constitution of India.

 Amendments passed by the Indian Constitution
 104 amendment Acts were passed till date. The 104th Amendment Act extends by ten years the deadline for the abolition of the reservation of seats in the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies for members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes.

The Constitution (One Hundred and Twenty-Sixth Amendment) Bill, 2019 proposes to extend the reservation for SCs and STs for another ten years, until January 25, 2030. And it was passed on December 12, 2019. With the passage of the bill, total 104 amendments were made to the Constitutions till now.