The doctrine of the "basic structure" of the Constitution was laid down by the Supreme Court in the:

In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), the Supreme Court held that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution under Article 368, but it cannot alter its "basic structure".

About the case:

• The petitioner, Swami Kesavananda Bharati, was the head of the Edneer Mutt in Kerala, who challenged Kerala's land reform laws affecting the mutt's property.
• The case was heard by a 13-judge bench, the largest bench ever constituted by the Supreme Court.

The judgment was delivered on 24 April 1973 by a 7:6 majority. Chief Justice S.M. Sikri headed the bench.

Background:

• In Shankari Prasad (1951), the Court held that Parliament could amend fundamental rights.
• In Golaknath (1967), the Court reversed this and held that Parliament could not amend fundamental rights.
• Parliament responded with the 24th Amendment (1971), which affirmed its power to amend any part of the Constitution.

What the Court held in Kesavananda Bharati:

• It upheld the 24th Amendment and overruled Golaknath.
• It held that the power of amendment does not include the power to destroy the basic structure.

Elements of the basic structure:

The Court did not give a complete list. Over time, the courts have identified elements such as:

Later cases:

In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), the Court applied the doctrine to strike down a clause of the 39th Amendment.

In Minerva Mills (1980), it held that limited amending power and the balance between fundamental rights and directive principles are part of the basic structure.

In I.R. Coelho (2007), it held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule are open to review if they violate the basic structure.

Why not the other options?

• ✗Golaknath, Minerva Mills and Shankari Prasad were important cases, but the doctrine was first laid down in Kesavananda Bharati.