Minerva Mills Ltd. and Ors. v Union of India and Ors.
Rule established
Clauses 4 and 5 of Article 368, inserted by the 42nd Amendment (which sought to place constitutional amendments beyond judicial review and grant Parliament unlimited amending power), were struck down as violative of the basic structure doctrine; limited amending power itself is a basic feature of the Constitution.
Facts
- Minerva Mills, a textile undertaking, was nationalised under an Act placed in the Ninth Schedule
- The challenge extended to the validity of clauses 4 and 5 of Article 368 (inserted by the 42nd Amendment, 1976), which declared that no amendment could be questioned in any court, and that there was no limitation on Parliament's amending power
- The petitioners argued these clauses destroyed the basic structure doctrine laid down in Kesavananda Bharati
Issue
- Whether Parliament can, through a constitutional amendment, exclude judicial review of amendments and grant itself unlimited power to amend the Constitution, given the basic structure doctrine.
Held
- Clauses 4 and 5 of Article 368 were held unconstitutional and void
- Judicial review is itself part of the basic structure of the Constitution, and cannot be excluded even by constitutional amendment
- The amending power under Article 368 is, by its nature, a limited power; granting Parliament the power to enlarge that limited power into an unlimited one is a contradiction in terms and destroys the basic structure
- The harmony and balance between Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles) is itself part of the basic structure; giving DPSPs absolute primacy over all fundamental rights is impermissible
Ratio Decidendi
A limited amending power is itself a basic feature of the Constitution; Parliament cannot use Article 368 to convert its limited amending power into an unlimited one, nor can it insulate constitutional amendments from judicial review, since judicial review and the harmony between fundamental rights and directive principles are both essential to the basic structure.
How to use it in an exam
- Part A: Essential continuation of the basic structure doctrine after Kesavananda Bharati; frequently tested for the "limited amending power is itself basic structure" paradox.
- Part B: Pair with Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and I.R. Coelho (2007) to trace the full doctrinal arc.
- Key line: "The donee of a limited power cannot by exercise of that power convert the limited power into an unlimited one."
Source
Source: AIR 1980 SC 1789; landmark decision refining the basic structure doctrine post-Kesavananda
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.