What was the holding of the Supreme Court in Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) regarding Article 368?

Answer and explanation

Correct answer: B. A limited amending power is itself a basic feature; Parliament cannot expand its power to an unlimited power

  1. Step 1: Analyze the decision in Minerva Mills (1980).
  2. Step 2: The court struck down clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 introduced by the 42nd Amendment which purported to exclude judicial review and give unlimited amending power.
  3. Step 3: Chief Justice Chandrachud observed that a limited amending power is a basic feature, and Parliament cannot by amendment convert a limited power into an unlimited one.
Answer
A limited amending power is itself a basic feature; Parliament cannot expand its power to an unlimited power.

Practise more Constitutional Governance: Emergency Provisions and Amendment Powers.

Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed CLAT UG mock tests.

All Constitutional Governance: Emergency Provisions and Amendment Powers questionsTake a mock test

More Constitutional Governance: Emergency Provisions and Amendment Powers questions