Article 31C: Why the SC is deciding if a fundamental right still exists in a case about private property

Contact Counsellor

CategoryPolity

Last Updated03/05/2024

While hearing a case to decide whether the government can acquire and redistribute private property.
A nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court led by the Chief Justice of India decided to take up the issue, whether Article 31C still exists.

As per Article 31C, the directive principles (Articles 39(b) and 39(c)) cannot be challenged by invoking the right to equality (Article 14) or the rights under Article 19.
Article 31C was introduced by The Constitution (Twenty-fifth) Amendment Act, 1971.
The 25th amendment was challenged in the seminal Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) in which 13 judges bench held that the Constitution has a “basic structure” that cannot be altered, even by a constitutional amendment.
In 1976, Parliament enacted The 42nd Constitution Amendment Act, which expanded the protection under Article 31C clause 4 to “all or any of the principles laid down in Part IV of the Constitution”,
As a result, every single directive principle (Articles 36-51) was protected from challenges under Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.
In 1980, in Minerva Mills v. Union of India, the SC struck down clauses 4 and 5 of the 42nd amendment.
The five-judge Bench held that Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution was limited, and it could not grant itself “unlimited” and “absolute” powers of amendment.