What does the Keshavananda case deal with?
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 3
The correct answer is Option (3) → The Parliament cannot amend the basic features of the Constitution.
Option (1) The need of the judiciary and the bureaucracy to be committed to the vision of the Prime Minister. — Incorrect. This was talk among people close to the Prime Minister about a judiciary and bureaucracy ‘committed’ to the vision of the executive and the legislature. It was a political demand, not a court’s decision.
Option (2) The appointment of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court without following the principle of seniority. — Incorrect. This happened after the Kesavananda decision of 1973: the government set aside the seniority of three judges and appointed Justice A. N. Ray as Chief Justice. It was an act of the government, not the subject of the case.
Option (3) The Parliament cannot amend the basic features of the Constitution. — Correct. The conflict between Parliament and the judiciary over amending Fundamental Rights culminated in the Kesavananda Bharati case, in which the Court decided that there are some basic features of the Constitution and the Parliament cannot amend these features.
Option (4) Invalidity of Indira Gandhi’s election to the Lok Sabha — Incorrect. That was the ruling of the Allahabad High Court in 1975 on Raj Narain’s election petition, the climax of the confrontation with the judiciary, not the Kesavananda case.
Note: A similar question was also asked in CUET (UG) 2026 on 15-05-2026 (Slot 1).
NCERT (2025-26): “Conflict with Judiciary … Thirdly, the Parliament amended the Constitution saying that it can abridge Fundamental Rights for giving effect to Directive Principles. But the Supreme Court rejected this provision also. This led to a crisis as far as the relations between the government and the judiciary were concerned. You may remember that this crisis culminated in the famous Kesavananda Bharati Case. In this case, the Court gave a decision that there are some basic features of the Constitution and the Parliament cannot amend these features. Two developments further added to the tension between the judiciary and the executive. Immediately after the Supreme Court’s decision in 1973 in the Keshavananda Bharati case, a vacancy arose for the post of the Chief Justice of India. It had been a practice to appoint the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court as the Chief Justice. But in 1973, the government set aside the seniority of three judges and appointed Justice A. N. Ray as the Chief Justice of India. The appointment became politically controversial because all the three judges who were superseded had given rulings against the stand of the government. Thus, constitutional interpretations and political ideologies were getting mixed up rapidly. People close to the Prime Minister started talking of the need for a judiciary and the bureaucracy ‘committed’ to the vision of the executive and the legislature. The climax of the confrontation was of course the ruling of the High Court declaring Indira Gandhi’s election invalid.” |