1st Constitutional Amendment Act 1951

Also called: First Amendment · Topic: Amendment of the Constitution and the Basic Structure · NCERT: Beyond NCERT

Meaning

The 1st Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951 was passed by the Provisional Parliament. It added Art. 15(4), Art. 31A, Art. 31B and the Ninth Schedule. It also rewrote Art. 19(2) so that limits on free speech had to be "reasonable", and it added three new grounds for those limits: public order, friendly relations with foreign states and incitement to an offence.

It was the first time Parliament changed fundamental rights to get past court rulings. It also started the long dispute between Parliament and the judiciary that ran from Shankari Prasad (1951) to Kesavananda Bharati (1973).

Explanation

Who passed it and why

• Passed by: the Provisional Parliament. This was the Constituent Assembly sitting as Parliament until the first Lok Sabha was elected in 1952.
• Why it was needed: courts had struck down government action in three areas.

Area	Case	What the court did
Land reform	Kameshwar Singh (Patna High Court, 1951)	Struck down Bihar's zamindari abolition law
Free speech	Romesh Thappar and Brij Bhushan (1950)	Struck down bans on journals, because "public order" was not then a ground for limiting speech under Art. 19(2)
Caste quotas	Champakam Dorairajan (1951)	Struck down Madras's communal quotas in college admissions

What it changed

• Art. 15(4) was added:
• The State may make special provisions (extra help or reserved places) for socially and educationally backward classes, SCs and STs.

• This answered Champakam Dorairajan.

• Art. 19(2) was rewritten:

• Limits on free speech must now be "reasonable". Courts can check whether they are.
• Three new grounds were added: public order, friendly relations with foreign states and incitement to an offence.

• This answered Romesh Thappar and Brij Bhushan.

• Art. 31A was added:

• It protects laws that let the State acquire "estates" (landholdings) or take over the management of property.

• Such laws cannot be struck down under Art. 13, even if they clash with fundamental rights [2].

• Art. 31B and the Ninth Schedule were added (see below).

• Aim: Arts. 31A, 31B and the Ninth Schedule were meant to stop slow and costly court cases and to put agrarian reform laws (laws on who owns and farms land) beyond court challenge [2][4].

Art. 31B and the Ninth Schedule

• Ninth Schedule: a list of Acts at the end of the Constitution. A law placed in it cannot be challenged in court for breaking fundamental rights.
• What Art. 31B says: no Act in the Ninth Schedule "shall be deemed to be void, or ever to have become void" for clashing with Part III. This applies "notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court or Tribunal to the contrary" [1].
• It works backwards in time (retrospective):
• The words "ever to have become void" do this.

• A law that a court has already struck down comes back to life once it is placed in the Schedule.

• It is wider than Art. 31A:

• Art. 31B works "without prejudice to" Art. 31A [1].

• So a listed law does not have to be about estates.

• Size:

• In 1951 it had 13 Acts, all land reform laws. Item 1 was the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 [4].
• It now has about 284 entries (verify current).

Limits of the shield

• The 1st Amendment protected land laws from fundamental rights challenges. It did not settle whether Parliament's power to amend fundamental rights had any limit.
• That question depended on Art. 13(2). Art. 13(2) says the State shall not make any "law" that takes away or abridges (cuts down) Part III rights. Any such law is void.
• The open question: is a constitutional amendment a "law" under Art. 13(2)? The courts answered it differently over the next 22 years.

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it sits:
• Art. 15(4) and the rewritten Art. 19(2) are in Part III.
• Art. 31A and Art. 31B follow Art. 31.

• The Ninth Schedule is at the end of the Constitution.

• How it was passed: under Art. 368, which in 1950 was headed "Procedure for the Amendment of the Constitution" [3]. The steps were: 1. The bill could start in either House. 2. Each House had to pass it by a special majority. This meant a majority of the total membership of the House, and also two-thirds of the members present and voting [3]. 3. Changes to certain federal matters also needed ratification by at least half of the states [3]. 4. The bill then went to the President for assent.

• Shankari Prasad (1951), the first challenge:

• Zamindars argued that the amendment took away property rights, so it was a "law" made void by Art. 13(2).
• The Supreme Court upheld the amendment.
• It said "law" in Art. 13(2) means ordinary law made under Parliament's normal legislative power.
• An amendment is made under the constituent power in Art. 368 (the power to make or change the Constitution itself), so it is not covered.

• Result: Parliament can amend fundamental rights.

• Sajjan Singh (1965):

• The Court upheld the 17th Amendment (1964), which widened "estate" in Art. 31A and added more laws to the Ninth Schedule.

• Mudholkar J. asked whether the Constitution has "basic features" that an amendment cannot change.

• Golaknath (1967):

• An 11-judge bench under CJI K. Subba Rao ruled 6:5 that an amendment is "law" under Art. 13.

• Through prospective overruling (a new ruling applies only to the future), it left the 1st, 4th (1955) and 17th Amendments valid.

• 24th Amendment (1971): added Art. 13(4), so Art. 13 does not apply to amendments made under Art. 368. This brought back the Shankari Prasad position [5].

• Later use of the Ninth Schedule: it grew beyond land reform. It includes Tamil Nadu's 69% reservation law, added by the 76th Amendment, 1994.

Don't confuse with

• Art. 31A vs Art. 31B: Art. 31A protects only laws on acquiring estates and taking over property management [2]. Art. 31B protects any Act placed in the Ninth Schedule, and it works backwards in time [1].
• Provisional Parliament vs first Lok Sabha: the 1st Amendment was passed by the Provisional Parliament, meaning the Constituent Assembly acting as Parliament. The first elected Lok Sabha came only in 1952.
• 1st Amendment (1951) vs 17th Amendment (1964): the 1st created Art. 31A and the Ninth Schedule. The 17th widened "estate" in Art. 31A to include ryotwari land and added more Acts to the Schedule. Golaknath was a challenge to a 17th Amendment law.
• 1st Amendment vs 24th Amendment (1971): the 1st protected particular laws from fundamental rights challenges. The 24th protected amendments themselves from Art. 13, by adding Art. 13(4) [5].

Prelims Hooks

• 1st Amendment, 1951: passed by the Provisional Parliament. It added Art. 15(4), 31A, 31B and the Ninth Schedule.
• Art. 19(2) after 1951: limits must be "reasonable". New grounds were public order, friendly relations with foreign states and incitement to an offence. This answered Romesh Thappar and Brij Bhushan (1950).
• Ninth Schedule: started with 13 Acts, all land reform laws. Item 1 was the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 [4].
• Art. 31B protection is retrospective: a listed law is treated as never having become void, whatever any court has ruled [1].
• Shankari Prasad (1951) upheld the 1st Amendment. "Law" in Art. 13(2) means ordinary law, not a constitutional amendment.
• Trap: Golaknath (1967) did not strike down the 1st Amendment. It kept it valid through prospective overruling, used for the first time in India.

Mains Points

• Social reform vs rights:
• The 1st Amendment shows an elected Parliament pushing zamindari abolition and caste quotas past courts that were protecting property and equal treatment.
• The cost was that it weakened judicial review (the courts' power to strike down unconstitutional laws) over a whole class of laws.

• The balance came only in Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution, but it cannot destroy its basic structure.

• The Ninth Schedule as a "shield":

• It was built to protect land reform.
• It grew from 13 to about 284 entries and came to include reservation laws such as Tamil Nadu's 69% quota law (76th Amendment, 1994).

• It is a strong GS-II example of how Parliament has avoided court checks.

• Free speech and "reasonable" limits:

• The new Art. 19(2) grounds, especially public order, widened the State's power to limit speech.
• The word "reasonable" gave courts a tool to test every such limit.
• Use this to show how one amendment both widened state power and kept a judicial check on it.

Related concepts

• Ninth Schedule
• Shankari Prasad case
• Sajjan Singh case
• Golaknath case
• Doctrine of prospective overruling
• R.C. Cooper case

Read more

• Parliament vs the judiciary I: from Shankari Prasad to Golaknath