Recent amendments and pending and failed bills

Detail

Key terms

• Constitutional amendment: a formal change to the text of the Constitution. Art. 368 gives Parliament this power.
• Constitution Amendment Bill: the draft of an amendment. A bill gets a number when it is introduced. If it passes and becomes law, it gets a new number as an Act. For example, the 128th Amendment Bill (2023) became the 106th Amendment Act.
• Basic structure: Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution. But it cannot destroy the Constitution's core features, such as democracy, federalism, judicial review or the rule of law. The Supreme Court laid down this rule in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).
• Negatived: a bill is "negatived" when the House votes on it and it does not get the majority it needs. The bill dies.
• Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC): a committee with members of both Houses. It studies a bill in detail before the House takes it up again.

How an amendment bill passes (Art. 368): the test each recent bill faced

Step	What is needed
1. Introduction	The bill can start in either House, by a minister or a private member. The President's prior permission is not needed.
2. Passing in each House	A special majority in each House separately. This means (a) a majority of the House's total membership and (b) two-thirds of members present and voting.
3. Deadlock	No joint sitting is allowed. If one House rejects the bill, it fails.
4. Ratification (federal provisions only)	If the bill changes federal matters (such as the Seventh Schedule, representation of states in Parliament, or Art. 368 itself), at least half the state legislatures must approve it by a simple majority (proviso to Art. 368(2)).
5. President's assent	The President must give assent (Art. 368(2), as changed by the 24th Amendment, 1971).

Amendments passed from 2014 to 2023

Amendment (year)	What it changed	Points to note
99th (2014)	Set up the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) (Arts. 124A–124C) to appoint judges, in place of the collegium (a group of the senior-most judges who choose judges)	Struck down in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015), the "Fourth Judges case". The Court held that judicial independence is part of the basic structure.
100th (2015)	Put into effect the India–Bangladesh Land Boundary Agreement. Changed the First Schedule (the list of states and their territories).	Enclaves were exchanged. An enclave is a small piece of one country's land fully surrounded by the other country. This needed an amendment because it changed the territory listed in the First Schedule.
101st (2016)	Brought in the Goods and Services Tax (GST). Art. 246A gives the Union and the states joint power to tax goods and services. Art. 269A covers GST on trade between states (IGST). Art. 279A sets up the GST Council.	It changed federal provisions, so the states ratified it.
102nd (2018)	Gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) (Art. 338B). Added Art. 342A, under which the President notifies the list of SEBCs (socially and educationally backward classes).	Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil (Maratha quota case, 2021) read Art. 342A to mean that only the Centre could identify SEBCs.
103rd (2019)	Allowed up to 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in education (Art. 15(6)) and in jobs (Art. 16(6))	This was the first quota based on income alone. It was upheld 3:2 in Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (2022).
104th (2019)	Extended SC/ST reserved seats in the Lok Sabha and the assemblies to 2030 (Art. 334). Ended the nomination of Anglo-Indians (Arts. 331, 333).
105th (2021)	Gave back to the states the power to make their own SEBC lists (Art. 342A(3))	It reversed the effect of the Maratha quota ruling.
106th (2023) — Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam	One-third of seats reserved for women in the Lok Sabha (Art. 330A), the state assemblies (Art. 332A) and the Delhi assembly (Art. 239AA)	Art. 334A: it comes into force only after a delimitation (redrawing of constituency boundaries) based on the first census after the Act begins. It lasts 15 years.

129th Amendment Bill, 2024: One Nation One Election (pending)

What "simultaneous elections" means. Elections to the Lok Sabha and all state assemblies would be held together, in one cycle.

Background

• The High-Level Committee (HLC) under former President Ram Nath Kovind was set up on 2 September 2023. It gave its report to President Droupadi Murmu on 14 March 2024, after 191 days of work. The report runs to 18,626 pages [5].
• The HLC suggested two phases [5]:
• Phase 1: hold Lok Sabha and assembly elections together.

• Phase 2: hold panchayat and municipal elections within 100 days of the general election.

• It also suggested a single electoral roll and voter ID card (EPIC) for all three levels of government [5].

• Of 47 political parties that sent views, 32 supported simultaneous elections [5].
• The Union Cabinet accepted the HLC's recommendations in September 2024 [6].
• The reasons given for the change [3]:
• The current cycle costs a lot and keeps pulling officials away from their normal work.
• The Model Code of Conduct (MCC) comes into force again and again. The MCC is the set of election-time rules that stops governments from announcing new schemes, so it holds up policy and development work.

Introduction and committee stage

• The bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 17 December 2024 [3]. The vote on introduction was 269 for and 198 against.
• It came with the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2024. That bill applies the same cycle to UTs that have assemblies (Delhi, Puducherry, J&K) [7].
• Both bills went to a JPC chaired by P.P. Chaudhary. PRS dates the referral to 19 December 2024 [3]. The JPC was still consulting in mid-2026.

What the bill does

• It inserts Art. 82A and amends Art. 83 (term of Parliament), Art. 172 (term of state assemblies) and Art. 327 (Parliament's power to make election laws).
• Appointed date: the President notifies a date at the first sitting of the Lok Sabha after a general election. Every assembly elected after that date ends together with that Lok Sabha's five-year term [3].
• Early dissolution: suppose the Lok Sabha or an assembly is dissolved early.
• A fresh election is held.
• The new House sits only for the rest of the original five years [3].

• This keeps the shared cycle in step.

• Deferral: the Election Commission may tell the President that one state's election cannot be held with the others. The President can then order a later date for that state. The bill sets no time limit on this postponement [3].

The debate

• Federalism: the terms of state assemblies would be cut short or tied to the Lok Sabha. Critics say federalism is part of the basic structure.
• Democracy and accountability: governments would face voters less often. A House elected only for the rest of a term could weaken the link between voters and their representatives.
• State ratification: the bill was introduced as needing only a special majority in Parliament. Critics argue that changing assembly terms touches federal provisions, so half the states should ratify it.

130th Amendment Bill, 2025: removal of ministers held in custody (pending)

Introduction

• It was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 20 August 2025 and sent to a JPC the same day [4].
• Two companion bills apply the same rule to UTs [4]:
• the Government of Union Territories (Amendment) Bill, 2025 (Puducherry)

• the J&K Reorganisation (Amendment) Bill, 2025

• The JPC is chaired by Aparajita Sarangi. It had reached the draft-report stage by July 2026.

How removal would work. The rule covers the Prime Minister, a Chief Minister, or any Union or state minister. It amends Arts. 75, 164 and 239AA. Removal happens when both of these are true [4]:

• the person is accused of an offence punishable with five years or more in jail, and
• the person is arrested and held in custody for 30 days in a row.

What happens next

• A minister:
• is removed by the President or Governor on the advice of the PM or CM, or

• if no such advice comes, ceases to hold office automatically on the 31st day [4].

• The PM or a CM must resign after 30 days in custody. If they do not, they cease to hold office from the next day [4].

The debate

• For the bill: it cleans up criminalised politics. It also keeps ministers from running a government from jail.
• Against the bill:
• It goes against the presumption of innocence, because a person loses office on arrest, not on conviction.
• Investigating agencies could misuse arrests to remove opposition governments.
• PRS notes that automatic removal of a PM or CM on the 31st day may violate four basic-structure features: the parliamentary form of government, separation of powers, federalism and the rule of law [4][8].

131st Amendment Bill, 2026: Lok Sabha size, delimitation and women's reservation (failed)

Introduction. It was introduced in the Lok Sabha on 16 April 2026 with two companion bills [2]:

• the Delimitation Bill, 2026
• the Union Territories Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2026

What it would have done

• Lok Sabha size (Art. 81): the maximum would rise from 550 to 850 members [2].
• States: from 530 to 815 seats

• UTs: from 20 to 35 seats

• Seats by population: seats would again go to each state in proportion to its population, so every Lok Sabha constituency would have roughly the same population [2]. Until now, the seat count has been frozen on the 1971 census.

• Census to be used (Art. 82): delimitation would no longer have to wait for the first census after 2026.
• The Delimitation Bill said the latest census published when the Delimitation Commission is set up would be used.

• In practice, that meant the 2011 census [2].

• Delimitation Commission: a Supreme Court judge (chair), the Chief Election Commissioner and the State Election Commissioner [2].

• Women's reservation: the bill removed the condition that the 106th Amendment's quota must wait for the first census after 2023. The quota could have started with the 2011-based delimitation [2].

What happened

• It was negatived in the Lok Sabha on 17 April 2026 because it did not get the special majority under Art. 368(2) [2].
• The two companion bills became infructuous (pointless, because the main bill they depended on had failed). They were never taken up [2][9].

Precedent: the 64th Amendment Bill (1989)

• This bill would have given panchayats constitutional status. It passed the Lok Sabha but failed in the Rajya Sabha.
• Panchayats got constitutional status later, through the 73rd Amendment (1992), which was passed with wider agreement.

Lessons

• The special majority works as a consensus check. A government with a simple majority alone cannot rewrite the Constitution. It needs support across parties.
• The north–south debate over delimitation continues.
• Seats based on population would add seats to fast-growing northern states.
• Southern states would get a smaller share, because they controlled their population growth.
• This raises a question about federal balance.

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 279A sets up the GST Council. Art. 269A covers IGST on trade between states. Both came through the 101st Amendment (2016), which the states had to ratify.
• Art. 338B sets up the NCBC (102nd, 2018). Art. 342A(3) lets states keep their own SEBC lists (105th, 2021).
• EWS quota: Arts. 15(6) and 16(6) (103rd, 2019). It was upheld in Janhit Abhiyan (2022).
• 106th Amendment (2023): Arts. 330A, 332A, 334A, 239AA. The quota lasts 15 years and starts only after delimitation based on the next census. Trap: it does not cover the Rajya Sabha or state legislative councils.
• 104th Amendment (2019) ended Anglo-Indian nomination to the Lok Sabha and the assemblies. It extended SC/ST seats to 2030.
• 129th Bill (One Nation One Election) inserts Art. 82A. The Kovind HLC report (14 March 2024) also proposed Art. 324A for local body elections [5].
• 130th Bill: 30 consecutive days in custody plus an offence punishable with 5 years or more means removal on the 31st day. It amends Arts. 75, 164, 239AA [4].
• 131st Bill (2026): Lok Sabha cap of 850 (815 from states, 35 from UTs). It was negatived on 17 April 2026 [2].
• Trap: an amendment bill has no joint sitting. The 64th Amendment Bill (1989) died in the Rajya Sabha.
• The NJAC (99th, 2014) is the only amendment in this list that was struck down in full, in the Fourth Judges case (2015).

Mains Points

• The special majority as a federal and consensus safeguard:
• The 131st Bill (2026) and the 64th Bill (1989) both failed for lack of a special majority.
• In contrast, the 101st (GST) passed through Parliament and state ratification, as an example of cooperative federalism.

• Use these cases to show that Art. 368 needs wide agreement for big changes.

• One Nation One Election, for and against:

• For: lower costs, fewer MCC breaks and better governance [3][5].
• Against: assemblies' terms cut short, no time limit on deferral [3], and the risk to federalism and democracy as part of the basic structure.

• Middle path: get state ratification, and put a time limit on deferral in the Constitution itself.

• Criminalised politics against due process (130th Bill):

• The goal of clean politics is valid.
• But removal on arrest, rather than on charge-framing or conviction, risks misuse by investigating agencies, and PRS flags four basic-structure concerns [8].

• Possible reforms: removal only after charges are framed; independent review of arrests; fast-track courts for cases against legislators.

• Delimitation and fair representation:

• "One person, one vote" pulls against fairness to states that controlled their population growth.
• Possible solutions: increase the total number of seats but protect each state's existing share; or give more weight to the Rajya Sabha.
• Tying women's reservation to delimitation also delays the 106th Amendment.