🏛️

Golaknath Case and Its Constitutional Impact

Apr 25, 2025

I.C. Golaknath and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Anrs.

Overview

  • A landmark 1967 case decided by the Supreme Court of India.
  • Full case name: I.C. Golaknath and Ors. vs State of Punjab and Anrs.
  • Decided on February 27, 1967.
  • The case addressed the issue of whether the Parliament could amend the Constitution to curtail Fundamental Rights.

Facts of the Case

  • The Golaknath family owned over 500 acres of farmland in Jalandhar, Punjab.
  • The 1953 Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act limited land holdings, declaring surplus land to be redistributed.
  • The family challenged the Act, claiming it violated their constitutional rights under Articles 19(1)(f), 19(1)(g), and 14.
  • The Seventeenth Amendment, placing the Punjab Act in the Ninth Schedule, was also challenged.

Key Issues

  • Whether a constitutional amendment is "law" under Article 13(3)(a) of the Constitution.
  • Whether Fundamental Rights can be amended.

Judgment

  • The Supreme Court overturned its previous decisions, ruling Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights.
  • A narrow majority (6:5) held that Article 368 amendments are "law" under Article 13(3).
  • Constitutional amendments cannot contravene Fundamental Rights in Part III of the Constitution.

Doctrine of Prospective Overruling

  • Introduced by Chief Justice Koka Subba Rao in this case.
  • Originates from American jurisprudence, allowing new rules for future cases while applying old rules to existing cases.
  • Used to uphold the Seventeenth Amendment, despite its abridgement of Fundamental Rights.

Minority View

  • Opposed the doctrine of prospective overruling.
  • Argued that judicial declarations should apply from the law's effective date, not prospectively.

Significance

  • Prompted the 24th Amendment in 1971, asserting Parliament's power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights.
  • The doctrine of basic structure established in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) later overruled Golaknath.
  • Kesavananda ruled that amendments affecting the Constitution's basic structure are void.

Related Cases

  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Established the basic structure doctrine.

Conclusion

  • The Golaknath case was pivotal in shaping the constitutional law in India, reinforcing the protection of Fundamental Rights against parliamentary amendments.

See Also

  • Indian law
  • Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala

External Links

Notes

  • Golaknath v. State Of Punjab had long-lasting implications on Indian constitutional law, including debates on the limits of parliamentary power.