Constitutional Amendments in India: Article 368, Types of Majority and the Amendments UPSC Keeps Asking About
UPSC has already asked about this. Read the story with these questions in mind.
- Prelims 2020Consider the following statements: The Constitution of India defines its 'basic structure' in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy. …Solve it below ↓
- Prelims 2019Consider the following statements: The 44th Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced an Article placing the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial…Solve it below ↓
Background: neither too rigid nor too flexible
The framers looked at two extremes. The United States Constitution is very hard to amend, needing approval by three-fourths of the States, and has only 27 amendments. Britain has no written constitution and Parliament can change anything by ordinary law. India chose a middle path: most provisions can be changed by Parliament alone with a special majority, a few federal ones also need State ratification, and many details are left to simple majority. Nehru argued that a constitution that is too rigid “stops a nation’s growth”. Part XX, with its single Article 368, is borrowed in idea from South Africa.
Why the Constitution can be amended
The framers wanted a document that was neither as rigid as the American one nor as easy to change as an ordinary law. India has amended its Constitution over a hundred times since 1950; the US, a little over two dozen times since 1789. That flexibility is deliberate.
Three ways to amend
| Method | What it needs | Examples of provisions |
|---|---|---|
| Simple majority (outside Article 368) | Ordinary law-making majority | Creating new States (Arts. 2-4), citizenship rules, quorum, Second Schedule salaries |
| Special majority (Art. 368(2)) | Majority of total membership + two-thirds present and voting, in each House separately | Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles, most of the Constitution |
| Special majority + State ratification | As above, plus resolutions by at least half the State legislatures | President’s election, Union-State legislative powers, Supreme Court and High Courts, GST (101st Amendment), Article 368 itself |
Procedure, step by step
- A Bill can start in either House, not in a State legislature.
- It can be a government or private member’s Bill; no prior presidential recommendation is needed.
- Each House must pass it separately; there is no joint sitting for amendment Bills.
- After the 24th Amendment (1971), the President must give assent.
- 1Introduced in either House (minister or private member)
- 2Passed in each House by special majority
- 3Ratified by half the States, where required
- 4Presented to the President, who must assent (24th Amendment)
- 5Constitution stands amended
The tug of war with the courts
Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965) said Parliament could amend Fundamental Rights. Golaknath (1967) reversed that. Parliament replied with the 24th Amendment. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) settled it: Parliament can amend any part but not destroy the basic structure. Minerva Mills (1980) struck down parts of the 42nd Amendment that tried to make amending power unlimited.
Prelims pointers
Remember that Article 368 does not apply to changes made by simple majority under other Articles, that the President cannot withhold assent to an amendment Bill, and that State ratification has no fixed deadline. The 101st (GST) Amendment needed ratification by half the States.
- 19511st: Ninth Schedule, reasonable restrictions
- 19567th: States reorganised
- 197642nd: mini-Constitution
- 197844th: emergency safeguards; property right removed
- 199273rd and 74th: panchayats and municipalities
- 2016101st: GST
Amendments worth remembering
| Amendment | Year | What it did |
|---|---|---|
| 1st | 1951 | Ninth Schedule; reasonable restrictions on speech widened |
| 7th | 1956 | States reorganised on linguistic lines; same Governor for two States |
| 42nd | 1976 | “Socialist, secular, integrity” in the Preamble; Fundamental Duties |
| 44th | 1978 | Right to property removed from Part III; “armed rebellion” replaced “internal disturbance” |
| 52nd | 1985 | Anti-defection law (Tenth Schedule) |
| 61st | 1989 | Voting age lowered from 21 to 18 |
| 73rd / 74th | 1992 | Panchayats and municipalities |
| 86th | 2002 | Right to education, Article 21A |
| 101st | 2016 | GST and the GST Council (Art. 279A) |
| 103rd | 2019 | 10% EWS reservation |
| 106th | 2023 | One-third seats for women in Lok Sabha and Assemblies |
Which provisions need which majority
| Type | Examples |
|---|---|
| Simple majority (outside Article 368) | New States and boundaries (Art. 2-4), citizenship, quorum, Second Schedule salaries, Fifth and Sixth Schedules |
| Special majority of Parliament | Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and most other provisions |
| Special majority + half the States | Election of the President, Union-State legislative powers, Seventh Schedule, Supreme Court and High Courts, representation of States in Parliament, Article 368 itself |
Limits on the amending power
Procedure is only half the story. Since Kesavananda Bharati (1973), an amendment that destroys the basic structure is void. Courts have struck down parts of the 39th Amendment (election of the Prime Minister beyond review), the 42nd Amendment (clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 that tried to bar review) and the 99th Amendment (NJAC). In Kihoto Hollohan (1992) the Court struck down paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule because it changed the jurisdiction of courts without the required State ratification, a reminder that procedure matters too.
Critique
- No special body such as a convention or referendum; the same Parliament amends.
- States cannot initiate amendments.
- No time limit for State ratification.
- No joint sitting if the Houses disagree, so the Rajya Sabha has an effective veto.
- Frequent amendment can erode stability, though most have been routine.
Constitutional Amendments: UPSC angle
For UPSC CSE
Prelims: which provisions need ratification, which need only simple majority, no joint sitting, matching amendments to changes. Mains GS-II: basic structure vs parliamentary sovereignty; amendment as a tool of social change.
Constitutional Amendments UPSC PYQs (Prelims)
Questions UPSC has actually asked, from the official papers. Pick an option to check yourself.
Consider the following statements :
– 1. The Constitution of India defines its 'basic structure' in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy.
– 2. The Constitution of India provides for 'judicial review' to safeguard the citizens' liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
The basic structure comes from judgments, mainly Kesavananda Bharati (1973). The Constitution does not define it. The phrase “judicial review” does not appear in the text either. The power comes from Articles 13, 32 and 226, and the Court calls it part of the basic structure. UPSC marked both statements wrong. Answer as per the official UPSC key · Battle IAS PYQ bankAnswer (d) & why
Consider the following statements :
– 1. The 44th Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced an Article placing the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review.
– 2. The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Amendment to the Constitution of India as being violative of the independence of judiciary.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
It was the 39th Amendment (1975) that added Article 329A, putting the Prime Minister’s election beyond the courts. The 44th (1978) removed it. The 99th Amendment set up the National Judicial Appointments Commission. The Court struck it down in 2015 for hurting judicial independence. Answer as per the official UPSC key · Battle IAS PYQ bankAnswer (b) & why
Mains PYQs on this topic
Questions from the official UPSC Mains papers (2023-2026 in the Battle IAS Mains bank), newest first. Each links to a model answer.
- UPSC Mains 2025 · GS Paper II · Q12 · 15 marks
Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.
- UPSC Mains 2023 · GS Paper II · Q15 · 15 marks
Explain the significance of the 101st Constitutional Amendment Act. To what extent does it reflect the accommodative spirit of federalism ?
Quick quiz
An amendment to which of these requires ratification by half the States?
Representation of States in Parliament is a federal feature listed in Art. 368(2) proviso.Answer (c)
Which amendment made presidential assent to a Constitution Amendment Bill compulsory?
The 24th Amendment (1971) made assent mandatory.Answer (a)
A deadlock between the Houses on a Constitution Amendment Bill is resolved by
There is no joint sitting for amendment Bills.Answer (c)
FAQs
What is Article 368?
The Article that gives Parliament the power to amend the Constitution and lays down the procedure.
Can Parliament amend the Fundamental Rights?
Yes, but it cannot damage the basic structure of the Constitution (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973).
Is there a joint sitting for a Constitution Amendment Bill?
No. Each House must pass it separately by special majority.
Which amendment is called the mini-Constitution?
The 42nd Amendment, 1976, because of its sweeping changes.
Which amendments needed State ratification recently?
The 101st (GST) needed ratification by half the States because it changed taxation powers.
Can a private member introduce a Constitution Amendment Bill?
Yes. It can be introduced in either House by a minister or a private member, without the President’s prior recommendation.
Do State legislatures pass amendments by special majority?
No. Where ratification is needed, half the State legislatures ratify by a simple majority.
Spotted an error? Tell us. We correct within 48 hours.
Image: Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs, Wikimedia Commons, GODL-India
How to use this in Mains
If asked: UPSC Mains 2025, GS-II: Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.
Quote: “Procedure is only half the story.”
Use it: Use to move from procedure to substantive limits.
In the news
Supreme Court: no prior approval under Section 17A needed to probe a bribe demand
In a judgment of 16 October 2026, a Supreme Court Bench of Justices S.V.N. Bhatti and N.V. Anjaria held that investigating a bribe demand by a public servant does not need prior approval under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act. Asking for a bribe, the court said, is not part of discharging official duties.
19 Oct 2026
CCPA acts against online sale of explosives: 3,940 sellers delisted from seven platforms
The Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) said on 19 October 2026 that 3,940 sellers of regulated explosives such as ammonium nitrate, picric acid and PETN have been delisted from seven online platforms after its action. It has fined Dial4Trade and ExportersIndia ₹10 lakh per order, and other cases are under hearing or investigation.
19 Oct 2026
India to host 61st CIML meeting on legal metrology in New Delhi, 26–28 October
India will host the 61st meeting of the International Committee of Legal Metrology (CIML) for the first time, in New Delhi from 26 to 28 October 2026. The Department of Consumer Affairs is organising it with the International Organization of Legal Metrology (OIML), and more than 100 delegates are expected, PIB said on 19 October.
19 Oct 2026
NMC withdraws MSMER-2023: medical colleges lose the fixed penalty rulebook, annual disclosure stays
The National Medical Commission (NMC) has de-notified the Maintenance of Standards of Medical Education Regulations, 2023 (MSMER-2023) by a notification dated 14 October 2026, published in the Gazette on 16 October. Its fixed penalties, including seat cuts and fines of up to ₹5 lakh for false records, go with it. The Annual Disclosure Report stays.
19 Oct 2026