CBSE Class 11 India Constitution Work: Chapter 9 - Constitution as a Living Document NCERT Solutions

Solution: The most appropriate reason for amending a constitution is that circumstances change, and the constitution must adapt to these new realities. While a document written long ago might seem outdated, the core reason for amendment is the need for suitable changes due to evolving societal, economic, and political conditions. The idea that every generation should have its own constitution or that it must reflect only the current government's philosophy are not universally accepted principles for constitutional amendment.

Solution:

1. True. As per Article 368 (2) of the Indian Constitution, the President shall give assent to a constitutional amendment bill and has no power to withhold assent or send it back for reconsideration.
2. True. The power to amend the Constitution is vested in the elected representatives of the people, primarily within the Parliament.
3. True. While the Judiciary does not have the power to initiate amendments, its power of judicial review allows it to interpret the Constitution. Through interpretation, it can significantly influence the application and understanding of constitutional provisions, effectively shaping the Constitution's meaning.
4. False. The Parliament can amend most parts of the Constitution, but it cannot amend the 'basic structure' of the Constitution, as established by the Supreme Court in landmark judgments.

Solution:

The following are involved in the amendment of the Indian Constitution in the specified ways:

1. Voters: Voters are indirectly involved as they elect the members of Parliament and State Legislatures. They do not directly participate in the amendment process itself.
2. President of India: The President is involved because a bill seeking to amend the Constitution must be presented to him for assent after it has been passed by both houses of Parliament (and ratified by states, if required). The President must give his assent.
3. State Legislatures: State Legislatures are involved in the amendment of specific provisions of the Constitution. Amendments related to the distribution of powers between the Union and the States, or amendments affecting the representation of States in Parliament, require ratification by at least half of the State Legislatures.
4. Parliament: The Parliament plays the central role in amending the Constitution. It can initiate amendment bills, and most amendments require passage by a special majority in both the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha. Some simpler amendments can be passed by a simple majority.
5. Governors: Governors have no direct role in the amendment of the Union Constitution. Their involvement is limited to the extent that they sign bills passed by their respective State Legislatures, which might include bills seeking ratification of certain constitutional amendments proposed by the Parliament.
6. Judiciary: The Judiciary is involved in interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that any amendment does not violate its 'basic structure'. While it cannot initiate amendments, its power of judicial review is crucial in safeguarding the Constitution's fundamental principles.

Solution: The 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, was highly controversial for several reasons, including:

1. Enactment during National Emergency: It was passed during the operation of a national emergency, a period when civil liberties were curtailed and political opposition was suppressed. The declaration and continuation of this emergency were themselves subjects of significant controversy.
2. Overriding Supreme Court Decisions: It sought to override the Supreme Court's decision in the Kesavananda Bharati case, which had laid down the 'basic structure' doctrine. This amendment aimed to give Parliament unlimited power to amend the Constitution.
3. Extension of Lok Sabha Term: The duration of the Lok Sabha and State Legislative Assemblies was extended from five years to six years, which was seen as undermining democratic principles.
4. Restrictions on Judicial Review: It imposed limitations on the power of judicial review by the courts and made certain provisions of the Constitution unamendable.
5. Changes to Preamble and Schedules: The amendment altered the Preamble by adding the words 'Socialist', 'Secular', and 'Integrity', and also made significant changes to the Seventh Schedule and numerous other articles of the Constitution.
6. Political Climate: Many opposition leaders were in jail during the period when the amendment was passed, limiting open debate and dissent.

Statements (b) and (c) in the question are generally considered incorrect as the 42nd Amendment was passed by Parliament and, for the provisions requiring it, ratification by states was obtained, albeit under the prevailing political circumstances. However, the core of the controversy lay in the nature and implications of the provisions themselves (d) and the context of its enactment (a).

Solution: The statement that is NOT a reasonable explanation for the conflict between the legislature and the judiciary over different amendments is:

d. Legislature cannot be entrusted to protect the rights of the citizens.

Here's why:

• a. Different interpretations of the Constitution are possible: This is a fundamental reason for conflict. The legislature and judiciary may interpret the same constitutional provision differently based on their roles and perspectives.
• b. In a democracy, debates and differences are natural: Disagreements and debates between different branches of government, including the legislature and judiciary, are inherent and often healthy in a democratic system, leading to checks and balances.
• c. Constitution has given higher importance to certain rules and principles and also allowed for amendment by special majority: The Constitution itself provides a framework, including fundamental rights and principles, and specifies amendment procedures (like special majority) to protect these. Conflicts can arise when the legislature's proposed amendments are seen by the judiciary as potentially undermining these protected aspects.
• d. Legislature cannot be entrusted to protect the rights of the citizens: This statement is unreasonable because the legislature, as a representative body, is fundamentally responsible for making laws that protect citizens' rights. While conflicts over interpretation and scope exist, assuming a complete lack of trust is not a basis for explaining the conflict; rather, it's the judiciary's role to ensure the legislature upholds these rights within constitutional bounds.