A law placed in IX Schedule of the Constitution:

9th schedule along with Article 31B was added in 1951 through the first amendment in Indian Constitution. It was meant to enact some new laws which were important to transform India into a more egalitarian society. Article 31B states that, “none of the Acts and Regulations specified in the Ninth Schedule nor any of the provisions thereof shall be deemed to be void, or ever to have become void, on the ground that such Act, Regulation or provision is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges any of the rights conferred by, any provisions of this Part, and notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of any court or tribunal to the contrary, each of the said Acts and Regulations shall, subject to the power of any competent Legislature to repeal or amend it, continue in force”. In Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala – The court upheld the judgement in Golaknath and introduced a new concept of “Basic structure of the Indian Constitution” and stated that, “all provisions of the constitution can be amended but those amendments which will abrogate or take away the essence or basic structure of constitution which included Fundamental Rights are fit to be struck down by the court”. Then in Waman Rao v. Union Of India , the Apex Court ruled that, “those amendments which were made in the constitution before 24th April 1973 (date on which judgement in Keshavananda Bharati was delivered) are valid and constitutional but those which were made after the stated date are open to being challenged on the ground of constitutionality and the State is only immunized for its acts before the judgement in Keshavananda Bharati. This is also known as “Doctrine of Prospective Over-Ruling” which means that ‘only what follows after is bound to abide by the rules and what has happened earlier will not be taken in the account’ Later in I R Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu -Two important questions were referred to the higher bench by the constitutional bench of 5 judges which remained unanswered in the judgement in Waman Rao. The questions were, · Can an Act or the part which violates Arts. 14, 19 or 21 be included in 9th schedule? · Is it mandatory that only a constitutional amendment which destroys the basic structure be struck down? It was held that every law must be tested under Art. 14, 19 and 21 if it came into force after 24th April 1973. In addition, the court upheld its previous rulings and declared that any act can be challenged and is open to scrutiny by the judiciary if it is not in consonance with the basic structure of the constitution.