I. R. COELHO (DEAD) BY LRS. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

I. R. COELHO (DEAD) BY LRS. versus STATE OF TAMIL NADU

Amendments to the Constitution made on or after 24th April, 1973, by which laws are inserted in the Ninth Schedule, can be challenged in court if they abrogate or abridge rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution in a way that violates the basic structure doctrine. The validity of each new insertion is to be assessed on its actual effect and impact on the rights in Part III, particularly Articles 14, 19, and 21. If the violation is of such nature as to destroy or damage the basic structure of the Constitution, such law will be invalidated, even if it is included in the Ninth Schedule.

Parties
Appellant: LR. Coelho (Dead) by LRs.; Respondent: State of Tamil Nadu
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
11 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Reference / Judgment on Reference by Nine Judge Bench
Outcome
Reference answered; principles laid down for future adjudication.
Legal Topics
Basic Structure Doctrine, Judicial Review, Ninth Schedule, Amendment of Constitution, Fundamental Rights, Separation of Powers, Rule of Law, Equality
Constitutional Law Basic Structure Doctrine Judicial Review Ninth Schedule Amendment of Constitution Fundamental Rights Separation of Powers Rule of Law +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LR. Coelho (Dead) by LRs.

Appellant

State of Tamil Nadu

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Reference / Judgment on Reference by Nine Judge Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether laws inserted into the Ninth Schedule after 24th April 1973 are immune from judicial review on the touchstone of basic structure doctrine.
  2. 2 What is the extent and nature of immunity that Article 31-B can provide to such laws?

Ratio Decidendi

Amendments to the Constitution made on or after 24th April, 1973, by which laws are inserted in the Ninth Schedule, can be challenged in court if they abrogate or abridge rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution in a way that violates the basic structure doctrine. The validity of each new insertion is to be assessed on its actual effect and impact on the rights in Part III, particularly Articles 14, 19, and 21. If the violation is of such nature as to destroy or damage the basic structure of the Constitution, such law will be invalidated, even if it is included in the Ninth Schedule.

Court Disposition

Reference answered; principles laid down for future adjudication.

Orders

  • A law placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24th April 1973 which abrogates or abridges Part III rights and violates the basic structure shall be subject to judicial review and liable to be invalidated if necessary.
  • If the validity of any Ninth Schedule law has already been upheld by the Supreme Court, it shall not be open to challenge again on the principles declared in this judgment.