What was held in the Coelho case? In this context, can you say that judicial review is of key importance amongst the basic features of the Constitution?
Approach · directive: “what / can you say”
What it asks · State the holding in I.R. Coelho (2007) on Ninth Schedule laws, then argue whether judicial review deserves a special place among the basic features.
The question has 2 parts — answer each
- What: the holding in I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) on Ninth Schedule laws
- Can you say: whether judicial review is of key importance among the basic features, with a reasoned position
Open with · I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) was decided by a nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court on the reach of the Ninth Schedule.
Cover
- Background: Article 31B shields laws in the Ninth Schedule from being void for violating fundamental rights; the Ninth Schedule had grown to include many laws.
- Holding: laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973, the date of Kesavananda Bharati, can be challenged if they damage the basic structure.
- Meaning: the Ninth Schedule does not give blanket immunity, and courts can test such laws against fundamental rights that form part of the basic structure.
- Judicial review as basic feature: Minerva Mills (1980) and L. Chandra Kumar (1997) treat it as essential; the NJAC ruling (2015) protected judicial independence.
- Why 'key': it is the machinery that enforces every other basic feature, such as federalism, secularism and fundamental rights; without it, they become declarations.
- Caution: democracy, federalism and secularism are equally basic, and judicial review must stay within constitutional limits and respect the separation of powers.
Close with · Judicial review is the keystone guarding the basic structure, but it strengthens rather than replaces the other features, and it must be exercised with restraint.
Add value (verified)
- Article 31B protects Ninth Schedule laws from being void for violating fundamental rights; Coelho held this shield does not bar review against the basic structure. The Constitution of India (as on 1 May 2024), Article 31B — Legislative Department ↗“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”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2016, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer · 288 words (UPSC limit 200) · Minimalist IAS
In I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007) a nine-judge Bench of the Supreme Court settled how far the Ninth Schedule can shield laws from fundamental rights.
What Coelho held
- Article 31B protects laws placed in the Ninth Schedule from being void for inconsistency with fundamental rights, and over the decades the Schedule grew to hold many laws far removed from land reform.
- Laws added after 24 April 1973, the date of Kesavananda Bharati, can be challenged if they damage the basic structure.
- The test is the law's actual effect on rights that form part of the basic structure, such as those under Articles 14, 19 and 21, not the mere fact of inclusion.
- Result: the Ninth Schedule gives no blanket immunity; Parliament cannot, by inserting a law, take away the courts' power to test it.
Is judicial review the key feature?
- Yes, in one sense: it is the machinery that enforces every other feature. Federalism, secularism, free elections and fundamental rights stay declarations unless a court can strike down what breaches them.
- Precedent agrees: Minerva Mills (1980) and L. Chandra Kumar (1997) treated review as essential, and the NJAC ruling (2015) guarded judicial independence for the same reason.
- Coelho itself is proof: the case turned on whether Parliament could exclude review through a device, and the answer was no.
- Caution: the basic structure has no hierarchy. Democracy, federalism and secularism are as basic as review, and review must stay within constitutional limits and respect the separation of powers, or the court becomes a super-legislature.
Judicial review is the keystone that holds the basic structure in place, but a keystone is not the whole arch: it protects the other features and draws its own legitimacy from restraint.
Written by Minimalist IAS from facts checked at source (how we verify) — a little fuller than exam length, so every part of the question is covered; in the hall, keep the structure and trim the detail. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.