Which of the following provisions of the Constitution of India need the ratification by the legislatures of not less than one-half of the States to effect amendment? 1. The manner of election of the President of India 2. Extent of the executive power of the Union and the States 3. Powers of the Supreme Court and High Courts 4. Any of the Lists in the 7th Schedule Select the correct answer using the code given below : Code :

1. The Basics of Constitutional Amendment (Article 368) (basic)

Welcome to your first step in mastering the Indian Constitution’s evolution! To understand how our nation grows, we must look at Article 368, found in Part XX. Think of the Constitution not as a static, frozen document, but as a "living organism." The framers knew that a document written in 1949 might not fit the needs of 2024, so they provided a mechanism for addition, variation, or repeal of its provisions Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 11, p.123.

The Indian approach to amendments is unique because it strikes a delicate balance. It avoids the extreme flexibility of the British system (where the Constitution can be changed by a simple majority in Parliament) and the extreme rigidity of the American system (which is notoriously difficult to amend). Instead, India is a synthesis of both. While some parts can be changed easily, others require a very high threshold of agreement, ensuring that the core foundations of our democracy aren't shifted on a whim Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 11, p.123.

System Type	Nature of Amendment	Example
Flexible	Amended like ordinary laws.	United Kingdom
Rigid	Requires a special, difficult procedure.	USA
Indian	A mix; some parts are easy, others are tough.	India

Crucially, Article 368 confers what we call 'Constituent Power' upon the Parliament. This is different from the regular legislative power used to pass daily laws. In the famous Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), the Supreme Court clarified that while Parliament has wide powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter its 'Basic Structure' Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 10, p.196. Essentially, you can renovate the house, but you cannot tear down the foundation that holds it up.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 11: Amendment of the Constitution, p.123; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 10: Procedure for Amendment, p.196

2. Understanding Majorities: Simple vs. Special (intermediate)

In the Indian parliamentary system, the process of decision-making hinges on different types of majorities. Since our Parliament is bicameral—consisting of the Lok Sabha and the Rajya Sabha—most decisions require the consent of both houses, but the "strength" of that consent varies depending on the importance of the issue Exploring Society: India and Beyond, NCERT Class VIII, The Parliamentary System: Legislature and Executive, p.142.

The most basic form is the Simple Majority. This refers to a majority of more than 50% of the members present and voting in the house at that time. It is the standard for passing ordinary bills, money bills, and even some constitutional changes like the creation of new states or the abolition of Legislative Councils. However, for more fundamental changes, the Constitution demands a Special Majority under Article 368 Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Amendment of the Constitution, p.124.

A Special Majority (as per Article 368) is more rigorous because it requires two conditions to be met simultaneously:

• Absolute Majority: More than 50% of the total membership of the House (regardless of vacancies or absentees).
• Two-Thirds Majority: At least two-thirds of the members present and voting.

This ensures that a constitutional amendment has both broad support from the entire house and intense support from those participating in the vote Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Parliament, p.240.

Feature	Simple Majority	Special Majority (Art. 368)
Requirement	>50% of those present and voting.	>50% of Total Strength AND 2/3rd of those present and voting.
Usage	Ordinary Bills, Confidence Motions, Admission of new States.	Constitutional Amendments, removal of SC/HC Judges, National Emergency.

Finally, there is a third category for Federal Provisions—matters that affect the powers of the States. In these cases, even a Special Majority in Parliament is not enough. The amendment must also be ratified by at least half of the State Legislatures by a simple majority Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125. This reflects India's "quasi-federal" nature, ensuring the Union cannot unilaterally alter the federal balance.

Sources: Exploring Society: India and Beyond, NCERT Class VIII, The Parliamentary System: Legislature and Executive, p.142; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Amendment of the Constitution, p.124-125; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Parliament, p.240

3. Federalism and the Role of States in Amendments (intermediate)

In a federal system, the power is divided between the Centre and the States. To ensure that the Union government doesn't unilaterally change the basic structure of this partnership, the Indian Constitution includes a safeguard known as State Ratification. This process reflects the rigidity of the Constitution when it comes to federal matters. While Article 1 describes India as a 'Union of States,' implying an indestructible union of destructible states, the core 'rules of the game' regarding their relationship cannot be changed by Parliament alone M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29.

Under Article 368, if an amendment seeks to alter the 'federal character' of the Constitution, it must first be passed by each House of Parliament by a special majority. Following this, it must be ratified by the legislatures of at least one-half of the States. It is important to note that the states perform this ratification via a simple majority (a majority of the members present and voting). Interestingly, the Constitution does not prescribe a specific time frame within which the states must give their consent, which has occasionally been a point of academic debate regarding the speed of constitutional change M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125.

Only specific provisions that touch upon the federal structure require this dual approval. These include:

• The Election of the President: Since the President is elected by an electoral college including state MLAs, any change in the manner of election (Articles 54 and 55) needs state consent.
• The Judiciary: Any changes to the powers or jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• Distribution of Powers: Any changes to the Seventh Schedule (Union, State, and Concurrent Lists) or the extent of the executive power of the Union and the States.
• Representation in Parliament: Changes to how states are represented in the Rajya Sabha or Lok Sabha.
• Article 368 itself: If Parliament wants to change the procedure of amending the Constitution, it must ask the states for permission!

When we compare this to other nations, India’s approach is a middle path. For instance, the United States requires a much stricter three-fourths (3/4ths) of states to ratify an amendment, making their Constitution one of the most rigid in the world M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, World Constitutions, p.673. India's requirement of only one-half (1/2) of states strikes what K.C. Wheare called a "good balance between flexibility and rigidity" M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125.

Sources: M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.29; M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125; M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, World Constitutions, p.673

4. The Basic Structure Doctrine and Limits on Amendment (intermediate)

To understand the limits on Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, we must look beyond just the procedure and into the substantive identity of the document. For the first two decades after independence, the Supreme Court largely held that Parliament's power under Article 368 was absolute. However, this changed with the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case (1973), which introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine. The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights, it cannot use this power to alter or destroy the "basic structure" or the essential features of the Constitution Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.626.

Think of the Basic Structure as the foundation and pillars of a building. You can repaint the walls or change the furniture (ordinary amendments), but if you remove the foundation, the entire structure collapses. Importantly, the Constitution does not define what constitutes this "Basic Structure." Instead, it is a judicial innovation, where the Supreme Court identifies specific features case-by-case. These currently include elements like the supremacy of the Constitution, the secular character of the state, federalism, and the separation of powers Indian Polity, Basic Structure of the Constitution, p.129.

This doctrine acts as a final check on majoritarianism. For instance, in the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court struck down provisions of the 42nd Amendment that tried to give Parliament unlimited amending power. The Court famously noted that "the donor (the Constitution) cannot be destroyed by the donee (Parliament) of the power." This case also reaffirmed that judicial review—the power of the courts to examine the legality of laws—is itself a part of the Basic Structure Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.629.

Sources: Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.626; Indian Polity, Basic Structure of the Constitution, p.129; Indian Polity, Landmark Judgements and Their Impact, p.629

5. Judicial Powers and the Seventh Schedule (exam-level)

At the heart of the Indian Constitution lies the federal principle—the idea that power is shared between the Union and the States. To ensure the Union doesn't unilaterally weaken the States, certain 'entrenched' provisions require a more rigorous amendment process. Under Article 368(2), amendments that affect the federal structure require not only a special majority in Parliament but also ratification by the legislatures of at least half of the States Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 11, p. 125.

The two most critical 'federal pillars' in this category are the Judiciary and the Seventh Schedule. The Constitution protects the status and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Chapter IV of Part V) and the High Courts (Chapter V of Part VI). For instance, if the Union wanted to curtail the Supreme Court’s plenary jurisdiction or its power to grant special leave to appeal Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 26, p. 292, it could not do so alone; the States must agree, as a healthy judiciary is essential for resolving Union-State disputes Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 21, p. 347.

Similarly, the Seventh Schedule is the very map of legislative authority. It contains the Union, State, and Concurrent Lists. Since any change to these lists—such as moving a subject from the State List to the Concurrent List—directly alters the legislative 'territory' of the States, the Constitution mandates state ratification. This prevents the Union from effectively 'hollowing out' state powers through simple constitutional amendments.

Feature	Special Majority Only	Special Majority + State Ratification
Core Logic	Relates to individual rights or governance standards.	Relates to the Federal Balance (Union vs. State power).
Examples	Fundamental Rights, DPSP.	Election of President, SC/HC Powers, Seventh Schedule.
State Role	No formal role in the amendment process.	Must be ratified by 1/2 of State Legislatures by simple majority.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 11: Amendment of the Constitution, p.125; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 26: Supreme Court, p.292; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 21: The Supreme Court, p.347

6. The List of Federal Provisions Requiring State Ratification (exam-level)

In a federal setup like India, the Constitution is not merely a Union document; it is a compact between the Union and the States. Therefore, certain 'federal provisions' are protected from unilateral changes by the Center. Under Article 368(2), if an amendment seeks to alter the federal balance, it must be ratified by the legislatures of at least one-half of the States by a simple majority before being sent for Presidential assent Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125.

The specific provisions requiring this 'double lock' of Special Majority + State Ratification include:

• The President: The manner and election process (Articles 54 and 55) Introduction to the Constitution of India, Procedure for Amendment, p.192.
• Executive Power: Any change to the extent of the executive power of the Union (Article 73) or the States (Article 162).
• The Judiciary: Provisions relating to the Supreme Court (Chapter IV of Part V) and the High Courts (Chapter V of Part VI and Article 241).
• Legislative Relations: Any of the three lists in the Seventh Schedule or the distribution of legislative powers Introduction to the Constitution of India, Procedure for Amendment, p.192.
• Representation: The representation of States in Parliament (Articles 80-81 and the Fourth Schedule).
• The Amending Power itself: Any amendment to Article 368 itself requires state ratification to ensure the Center cannot unilaterally make the amendment process easier in the future Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125.

It is important to note that for state ratification, the Constitution does not prescribe a specific time limit. Furthermore, while the Parliament passes the bill with a special majority, the State legislatures only need to pass a resolution with a simple majority to signify their consent Introduction to the Constitution of India, Procedure for Amendment, p.192.

Sources: Indian Polity, Amendment of the Constitution, p.125; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Procedure for Amendment, p.192

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the three types of constitutional amendments, this question tests your ability to apply the "Federal Test" to specific provisions. To arrive at the correct answer, you must identify which of these points affect the federal character of the Constitution. Under Article 368(2), any amendment that alters the distribution of power or the institutional balance between the Union and the States requires a Special Majority of Parliament plus ratification by at least half of the State Legislatures. This mechanism acts as a safeguard, ensuring the Union cannot unilaterally diminish the constitutional status of the States.

Walking through the reasoning, think about the impact of each provision. The manner of election of the President (Point 1) involves the State MLAs, so any change directly affects the States' voice in the executive head's selection. The extent of executive power (Point 2) and the Lists in the 7th Schedule (Point 4) are the very definitions of the Union-State relationship; changing them would redefine their respective jurisdictions. Furthermore, because the Supreme Court and High Courts (Point 3) serve as the ultimate arbiters of federal disputes, their jurisdiction is protected from unilateral central interference. Since all four points are fundamental to India's federalism as detailed in Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth, the correct answer is (A) 1, 2, 3 and 4.

The common trap UPSC sets in these questions is to include provisions that require only a Special Majority (like Fundamental Rights) or a Simple Majority (like the reorganization of state boundaries under Article 3). Students often mistakenly believe that only the 7th Schedule requires state consent, which is why options B, C, and D exist to lead you toward an incomplete selection. Always remember: if a provision is listed in the proviso to Article 368(2)—including the Representation of States in Parliament and the amendment procedure itself—it must be ratified by the states as explained in Introduction to the Constitution of India by D.D. Basu.