Q9.Indian Constitution has conferred the amending power on the ordinary legislative institutions with a few procedural hurdles. In view of this statement, examine the procedural and substantive limitations on the amending power of the Parliament to change the Constitution.

The Indian Constitution, a living document, grants Parliament amending power. However, this power is not absolute, being subject to both procedural and substantive limitations to safeguard its foundational principles and democratic ethos.

Article 368 outlines specific amendment procedures, acting as significant hurdles ensuring deliberation and broad consensus.

• Special Majority: Most provisions require a special majority in both Houses (majority of total membership and 2/3rd of members present and voting).
• Special Majority + State Ratification: Amendments affecting federal structure, like legislative powers or state representation, additionally require ratification by at least half of the state legislatures.

These safeguards prevent hasty or arbitrary changes, ensuring fundamental alterations reflect wider national consensus and respect federal principles.

The most significant substantive limitation is the 'Basic Structure Doctrine', propounded by the Supreme Court in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This doctrine holds that Parliament cannot amend the 'basic structure' or 'essential features' of the Constitution, even with the prescribed majority.

• Supremacy of the Constitution
• Sovereign, democratic, republican nature
• Secular and federal character
• Separation of powers, Judicial review
• Parliamentary system, Rule of law

This doctrine ensures the core identity and values remain inviolable, preventing abrogation under the guise of amendment.

These procedural and substantive limitations collectively strike a crucial balance. They allow the Constitution to adapt to changing times while preserving its fundamental identity, democratic values, and the spirit of its framers, ensuring constitutional integrity.