Practice free →
HomeLLMLawConstitutional Law › In I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2…

In I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that:

Alaws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 are open to challenge if they violate the basic structure or abridge Articles 14, 19 and 21
Ball laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 are immune from challenge on every ground (compare I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1)
Cthe Ninth Schedule as a constitutional device is unconstitutional in its entirety from inception (compare I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1)
Donly laws placed in the Ninth Schedule by the original Constitution itself are valid for protection (compare I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1)
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: A. laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 are open to challenge if they violate the basic structure or abridge Articles 14, 19 and 21
1. Coelho settled that any law placed in the Ninth Schedule AFTER 24 April 1973 (the date of Kesavananda Bharati) is subject to the basic structure doctrine. 2. Such laws can be tested against the 'golden triangle' (Articles 14, 19 and 21). 3. The Ninth Schedule itself remains valid, but its protection is not absolute. 4. Hence option B is correct. _Source: Constitution of India (Bare Act, updated to 105th Amendment Act 2021), Govt. of India Legislative Dept., I. R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu, (2007) 2 SCC 1_
Solve this in the app — LLM practice & 24k+ MCQs →
Related questions