The process of addition, variation or repeal of any part of the constitution by the parliament under its constituent powers, is called amendment of the constitution. The procedure is laid out in Article 368. An amendment bill must be passed by each House of the Parliament by a majority of the total membership of that House when at least two-thirds members are present and voted. In addition to this, certain amendments which pertain to the federal nature of the Constitution must be ratified by a majority of state legislatures. Unlike the ordinary bills under legislative powers of Parliament as per Article 245 (with exception to money bills), there is no provision for joint sitting of the two houses (Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha) of the parliament to pass a constitutional amendment bill.
The Supreme Court has ruled in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case that an amendment cannot destroy what it seeks to modify, which means, while amending anything in the Constitution, it cannot tinker with the “basic structure” or its framework, which is immutable. Such an amendment will be declared invalid even though no part of the constitution is explicitly prevented from being amended, nor does the basic structure doctrine protect any single provision of the Constitution. Yet, this “doctrine of basic features” lays down that, the Constitution when “read as a whole”, that what comes to be understood as its basic features cannot be abridged, deleted or abrogated. What these “basic features” are, have not been defined exhaustively anywhere and whether a particular provision of the Constitution of India is a “basic feature” is decided as and when an issue is raised before a court in an instant case.
This implies that the Parliament, while amending the Constitution, can only amend it to the extent so as to not destroy any of the aforesaid characters. The Supreme Court/High Court(s) may declare the amendment null and void if this is violated, by performing Judicial review. This is typical of Parliamentary governments, where the Judiciary has to exercise an effective check on the exercise of the powers of the Parliament, which in many respects is supreme.
