BharatNotes What is the Golaknath Case?
I.C. Golaknath and Others v. State of Punjab (1967) is a landmark Supreme Court judgment in which the Court ruled, by a narrow 6:5 majority, that Parliament could not amend the Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III of the Indian Constitution. The judgment was delivered on 27 February 1967 by a bench headed by Chief Justice K. Subba Rao.
The case originated when the Golaknath family, which held over 500 acres of farmland in Jalandhar, Punjab, challenged the Punjab Security and Land Tenures Act, 1953, which declared their excess land as "surplus." They argued that the Act violated their Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 19(1)(f), and 19(1)(g).
The Supreme Court held that a constitutional amendment under Article 368 was an ordinary "law" within the meaning of Article 13(3), and therefore subject to the prohibition against laws that abridge Fundamental Rights. The Court introduced the doctrine of "prospective overruling" (borrowed from American jurisprudence): previous amendments would remain valid, but Parliament would have no future power to amend Part III. This judgment directly provoked Parliament to pass the 24th Amendment (1971), asserting its amending power, leading ultimately to the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).
Key Features
| # | Feature | Details |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Case Name | I.C. Golaknath and Others v. State of Punjab and Anrs. |
| 2 | Judgment Date | 27 February 1967 |
| 3 | Bench | 11 judges; headed by Chief Justice K. Subba Rao |
| 4 | Majority | 6:5 in favour of petitioners |
| 5 | Core Ruling | Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights (Part III) |
| 6 | Article 368 | Held to be merely a "procedure" for amendment, not a "power" |
| 7 | Article 13(3) | Constitutional amendments treated as "law" subject to Part III restrictions |
| 8 | Prospective Overruling | Past amendments valid; future amendments to Part III barred |
| 9 | Overruled | Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965) decisions |
| 10 | Consequence | Parliament passed 24th Amendment (1971); led to Kesavananda Bharati (1973) |
UPSC Exam Corner
Prelims: Key Facts
- Judgment date: 27 February 1967
- Bench size: 11 judges; Majority: 6:5
- Chief Justice: K. Subba Rao
- Key doctrine: Prospective overruling
- Overruled: Shankari Prasad (1951) and Sajjan Singh (1965)
- Led to: 24th Amendment (1971) and Kesavananda Bharati (1973)
Mains: Probable Themes
- Trace the evolution of the amending power debate from Shankari Prasad to Golaknath to Kesavananda Bharati
- "The Golaknath judgment was a necessary correction that ultimately led to the Basic Structure Doctrine." -- Discuss
- Analyse the doctrine of prospective overruling as applied in Indian constitutional law
- Examine the tension between Parliament's amending power and the judiciary's role in protecting Fundamental Rights
Sources: I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (Wikipedia) | Golaknath Case (IndianKanoon) | Golaknath Case (Vajiram & Ravi) | Golaknath Case (iPleaders)
