Landmark constitutional amendments: 1st to 106th

One hundred and six constitutional amendments in seventy-five years: each one is a snapshot of the political moment that produced it, from land reforms in 1951 to women's reservation in 2023. This article covers the amendments UPSC asks about most, what each changed, and the story behind it.

The first battles: the 1st and 24th Amendments

Within a year of the Constitution's commencement, zamindari abolition laws were being struck down for violating the right to property. Nehru's government responded with the 1st Amendment (1951), which added reasonable restrictions to free speech in Article 19(1)(a), inserted Articles 31A and 31B protecting land-reform laws, and created the Ninth Schedule for laws immune from judicial review. Upheld in Shankari Prasad (1951), it set the template for two decades: Parliament amending to overcome judgments, courts pushing back.

The same year brought the 25th Amendment (1971), which inserted Article 31C to protect laws implementing the Directive Principles in Articles 39(b) and 39(c), on the distribution of material resources and the prevention of wealth concentration, from challenges under Articles 14, 19 and 31. It was the first statutory attempt to give Directive Principles primacy over Fundamental Rights, later widened by the 42nd Amendment and then trimmed back in Minerva Mills (1980) to laws genuinely implementing Articles 39(b) and 39(c).

The 24th Amendment (1971) was Indira Gandhi's answer to Golaknath (1967), which had made Fundamental Rights unamendable. It declared Parliament could amend any part of the Constitution including Fundamental Rights, and made presidential assent to amendment bills obligatory. It directly triggered Kesavananda Bharati (1973), where the Court upheld the 24th Amendment but added the basic structure limitation constraining every amendment since.

The Emergency pair: the 42nd and the 44th

Passed during the Emergency with the opposition in jail and the press censored, the 42nd Amendment (1976) is the most sweeping single amendment in Indian history. It added Socialist, Secular and Integrity to the Preamble, inserted ten Fundamental Duties as Part IVA, gave Directive Principles primacy over Fundamental Rights through Article 31C, made the President bound by ministerial advice under Article 74, extended the Lok Sabha's term to six years, and through clauses (4) and (5) of Article 368 declared Parliament's amending power unlimited. Minerva Mills (1980) struck down those last clauses, but the Preamble words and the Duties survived. The 42nd Amendment also froze the allocation of Lok Sabha seats and the delimitation of constituencies on the basis of the 1971 census, a freeze meant to run to 2001 and later extended, which is why the delimitation question still looms over southern states.

Between the two came the 39th Amendment (1975), passed weeks after the Allahabad High Court had set aside Indira Gandhi's election: it placed the election disputes of the President, Vice-President, Prime Minister and the Lok Sabha Speaker beyond the jurisdiction of courts. In Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) the Court struck down that clause, holding free and fair elections to be part of the basic structure, while upholding the rest of the amendment.

The Janata government's 44th Amendment (1978) undid the Emergency's excesses: it restored the five-year Lok Sabha term, replaced internal disturbance with armed rebellion as the Article 352 ground, and removed the right to property from Fundamental Rights, converting it into a legal right under Article 300A. It also insulated Articles 20 and 21 from suspension under Article 359, answering the ADM Jabalpur judgment (1976). The 44th both deleted a fundamental right and strengthened the rest.

Deepening democracy: the 52nd, 61st, 73rd, 74th and 86th

The 52nd Amendment (1985) added the Tenth Schedule to stop floor-crossing, disqualifying MPs and MLAs who leave their party or defy its whip, with the Presiding Officer deciding subject to judicial review after Kihoto Hollohan (1992). The 61st Amendment (1988) lowered the voting age from 21 to 18 under Article 326, adding millions of first-time voters. The twin 73rd and 74th Amendments (1992) gave constitutional status to local self-government: Part IX and the Eleventh Schedule for three-tier Panchayats, Part IXA and the Twelfth Schedule for municipalities, with direct elections, SC/ST and women's reservations, and Finance Commissions. Together they created the third tier of federalism and over three million elected representatives. The 86th Amendment (2002) inserted Article 21A making education for ages 6 to 14 a Fundamental Right, added the parental duty in Article 51A(k), and reworked Article 45, later operationalised by the RTE Act, 2009.

Institutional engineering: the 91st, 97th and the 99th that died

The 91st Amendment (2003) capped the Council of Ministers at 15 percent of the House strength, ending jumbo ministries, and tightened the anti-defection law by deleting the split exemption so only a two-thirds merger escapes disqualification. The 97th Amendment (2011) gave constitutional status to cooperatives through Part IXB, Article 43B and an expanded Article 19(1)(c), though its multi-state provisions were read down in 2021 on federalism grounds. The 99th Amendment (2014) sought to replace the collegium with the NJAC, but the Supreme Court struck it down 4:1 in 2015, holding judicial primacy in appointments is basic structure; it is the only amendment here wholly invalidated.

The economy and social justice: the 101st and 103rd

The 101st Amendment (2016) introduced the Goods and Services Tax by inserting Article 246A and reworking the Seventh Schedule's tax entries, with ratification by half the states, a textbook third-type amendment and a GS-II 15-mark question on accommodative federalism. The 103rd Amendment (2019) inserted Articles 15(6) and 16(6), giving up to 10 percent reservation to Economically Weaker Sections, the first quota based purely on economic criteria, breaching the Indra Sawhney 50 percent ceiling. In Janhit Abhiyan (2022), the Court upheld it 3:2, holding the ceiling was not basic structure.

The recent trio: the 104th, 105th and 106th

The 104th Amendment (2020) extended reservation of seats for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies by another ten years, taking the provision to 2030. At the same time, it ended the nomination of two Anglo-Indian members, a provision that dated to 1950 and had lapsed as the community's numbers shrank. The decennial extension has become almost a ritual since the Constitution's commencement, renewed each decade, but this time the Anglo-Indian clause was quietly retired.

The 105th Amendment (2021) restored to states and Union Territories the power to prepare and maintain their own lists of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes for state purposes, by amending Articles 338B, 342A and 366. It was a direct response to the Supreme Court's May 2021 Maratha reservation ruling (Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil), which had read the 102nd Amendment as stripping states of that power. The amendment is a notable federalism correction, and politically significant for OBC welfare politics in the states, where backward-class lists shape welfare schemes and reservations.

The 106th Amendment (2023), titled the Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam, reserves one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha, state legislative assemblies and the Delhi assembly for women, with one-third of the SC and ST reserved seats also earmarked for women; the reserved seats will rotate among constituencies. It is the first successful constitutional women's-reservation amendment after decades of failed bills. Crucially, it takes effect only after the next census-cum-delimitation exercise, making the delayed start its most exam-relevant feature.

The 102nd Amendment (2018): the NCBC's constitutional moment

The 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) is the amendment that gave the National Commission for Backward Classes constitutional status through new Article 338B, with Article 342A reserving the Central OBC list to the President. It deserves its own entry, not a subordinate clause: the Commission went from a statutory body to a constitutional one, and the 105th Amendment (2021) then restored the states' power to identify their own OBCs after the Supreme Court's Maratha-quota ruling struck the balance the other way.

How to remember the landmark amendments

• 1951, 1st: Ninth Schedule and land reforms; 1971, 24th: Parliament can amend FRs, assent compulsory; 1971, 25th: Article 31C shields laws implementing Articles 39(b) and 39(c) from Articles 14, 19 and 31.
• 1975, 39th: election disputes of the PM and Speaker kept out of courts; the clause was struck down in Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) as violating the basic structure.
• 1976, 42nd: also froze Lok Sabha seat allocation and constituency boundaries on the 1971 census basis.
• 1976, 42nd: mini-constitution, Preamble words, Fundamental Duties; 1978, 44th: Emergency reversal, property out of FRs.
• 1985, 52nd: anti-defection Tenth Schedule; 1988, 61st: voting age 21 to 18.
• 1992, 73rd and 74th: Panchayats and municipalities; 2002, 86th: Article 21A right to education.
• 2003, 91st: 15 percent cap on ministries, defection tightened; 2011, 97th: cooperatives, Part IXB.
• 2014, 99th: NJAC, struck down 2015; 2016, 101st: GST.
• 2019, 103rd: EWS 10 percent; 2020, 104th: SC/ST seats to 2030; 2021, 105th: states identify OBCs; 2023, 106th: women's reservation one-third.

Key Terms

• The 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) is: The 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) is the amendment that gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes, inserting Article 338B for the NCBC and Article 342A empowering the President to notify the Central list of Socially and Educationally Backward Classes. It made parliamentary law necessary to alter the Central OBC list, a centralisation partly rolled back by the 105th Amendment. For UPSC, it is a core GS-2 polity amendment on backward-class governance and federalism. The National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC)
• Socially and Educationally Backward Classes: Socially and Educationally Backward Classes (SEBCs) are communities identified under Articles 15(4), 15(5), 16(4) and 340 of the Constitution as disadvantaged by social status and educational access, broadly overlapping with the Other Backward Classes. Identification rests on caste-based surveys and commissions, with the Supreme Court capping reservations at 50 percent. UPSC relevance: core to GS-2 debates on affirmative action, creamy layer and caste census. Indra Sawhney v. Union of India, 1992
• National Commission for Backward Classes: The National Commission for Backward Classes is the body that advises the government on the inclusion and exclusion of castes in the Central list of Other Backward Classes. Created as a statutory body in 1993, it was given constitutional status by the 102nd Amendment of 2018 as Article 338B, with a chairperson, vice-chairperson and three members. It matters for UPSC as a recurring topic on reservations, the creamy layer, and the debates over states' power to identify backward classes.
• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes: Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes are communities notified by the President under Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution respectively, recognized as historically disadvantaged. They are entitled to reservation in legislatures, public employment and education, and protection under laws like the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. They are central to UPSC polity questions on affirmative action and social justice. the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
• Articles 338B, 342A and 366: Articles 338B, 342A and 366 are the backward-classes constitutional architecture: Article 338B (inserted by the 102nd Amendment, 2018) constitutes the National Commission for Backward Classes; Article 342A empowers the President to specify socially and educationally backward classes; Article 366 carries key definitions used across the Constitution. For UPSC, they govern OBC reservation and the Centre-State division of power over backward-class lists. The 102nd Constitutional Amendment (2018) gave constitutional status to the National Commission for Backward Classes through Article 338B.
• the Goods and Services Tax: The Goods and Services Tax is India's comprehensive destination-based indirect tax, subsuming excise duty, service tax, VAT, and other levies into one system. Introduced by the 101st Constitutional Amendment in 2016 through Articles 246A, 269A, and 279A, it applies CGST plus SGST on intra-state supply and IGST on inter-state supply, with rates set by the GST Council. Example: the GST Council's decisions on tax slabs illustrate cooperative federalism in action. The GST Council's periodic decisions fixing tax slabs and rates for goods and services across states.
• National Judicial Appointments Commission: The National Judicial Appointments Commission was the six-member body created by the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act and the NJAC Act, both of 2014, to replace the collegium system for appointing Supreme Court and High Court judges. It comprised the Chief Justice of India, two senior Supreme Court judges, the Union Law Minister and two eminent persons. In October 2015 the Supreme Court struck it down in the Fourth Judges case for violating judicial independence, restoring the collegium. The 4:1 majority verdict in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (2015).
• Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam: The Nari Shakti Vandan Adhiniyam is the Constitution (106th Amendment) Act, 2023, which reserves one-third of seats in the Lok Sabha and state legislative assemblies for women, including within the SC and ST quotas, for a period of 15 years. It will take effect only after the next delimitation exercise following the census. It matters for UPSC as the latest major step in women's political representation, following the 73rd and 74th Amendment reservations in local bodies.
• doctrine of basic structure: The doctrine of basic structure is the Supreme Court’s holding that Parliament’s amending power under Article 368 cannot be used to destroy the Constitution’s essential features. Propounded in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) and refined in Minerva Mills (1980), it reconciles parliamentary sovereignty with constitutional supremacy. It is arguably the most important doctrine in Indian constitutional law and a perennial UPSC mains theme. Minerva Mills (1980) used the doctrine to strike down the 42nd Amendment’s attempt to give directive principles primacy over fundamental rights.
• 73rd and 74th Amendments: The twin 1992 constitutional amendments that gave local government constitutional status. The 73rd added Part IX and the Eleventh Schedule for Panchayati Raj institutions (Articles 243 to 243O); the 74th added Part IXA and the Twelfth Schedule for urban local bodies (Articles 243P to 243ZG). For UPSC, they are the foundation of democratic decentralisation, reservations for SCs, STs and women, and the State Finance Commission. Mandatory panchayat elections every five years with one-third of seats reserved for women under Article 243D.
• Articles 31A and 31B: Articles 31A and 31B are the provisions saving certain laws from fundamental-rights challenge: Article 31A protects laws providing for the acquisition of estates and agrarian reform, while Article 31B validates the Acts and Regulations placed in the Ninth Schedule. For UPSC, they frame the history of land-reform legislation and the basic-structure doctrine's reach into the Ninth Schedule. In I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007), the Supreme Court held Ninth Schedule laws open to basic-structure review.
• Articles 20 and 21: Articles 20 and 21 are the criminal-justice and liberty core of the fundamental rights: Article 20 protects against ex post facto laws, double jeopardy and self-incrimination, while Article 21 guarantees that no person shall be deprived of life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. For UPSC, Article 21's judicial expansion into dignity, privacy, environment and livelihood is essential. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Supreme Court read fair procedure into Article 21, transforming its interpretation.

Practice questions

Landmark amendments at a glance

The article above walks through the landmark amendments in narrative; this table is the revision grid. Amendment, year, and the one-line change to memorise: