G. Ninth Schedule & Judicial Review
Free study material · concepts, shortcuts & solved questions
| Case | Year | Bench | Holding |
|---|---|---|---|
| Waman Rao v. Union of India | 1981 | 5-judge | (see Section A) — Ninth Schedule laws added before 24 April 1973 are protected from Basic Structure review; those added after are not automatically so. |
| I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu | 2007 | 9-judge | Held post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws are open to Basic Structure review — in particular, against the "golden triangle" of Arts. 14, 19 and 21 — even though Art. 31B nominally immunises Ninth Schedule laws from ordinary Fundamental Rights challenge. |
Notes. The Ninth Schedule (Art. 31B) was created to shield land-reform laws from FR challenge; Coelho's importance is that it refused to let the Schedule become a backdoor around Kesavananda's Basic Structure limit — a law cannot escape basic-structure review merely by being inserted into the Ninth Schedule after 1973.
Mnemonic. "Waman built the Wall, Coelho found the Crack" — Waman Rao (1981) sets up the pre-/post-1973 wall of protection; Coelho (2007) finds the crack in it for anything added after 24 April 1973. Two cases, one gate, one date to remember: 24 April 1973.
Practice Recall. Before reading on: what is the cutoff date that separates a protected Ninth Schedule law from one open to Basic Structure review, and which two cases establish this rule?
Answer: 24 April 1973 (the date of the Kesavananda Bharati judgment). Waman Rao (1981) laid down the prospective cutoff; I.R. Coelho (2007, 9-judge) confirmed that post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws remain open to Basic Structure/golden-triangle review despite Art. 31B.