Waman Rao & Others v. Union of India & Others
Bench: Constitution Bench — 5 Judges (Y.V. Chandrachud CJ, A.C. Gupta, N.L. Untwalia, P.N. Bhagwati & V.D. Tulzapurkar JJ)
Parties
Facts of the Case
Following Kesavananda Bharati (1973), the question arose about the status of laws already placed in the Ninth Schedule at the time of Kesavananda (April 24, 1973) versus laws added to the Ninth Schedule after that date. Article 31B provides that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule cannot be challenged as violating Fundamental Rights. But Kesavananda had said that even constitutional amendments can be challenged if they violate the Basic Structure. The question was whether the Ninth Schedule shield was still operative — and if so, for which laws.
Legal Issues Before the Court
- 1What is the status of laws placed in the Ninth Schedule before April 24, 1973 (the date of Kesavananda)?
- 2Are laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973 subject to judicial review under the Basic Structure doctrine?
The Judgment
The Constitution Bench held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule up to and including April 24, 1973 (the date of Kesavananda Bharati) were immunised from challenge under Article 31B and could not be questioned. However, for laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973, the position was left open — the court suggested such laws were potentially subject to judicial review under the Basic Structure. This position was subsequently definitively settled in I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007).
Key Principles Laid Down
PRE-KESAVANANDA NINTH SCHEDULE LAWS — IMMUNISED: Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule up to April 24, 1973 (the date of Kesavananda Bharati) enjoy full protection under Article 31B and are not subject to challenge under Fundamental Rights.
POST-KESAVANANDA NINTH SCHEDULE LAWS — OPEN QUESTION (LATER SETTLED BY I.R. COELHO): Laws added to the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973 were left open by Waman Rao — the question of their reviewability was definitively settled by I.R. Coelho (2007) which held that post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws are subject to judicial review if they violate the Basic Structure (including Fundamental Rights essential to it).
ARTICLE 31B — PROTECTIVE SHIELD — LIMITED POST-KESAVANANDA: Article 31B's shield for Ninth Schedule laws is not absolute after Kesavananda. While pre-1973 laws are fully protected, post-1973 additions must pass the Basic Structure test.
Impact on Indian Law
Waman Rao (1981) is the transitional ruling between Kesavananda (1973) and I.R. Coelho (2007) on the Ninth Schedule. It established the April 24, 1973 date as the dividing line for Ninth Schedule immunity and triggered two decades of uncertainty about post-1973 Ninth Schedule laws that was ultimately resolved by I.R. Coelho.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are all laws in the Ninth Schedule protected from challenge?
Not anymore. Waman Rao (1981) held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule up to April 24, 1973 (date of Kesavananda) are fully immunised under Article 31B. For laws added after that date, I.R. Coelho (2007) — building on Waman Rao — held that they can be challenged if they violate the Basic Structure, including if they abrogate or abridge Fundamental Rights essential to the Basic Structure.