What was the main question before the Court?

Whether the First Amendment inserting Articles 31A and 31B was valid under Article 368 and not barred by Article 13.

How did the Court read Article 368?

As a complete power to amend the Constitution, including fundamental rights, unless the Constitution itself limits that power.

What happened to Zamindari Abolition laws?

They were protected. Article 31A saved certain acquisition laws, and Article 31B validated listed Acts in the Ninth Schedule.

Did the decision remove High Court or Supreme Court powers?

No. The ruling noted that writ powers and appellate jurisdiction continued to operate.

Why is the case important today?

It was the first big ruling on Parliament’s amending power and paved the path for later debates like Golak Nath and Kesavananda.

Law Easy

01 November, 2025

1301

Shankari Prasad v. Union of India: Article 368 & First Amendment | Easy English Case Note

Shankari Prasad v. Union of India

AIR 1951 SC 458

Supreme Court of India 1951 Constitution Bench Citation: AIR 1951 SC 458 Area: Constitutional Law Reading time: ~6 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi Location: India Published: 24 Oct 2025

Quick Summary

This was the first big case on Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution. The Court read Article 368 broadly. It said Parliament could amend even fundamental rights, unless the Constitution itself said “no.” Articles 31A and 31B, added by the First Amendment, were upheld. Land reform laws were therefore protected.

Court: Supreme Court of India (1951)
Main provisions: Article 368, Articles 31A & 31B, Article 13
Outcome: First Amendment valid; petitions failed

```

Issues

Was the Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951 valid under Article 368?
Could Articles 31A and 31B stand against Article 13?

Rules

Article 368: Grants Parliament power to amend the Constitution.
Article 13: Laws inconsistent with fundamental rights are void; question—does it limit amendments?

In this case, the Court treated “amendment” as a special constitutional power, not an ordinary “law” under Article 13.

Facts (Timeline)

Timeline of facts in Shankari Prasad case

Zamindari Abolition laws were made to acquire big estates and redistribute land to tenants.

These laws faced mixed High Court rulings—struck down by Patna HC, upheld by Allahabad and Nagpur HCs.

Union Government passed the First Amendment (1951), adding Articles 31A and 31B to protect such reforms.

Zamindars challenged the Amendment before the Supreme Court, calling it unconstitutional.

Arguments

Petitioners

First Amendment violates fundamental rights; barred by Article 13.
Parliament cannot cut down Part III rights through Article 368.

Union of India

Article 368 is a special power to amend; not a “law” under Article 13.
Articles 31A & 31B validly protect land reform and listed Acts.

Judgment

Holding on Article 368

Parliament can amend the Constitution under Article 368. This includes changes that touch Part III rights.

Effect on Reforms

Articles 31A and 31B were upheld. Land reform laws stayed protected. Writ and appeal powers of courts continued.

Ratio

	Principle	Easy Meaning
1	Article 368 is a complete amending power	Parliament may amend any part unless the Constitution stops it.
2	Amendment ≠ ordinary “law” under Article 13	Article 13 does not strike down an amendment passed under Article 368.
3	Articles 31A & 31B valid	31A saves certain acquisition laws; 31B validates listed Acts.

Land is a State subject, but changing the Constitution is Parliament’s job.

Why It Matters

This ruling set the tone for constitutional amendments in India. It confirmed that social reform via amendment is possible, while courts keep their role to check how laws are applied.

Key Takeaways

First Amendment upheld; Articles 31A & 31B stand.
Article 368 allows amendments even affecting Part III.
Courts’ writ and appellate powers continue.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: A-M-E-N-D → Article 368, Modifies Part III, Excludes Art. 13, Ninth Schedule, Development reforms.

Power: Look for Article 368 authority.
Protection: Check 31A/31B shields.
Procedure: Was the amendment passed properly?

IRAC Outline

Issue

Is the First Amendment, including Articles 31A and 31B, valid under Article 368 despite Article 13?

Rule

Article 368 confers amending power; an amendment is not an ordinary “law” under Article 13.

Application

31A protects certain acquisition laws; 31B validates scheduled Acts. Both flow through a proper amendment.

Conclusion

Amendment stands. Land reforms survive. Petitions fail.

Glossary

Constitutional Amendment: A formal change to the Constitution using Article 368 process.
Ninth Schedule: List that shields certain laws from rights challenges via Article 31B.
Acquisition Laws: Laws for compulsory taking of property with safeguards, protected by Article 31A.

FAQs (Student-Friendly)

No. The Court said an amendment under Article 368 is not an ordinary “law” under Article 13.

31A saved certain acquisition laws; 31B validated listed Acts in the Ninth Schedule.

No. High Courts’ writ power and the Supreme Court’s appellate power continued.

It set the early view that Parliament can amend Part III, shaping later constitutional debates.

```

Comment

Nothing for now