Which of the following Constitution Amendments was the first Constitutional Amendment, which was rectified by the State Legislatures according to the requirements of the provision of the Article 368 (2) of the Constitution?
- (a)First Constitutional Amendment, 1951
- (b)Second Constitutional Amendment, 1952
- (c)Third Constitutional Amendment, 1954
- (d)Fourth Constitutional Amendment, 1954
Correct — C, the Third Constitutional Amendment Act, 1954. It re-enacted Entry 33 of the Concurrent List (List III, Seventh Schedule) to widen Union/State power over trade, production, supply and distribution of essential commodities such as foodstuffs, raw cotton, raw jute and cattle fodder. Because it altered an entry in a Seventh Schedule List — one of the categories entrenched under the proviso to Article 368(2) — it needed, and by record received, ratification from several State Legislatures, making it the first amendment actually carried through that route.
- (a)First Constitutional Amendment, 1951 — Mainly curbed free-speech grounds (Article 19) and inserted the Ninth Schedule for land-reform laws — it did not touch a Seventh Schedule List or another Article 368(2)-proviso category, so no State ratification was involved.
- (b)Second Constitutional Amendment, 1952 — Amended Article 81(1)(b) to remove the upper population-ceiling for parliamentary constituencies after the 1951 Census — a machinery change; it is not the amendment credited with being the first ratified by States under the Article 368(2) proviso.
- (d)Fourth Constitutional Amendment, 1954 — Came after the Third Amendment and dealt chiefly with property-compensation matters (Article 31) — it is not the amendment credited with being first through the State-ratification route.
The proviso to Article 368(2) carves out certain 'federal' provisions — e.g., the election of the President, the extent of executive power of the Union/States, Supreme Court/High Court provisions, the distribution of legislative powers, any List in the Seventh Schedule, and representation of States in Parliament — where a constitutional amendment needs a special majority in Parliament PLUS ratification by not less than one-half of the State Legislatures, because these provisions touch the federal structure itself.
Most ordinary amendments (like the First, which only reworked Fundamental Rights restrictions) need just a Parliamentary special majority. The trap is assuming state ratification applies to every amendment, or picking the numerically 'first' or 'earliest' amendment overall rather than the first one that actually triggered the ratification proviso.
- Article 368(2) proviso: ratification by not less than one-half of State Legislatures is needed for amendments touching listed federal provisions (e.g., any Seventh Schedule List, representation of States in Parliament, SC/HC provisions, Article 368 itself)
- The Third Amendment Act, 1954 re-enacted Entry 33 of the Concurrent List (List III) covering essential-commodity trade and production
- Ordinary amendments outside the proviso's listed categories need only a Parliamentary special majority, no State ratification
Only amendments touching an Article 368(2)-proviso category (e.g., a Seventh Schedule List) trigger State-Legislature ratification.
- Assuming every early amendment needed State ratification
- Confusing 'first amendment overall' (1951) with 'first amendment ratified under the proviso' (Third, 1954)
Usually names a specific amendment/Article and asks whether it needed State-Legislature ratification, or asks which category of provisions the proviso covers.
Which of the following are matters on which a constitutional amendment is possible only with the ratification of the legislatures of not less than one-half of the States? I. Election of the President II. Representation of States in Parliament III. Any of the Lists in the 7th Schedule IV. Abolition of the Legislative Council of a State Choose the correct answer from the codes given below:
- (a) I, II and III
- (b) I, II and IV
- (c) I, III and IV
- (d) II, III and IV
Answer(a) I, II and III — election of the President, representation of States in Parliament, and any Seventh Schedule List all fall under the Article 368(2) proviso; abolition of a State Legislative Council (Art. 169) does not.
Same concept — which categories of constitutional amendment require State-Legislature ratification under Article 368(2).
MPPSC_2024_PRE_PaperI_Q132024An amendment of the Constitution shall require to be ratified by the legislatures of not less than one-half of the states:
- (a) If such amendment seeks to make changes in Article 53.
- (b) If such amendment seeks to make changes in Article 239A.
- (c) If such amendment seeks to make changes in Article 243A.
- (d) If such amendment seeks to make changes in Article 279A.
Answer(d) If such amendment seeks to make changes in Article 279A.
Same Article 368(2) State-ratification proviso concept, asked directly by MPPSC three years later.
- practice — not a real PYQ
Under the proviso to Article 368(2), an amendment affecting which of the following requires ratification by not less than one-half of the State Legislatures?
- (a)Fundamental Rights under Article 19
- (b)Any List in the Seventh Schedule
- (c)The Preamble alone
- (d)Directive Principles of State Policy
Answer(b) Any List in the Seventh Schedule — one of the entrenched categories under the Article 368(2) proviso.
- practice — not a real PYQ
A constitutional amendment seeking to change Article 279A (GST Council) would require:
- (a)Only a simple majority in Parliament
- (b)Only a special majority in Parliament
- (c)A special majority in Parliament plus ratification by not less than one-half of the State Legislatures
- (d)No parliamentary process at all
Answer(c) A special majority plus ratification by not less than one-half of the State Legislatures.