Constitutional Law: Fundamental Rights and Judicial Review
Constitutional Law tests the Constitution's structure and fundamental rights: Articles 12–13, 14, 19, 21, 32 and 226, the basic-structure doctrine, DPSPs and federal distribution. MP Civil Judge questions often ask whether state action is arbitrary, whether a statute is void, or which writ lies.
Core rules
- Article 12 defines “State” to include government, Parliament, legislatures and “other authorities”; courts apply the instrumentality test.
- Article 13 voids laws inconsistent with fundamental rights; constitutional amendments are not “law” under Article 13 (Kesavananda Bharati).
- Article 14 permits reasonable classification based on intelligible differentia with rational nexus; it also bars manifest arbitrariness.
- Article 19 freedoms carry reasonable restrictions; Article 21 protects life and personal liberty, now including privacy (Puttaswamy).
- Article 32 is a fundamental right to constitutional remedies; Article 226 is wider but discretionary.
Worked example
A state law reserves municipal contracts for local residents. A non-resident challenges it under Article 14. The court asks whether residents and non-residents form distinct classes, whether the classification has a rational nexus to the object of local employment, and whether the measure is proportionate. If the real purpose is to exclude outsiders from trade, the law also fails Article 19(1)(g). Reasoning: classification must be tested against the actual object, not the stated label.
Traps
- Article 32 lies only against state action violating fundamental rights; Article 226 covers other legal rights too.
- The basic-structure doctrine limits the amendment power, not ordinary legislation.
- DPSPs are not directly enforceable but inform interpretation.
- Emergency provisions can suspend Article 19, but Article 20 and Article 21 protections are not suspended in the same way.