आई.आर. कोएल्हो बनाम तमिलनाडु राज्य
| Citation | AIR 2007 SC 861, (2007) 2 SCC 1 |
| Court | Supreme Court of India (9-Judge Constitution Bench) |
| Date | 11 January 2007 |
| Year | 2007 |
| Bench | Y.K. Sabharwal CJ, Ashok Bhan, A. Pasayat, B.P. Singh, S.H. Kapadia, C.K. Thakker, P.K. Balasubramanyan, Altamas Kabir, D.K. Jain JJ. |
| Acts/Articles | Article 31B, Ninth Schedule, Article 14, 19, 21 |
| Category | Constitutional Law |
Key Principle Established
Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 are subject to judicial review if they violate the basic structure of the Constitution.
Laws placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution enjoyed blanket immunity from judicial review under Article 31B. The question was whether Parliament could continue to place any law in the Ninth Schedule to shield it from fundamental rights challenge, especially after the basic structure doctrine was established in Kesavananda Bharati (1973).
The 9-Judge Bench unanimously held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 (the date of Kesavananda Bharati judgment) are open to judicial review. If such laws violate fundamental rights that form part of the basic structure (particularly Articles 14, 19, and 21 and their interplay), they can be struck down despite Ninth Schedule protection.
This judgment closed the Ninth Schedule escape route that legislatures had been using to immunize laws from constitutional challenge. It reinforced that no constitutional amendment can destroy the basic structure, and that fundamental rights are integral to the basic structure.
(1982) 1 SCC 618
Equal pay for equal work is a constitutional goal derivable from Articles 14, 16, and 39(d) read together.
Read Analysis(2020) 9 SCC 1
Daughters have equal coparcenary rights by birth under the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 — irrespective of whether the father…
Read Analysis(1984) 1 SCC 131
An institution receiving government grants is "State" under Article 12. Employees of such bodies are entitled to Article 14 and…
Read AnalysisThis judgment summary is for educational and research purposes. While care has been taken to accurately represent the ratio and findings, for authoritative reference always consult the original judgment text from official sources (SCC Online, AIR, Manupatra, or court websites).
22+ years of practice before Punjab & Haryana High Court and Supreme Court of India.