Amendment Types Under Article 368 Explained

Amendment types describe the three distinct routes by which the Indian Constitution can be changed — a simple majority of Parliament, a special majority of Parliament, and a special majority combined with ratification by half the states. Article 368 lays down the core procedure and governs two of these three routes, while a number of other articles allow changes by ordinary legislative majority without invoking Article 368 at all. Knowing which provision needs which majority — and why — is essential to understanding how India balances a flexible constitution with protection for its federal and fundamental features.

Article 368: The Constituent Power

Article 368(1) gives Parliament constituent power to amend the Constitution "by way of addition, variation or repeal" of any provision, "notwithstanding anything" else in the Constitution, following the procedure the article itself lays down. Under Article 368(2), an amendment can be initiated only by introducing a Bill in either House of Parliament. Once the Bill clears each House by the required majority, it is presented to the President, who must give assent — after which the Constitution stands amended on the terms of the Bill. The 24th Amendment Act of 1971 made presidential assent obligatory. Article 368(2) also states that no authority other than Parliament, following this procedure, may amend the Constitution.

Three Ways to Amend the Constitution

Type	Majority required	Ratification by states	Covers
Simple majority	Majority of members present and voting (ordinary legislative process)	Not required	Provisions listed outside Article 368
Special majority	Majority of total membership + two-thirds of members present and voting, in each House	Not required	Most other provisions, including Fundamental Rights
Special majority + ratification	Same special majority, plus ratification	By not less than half the state legislatures	Provisions touching the federal structure

Amendment by Simple Majority

Certain provisions can be changed by an ordinary law of Parliament, passed by a simple majority of members present and voting in each House, exactly as regular legislation is passed. Such changes are not treated as amendments for the purposes of Article 368 at all. Matters in this category include admission/establishment of new states; alteration of areas, boundaries, or names of existing states; creation or abolition of legislative councils; the Second Schedule (emoluments and privileges of the President, Governors, Speakers, and judges); quorum, salaries, and rules of procedure in Parliament; parliamentary privileges; use of English in Parliament; the number of Supreme Court judges and its jurisdiction; the official language; citizenship; elections and delimitation; Union territories; and administration of Scheduled Areas and Tribal Areas under the Fifth and Sixth Schedules.

Amendment by Special Majority

The bulk of the Constitution's provisions require a special majority under Article 368(2) — a majority of the total membership of each House, and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members present and voting. "Total membership" is counted regardless of vacancies or absentees, so support from two-thirds of those present is not enough if it falls short of an absolute majority of the full House. This route covers Fundamental Rights and most other provisions not in the simple-majority or ratification lists.

Amendment by Special Majority with State Ratification

A proviso to Article 368(2) adds a further safeguard for provisions touching India's federal structure: after passing both Houses by special majority, the amendment Bill must also be ratified by not less than half the state legislatures, by simple majority, before presentation to the President. This category covers the manner of electing the President; the executive power of the Union and states; the Supreme Court and High Courts; distribution of legislative powers under the Seventh Schedule Lists; representation of states in Parliament; and Article 368 itself. No time limit is prescribed for states to ratify. This threshold is more flexible than comparable federations — the United States Constitution, for instance, requires three-fourths of states.

Procedure for Passing an Amendment Bill

An amendment Bill can be introduced only in either House of Parliament, never in a state legislature, and by a minister or a private member without needing prior presidential permission.
The Bill must be passed by each House separately by the applicable majority; there is no provision for a joint sitting of both Houses if they disagree, unlike the procedure for ordinary bills.
If the Bill seeks to change a federal provision covered by the proviso to Article 368(2), it must additionally be ratified by not less than half the state legislatures before being presented to the President.
The President must give assent to a duly passed Bill, after which the Constitution stands amended in the terms of the Act.

Basic Structure Doctrine: A Limit on Amending Power

Even though Article 368 grants wide constituent power, the Supreme Court has held that this power is not unlimited. In Kesavananda Bharati (1973), a full bench of 13 judges held that certain basic features of the Constitution — including sovereignty and territorial integrity, the federal system, judicial review, and parliamentary government — cannot be amended away, even through Article 368. Parliament reacted with the 42nd Amendment Act (1976), which inserted clauses (4) and (5) into Article 368 declaring no limitation on Parliament's constituent power and barring courts from questioning any amendment. In Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), the Supreme Court struck down these clauses, holding that a limited amending power, judicial review, and the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are themselves basic features.

The ratification requirement has also been tested in court. In Kihoto Hollohon v. Zachilhu (1993), the Supreme Court held that Paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule — which barred court jurisdiction over disqualification decisions under the anti-defection law — was invalid for want of ratification under the proviso to Article 368(2). Separately, the Court has held that amendments placing laws in the Ninth Schedule on or after 24 April 1973 (the date of the Kesavananda Bharati judgment) enjoy no blanket protection and must be tested against the Constitution's basic features.

UPSC Relevance

Prelims

The specific majority and ratification requirements attached to Article 368 are a recurring objective-type question area.
Know which category — simple majority, special majority, or special majority with ratification — a given constitutional provision falls under.
Landmark cases (Kesavananda Bharati, Minerva Mills, Kihoto Hollohon) and their core holdings are frequently tested.

Mains

Discuss the basic structure doctrine as a judicially evolved limit on Parliament's amending power (GS2).
Evaluate whether India's amendment procedure strikes an appropriate balance between rigidity and flexibility compared to federations such as the United States.
Analyse the significance of the ratification requirement in protecting India's federal structure.

FAQ

Q1. How many types of constitutional amendment procedures does India have? Three: amendment by simple majority (outside Article 368), amendment by special majority under Article 368, and amendment by special majority plus ratification by half the state legislatures.

Q2. What is a "special majority" under Article 368? A majority of the total membership of each House of Parliament, together with a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting.

Q3. Which amendments require ratification by states? Amendments touching federal provisions — such as the election of the President, executive powers of the Union and states, the Supreme Court and High Courts, distribution of legislative powers, representation of states in Parliament, and Article 368 itself — need ratification by not less than half the state legislatures.

Q4. Is there a time limit for states to ratify an amendment Bill? No. The Constitution prescribes no time limit within which state legislatures must complete ratification.

Q5. Can Parliament amend the "basic structure" of the Constitution? No. Since Kesavananda Bharati (1973), the Supreme Court has held that Parliament's amending power under Article 368 cannot be used to destroy the Constitution's basic structure, even though the text of Article 368 itself can be amended.

Quick Revision

Article 368 governs two of the three amendment routes; a third route lies entirely outside Article 368.
Simple majority: ordinary legislative process, no Article 368 procedure involved.
Special majority: total membership majority + two-thirds present and voting, in each House.
Special majority + ratification: for federal provisions, needs half the states' simple-majority approval, no time limit.
No joint sitting provision exists for constitutional amendment Bills.
24th Amendment (1971): made presidential assent to an amendment Bill obligatory.
Kesavananda Bharati (1973): originated the basic structure doctrine.
Minerva Mills (1980): struck down unlimited amending power inserted by the 42nd Amendment.
Kihoto Hollohon (1993): Tenth Schedule Paragraph 7 held invalid for want of ratification.

Sources

Further Reference

For deeper reading on this topic and the wider polity syllabus, these standard works are recommended:

M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity (McGraw Hill) — the standard UPSC handbook.
D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India (LexisNexis) — authoritative constitutional-law treatment.
The Constitution of India — Bare Act — the official text.

Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate, UPSC.wiki earns from qualifying purchases — at no extra cost to you.

Types of Constitutional Amendments (Simple, Special Majority, Ratification)

At a glance