While deciding the Golaknath case in February 1967, Supreme Court ruled that the Parliament has no power to curtail the fundamental rights. They were made permanent and sacrosanct reversing the Supreme Court's earlier decision which had upheld Parliament's power to amend all parts of the Constitution, including Part III related to Fundamental Rights. Up till the 24th constitutional amendment in 1971, the fundamental rights given to the people were permanent and can not be repealed or diluted by the Parliament. 24th constitutional amendment introduced a new Article 13(4) enabling Parliament to legislate on the subjects of Part III of the constitution using its constituent powers per Article 368 (1). In the year 1973, the 13 member constitutional bench of supreme court also upheld with majority the validity of 24th constitutional amendment. However it ruled that Basic structure of the constitution which is built on the basic foundation representing the dignity and freedom of the individual, can not be altered. This is of supreme importance and cannot be destroyed by any form of amendment to the constitution. Many constitutional amendments to Part III of the constitution were made deleting or adding or diluting the fundamental rights before the judgement of Golaknath case (Constitutional amendments 1,4,7 and 16) and after the validity of 24th constitutional amendment is upheld by the Supreme Court (Constitutional amendments 25,42,44,50,77,81,85,86,93 and 97).

See options at the end. Can we conclude that can fundamental rights be amended under article 368?

Options are: (a). no (b). yes
(b).