NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court's nine-judge bench led by CJI D Y Chandrachud on Tuesday unanimously ruled that Article 31C of the Constitution , which presumed legality of legislation giving effect to Directive Principles of State Policy , and which was partly validated by the SC's 13-judge bench in Kesavananda Bharati case, continues to hold good. The bench said the SC's 1980 Minerva Mills judgment , which struck down Section 4 of the Emergency-era 42nd amendment changing the contours of Article 31C, would not altogether obliterate the provision, although the constitutionality of specific laws enacted to give effect to it could be subjected to judicial scrutiny. The original text of Article 31C, which was inserted in the Constitution in 1971 through the 25th constitutional amendment, said no law giving effect to Directive Principles of State Policy, as specified in clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39, "shall be deemed to be void on the ground that it breached Articles 14 (equality) and 19 (free speech)".
Kesavananda Bharati judgment upheld this part of Art 31C. However, it had struck down the second part of Article 31C, which said no law containing a declaration that it is for giving effect to such policy shall be called in question in any court on the ground that it does not give effect to such policy. Through the 42nd amendment, Parliament had amended Article 31C to expand its scope much beyond clauses (b) and (c) of Article 39 and in its place incorporated "all or any princip.