POLITICS OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT UNDER ARTICLE 368

The framers of the Indian constitution were keen to avoid excessive rigidity from the constitution, that this constitution should evolve with time and the rigidity of the federal government for amending any provision that is the basic feature of the federal nation should not stop the functioning of a growing nation that it led to a barrier for our growing nation that is why they made this sacred Constitution a Dynamic in nature. And for this reason, they added a separate part in the constitution for amending the constitution itself in Article 368 and Part XX. The true nature for this amending provision is for the purpose that the needed portion can be amended easily and the provisions that need more interest of the nation will be amended by rigid process i.e. by the Special Majority plus ratification by half of the state. But the framers were not aware that time that the political expert will find a way from it also. They were not aware of the present political environment. This research paper tells about the necessity of Article 368, the politics did by political parties in even fundamental rights, tried to establish autocracy in the country, and even also threaten judiciary indirectly by amending articles or by encroaching in their system by appointing judges. The research paper talks about the four phases of judicial development that is Shankari Prasad Case (1951) to Golaknath Case (1967), Golaknath Case (1967) to Kehvananda Bharti Case (1973). Keshavananda Bharti Case to Election Case (1975), and Election Case to Minerva Mills Case (1980). This paper tries to highlight the politics done by the government in power from the time of Independence to the Present. And have suggested some of the ways by which amendment can be saved.