The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) is historically significant for establishing:

The correct option is The "Basic Structure" doctrine that limits Parliament's amendment power..

Explanation

The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case is the most significant constitutional case in Indian history. It addressed the scope of Parliament's power to amend the Constitution under Article 368 and the validity of the 24th, 25th, and 29th Constitutional Amendments.

Option Analysis:

• The "Basic Structure" doctrine that limits Parliament's amendment power. is Correct: The Supreme Court, in a historic 7:6 majority decision, overruled the Golaknath (1967) judgment and held that Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, including Fundamental Rights. However, it laid down the "Basic Structure" doctrine, stating that Parliament cannot alter or destroy the essential features or the basic structure of the Constitution (e.g., judicial review, secularism, democracy).
• The supremacy of Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights. is Incorrect: While the court upheld the first part of the 25th Amendment (which gave precedence to Directive Principles under Articles 39The supremacy of Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights. and 39The absolute power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. over Fundamental Rights under Articles 14, 19, and 31), it did not establish a general supremacy of Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights. The doctrine of "harmonious construction" remains the guiding principle.
• The absolute power of Parliament to amend the Constitution. is Incorrect: The judgment explicitly rejected the government's claim of absolute or unlimited power to amend the Constitution. The court established that the power to amend is not the power to destroy; it is limited by the inviolability of the Basic Structure.
• The abolition of the right to property as a fundamental right. is Incorrect: The Right to Property was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights (Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31) by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978, not by the Kesavananda Bharati judgment. The judgment merely affirmed Parliament's competence to amend such rights.

Key Takeaway: The Kesavananda Bharati case established that while Parliament's constituent power to amend the Constitution is wide, it is not unlimited; it is subject to the inherent limitation of the Basic Structure Doctrine.