In which disputed case did the Supreme Court bench state that, "Judicial review is a basic feature of the Constitution and including an act, or part of it, in the Ninth Schedule which has been held unconstitutional by exercising the power of judicial review, is to destroy or damage the basic structure of the Constitution."

Correct option is A

The correct answer is (a) I.R. Coelho vs. State of Tamil Nadu
Explanation:
• This famous judgment, delivered by a 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court in 2007, is popularly known as the Ninth Schedule Case.
• The Court held that any law placed in the Ninth Schedule after April 24, 1973 (the date of the Kesavananda Bharati verdict) is open to judicial review.
• The bench stated that if a law violates the Basic Structure of the Constitution, it cannot be protected solely by being placed in the Ninth Schedule.
Information Booster:
• The Ninth Schedule was added to the Constitution by the First Amendment Act, 1951 to protect land reform laws from being challenged in court.
• Article 31B was introduced to give blanket protection to acts listed in this schedule.
• The I.R. Coelho judgment established that Judicial Review itself is a basic feature of the Constitution and cannot be taken away.
Additional Knowledge:
(b) Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala
• This historic 1973 case established the Basic Structure Doctrine, holding that Parliament cannot alter the fundamental features of the Constitution.
(c) Maneka Gandhi vs. Government of India
• This 1978 case expanded the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty), introducing the concept of "due process of law" alongside "procedure established by law."
(d) Common Cause vs. Government of India
• This organization is associated with several PILs regarding governance and environmental issues, such as the famous "Living Will" (Passive Euthanasia) judgment (2018).