Protective umbrella to legislations that aim to implement social and land reform measures. It grants immunity to these legislations from judicial review, preventing them from being declared unconstitutional on the grounds of violating fundamental rights.

The purpose of adding the 9th Schedule was to safeguard land reform laws, which were seen as essential for promoting social justice and reducing inequalities in post-independence India. These laws often required acquisition of land from large landowners for redistribution among landless farmers or for other public welfare purposes.

However, there were concerns that such land reform laws might be struck down by the courts on the grounds of violating property rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 of the Constitution. To address this issue, the 9th Schedule was introduced to shield these laws from judicial scrutiny.

Over the years, several legislations have been added to the 9th Schedule, covering a wide range of subjects including land reforms, reservation policies, educational quotas, and other welfare measures. The objective is to protect these laws from legal challenges and allow the government to implement them without interference from the judiciary.

However, the use of the 9th Schedule has been a subject of controversy. Critics argue that it has been misused to shield laws that are arbitrary, discriminatory, or violative of fundamental rights. They argue that it undermines the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution, which prohibits amendments that violate the core principles and values of the Constitution.

In recent years, the Supreme Court of India has taken a more critical stance towards the use of the 9th Schedule. It has held that laws included in the 9th Schedule are not immune from judicial review if they violate the basic structure of the Constitution. This has led to a more nuanced approach, where the court examines the constitutional validity of laws in the 9th Schedule on a case-by-case basis.

Overall, the 9th Schedule and Article 31-B were introduced to protect social and land reform laws from being struck down by the courts. While it has provided a level of protection to these laws, its use and scope continue to be debated and scrutinized.