The correct answer is option 'B', Golaknath case.

Golaknath case:
In the Golaknath case (1967), the Supreme Court of India dealt with the issue of the relationship between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy. The case challenged the constitutional validity of the 17th amendment which introduced certain land reform laws. The court, in this case, held that the Parliament does not have the power to amend the Fundamental Rights as they are outside the amending power of the Parliament. The court based its decision on the interpretation of Article 368 of the Constitution, which deals with the power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution. The court held that the power to amend does not include the power to abrogate or take away the Fundamental Rights as they are an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution.

Significance of the Golaknath case:
The Golaknath case was significant as it established the principle that the Fundamental Rights are above the Directive Principles of State Policy. It restored the primacy of the Fundamental Rights and limited the amending power of the Parliament. This decision was a major setback for the government as it restricted its ability to bring about social and economic reforms through legislation. It also highlighted the importance of fundamental rights as the cornerstone of the Indian Constitution.

Impact of the Golaknath case:
The Golaknath case had far-reaching consequences. It led to a political and legal debate on the balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy. It also gave rise to concerns about the rigidity of the Constitution and the limited scope for social and economic reforms. In response to the decision, the Parliament passed the 24th amendment in 1971, which amended Article 13 and Article 368 to make it clear that the Parliament has the power to amend any part of the Constitution, including the Fundamental Rights. This amendment effectively overruled the Golaknath case and restored the amending power of the Parliament.

In conclusion, the Golaknath case is the correct answer as it is the case where the Supreme Court restored the primacy of the Fundamental Rights over the Directive Principles of State Policy. It limited the amending power of the Parliament and emphasized the importance of the Fundamental Rights as an integral part of the basic structure of the Constitution.