How is the Constitution of India best described in terms of its flexibility and rigidity?

Introduction / Context:
Constitutions around the world are often classified as rigid or flexible based on how easy or difficult it is to amend them. The Constitution of India uses different procedures for different types of amendments, making its character more complex than a simple rigid or flexible label. Understanding this mixed nature is important in Indian polity, as it explains how the Constitution can both protect its core structure and adapt to changing needs.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The question concerns the overall nature of the Constitution of India.
• We focus on the amendment process as provided in Article 368 and related provisions.
• The options include simple labels like rigid or flexible and a mixed description.

Concept / Approach:
A rigid constitution is one that can be amended only through a special, often difficult, procedure, whereas a flexible constitution can be changed by the ordinary law making process. The Constitution of India provides multiple methods for amendment. Some provisions can be amended by a simple majority in Parliament, similar to ordinary laws. Other provisions require a special majority of Parliament, and certain amendments further require ratification by at least half of the state legislatures. This varying level of difficulty shows that the Indian Constitution is partly rigid and partly flexible.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall that Article 368 provides the primary procedure for constitutional amendment.Step 2: Recognise that some Articles can be amended by simple majority, for example relating to the creation of new states and certain schedules.Step 3: Note that many key provisions require a special majority of both Houses of Parliament.Step 4: Understand that still other provisions also need ratification by at least half of the state legislatures, such as changes affecting the federal structure.Step 5: Conclude that because the ease of amendment varies, the Constitution of India is correctly described as partly rigid and partly flexible.

Verification / Alternative check:
To verify, refer to standard polity sources that classify constitutions. They almost always mention that the British Constitution is a classic example of a flexible constitution, while the United States Constitution is often cited as rigid. When discussing India, these books routinely describe it as a unique blend of rigidity and flexibility. They emphasise that some amendments are easy and some are difficult, which confirms the mixed classification.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Calling the Constitution purely rigid ignores the many provisions that can be amended by simple majority. Calling it purely flexible ignores the special majority and ratification requirements that protect important features. Very rigid exaggerates the difficulty of amendment and does not reflect reality. Describing it as unwritten and completely flexible is completely incorrect because the Indian Constitution is a written document and has a defined amendment procedure.

Common Pitfalls:
Some learners, after reading about the basic structure doctrine and difficult amendment procedures, assume the Constitution must be very rigid. Others focus on frequent amendments and mistakenly see it as fully flexible. The best way to avoid these extremes is to remember that different parts of the Constitution follow different amendment routes, resulting in a balanced description partly rigid and partly flexible.

Final Answer:
Partly rigid and partly flexible