Article 13. Article 13 prevents the passing of laws which "take away or abridge" the Fundamental Rights provisions. Article 368 does not contain a power to amend the constitution but only a procedure. The power to amend comes from the normal legislative power of Parliament. Therefore, amendments which "take away or abridge" the Fundamental Rights provisions cannot be passed. Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) Six years later in 1973, the largest ever Constitution Bench of 13 Judges, heard arguments in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (case citation: AIR 1973 SC 1461). The Supreme Court reviewed the decision in Golaknath v. State of Punjab, and considered the validity of the 24th, 25th, 26th and 29th Amendments. The Court held, by a margin of 7–6, that although no part of the constitution, including fundamental rights, was beyond the amending power of Parliament (thus overruling the 1967 case), the "basic structure of the Constitution could not be abrogated even by a constitutional amendment". The decision of the Judges is complex, consisting of multiple opinions taking up one complete volume in the law reporter "Supreme Court Cases". The findings included the following: All of the Judges held that the 24th, 25th and 29th Amendments Acts are valid. Ten judges held that Golak Nath'''s case was wrongly decided and that an amendment to the Constitution was not a "law" for the purposes of Article 13. Seven judges held that the power of amendment is plenary and can be used to amend all the articles of the constitution (including the Fundamental Rights). Seven judges held (six judges dissenting on this point) that "the power to amend does not include the power to alter the basic structure of the Constitution so as to change its identity". Seven judges held (two judges dissenting, one leaving this point open) that "there are no inherent or implied limitations on the power of amendment under Article 368". Nine judges (including two dissenters) signed a statement of summary for the judgment that reads: Golak Nath's case is over-ruled. Article 368 does not enable Parliament to alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution. The Constitution (Twenty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1971 is valid. Section 2(a) and 2(b) of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act, 1971 is valid. The first part of section 3 of the Constitution (Twenty-fifth Amendment) Act, 1971 is valid. The second part namely "and no law containing a declaration that it