Statement 1 is incorrect. The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 did not place the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review. This provision was introduced by the 39th Amendment Act of 1975, which aimed to place disputes relating to the election of the President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, and Speaker of the Lok Sabha beyond the jurisdiction of all courts. However, the Supreme Court, in the landmark case of Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), struck down this provision as unconstitutional, affirming the principle of judicial review. The 44th Amendment primarily aimed to reverse several provisions introduced by the 42nd Amendment.
Statement 2 is correct. The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, established the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) to replace the existing Collegium System for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. In 2015, the Supreme Court of India, in the Fourth Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India), declared both the 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act unconstitutional. The Court held that the NJAC violated the independence of the judiciary, which is a fundamental aspect of the basic structure of the Constitution.
Option (a) 1 only: This option is incorrect because Statement 1 is factually inaccurate.
Option (c) Both 1 & 2: This option is incorrect because Statement 1 is inaccurate.
Option (d) Neither 1 nor 2: This option is incorrect because Statement 2 is accurate.