The correct answer is (c).
In the case of Kesvanand Bharti v. State of Kerala, the Supreme Court held that an amendment of the Constitution under Article 368 is a ‘law’ under Article 13. This means that an amendment to the Constitution is subject to the same limitations as any other law, and cannot violate fundamental rights.
The other options are incorrect because they do not support the correct answer.
In the case of Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, the Supreme Court held that the power to amend the Constitution is a limited power, and cannot be used to destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.
In the case of Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the power to amend the Constitution is a plenary power, and cannot be limited by any other law.
In the case of Goloknath v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court held that the power to amend the Constitution is a limited power, and cannot be used to violate fundamental rights.
However, the Supreme Court later overruled its decision in Goloknath v. State of Punjab in the case of Kesvanand Bharti v. State of Kerala.