Q.42nd amendment was one of the most controversial. Which reasons explain the controversy? (national emergency context; without special majority; without State ratification; contained controversial provisions.)

The 42nd Amendment's controversy came mainly from the political context it was passed in and from its own far-reaching, contested content — not from any procedural shortcut in how it was passed. …

1. True. The 42nd Amendment was made against the backdrop of the internal Emergency declared in June 1975, and the declaration of that Emergency was itself deeply controversial. It was passed in Parliament while many opposition MPs were in jail because of the Emergency, which is exactly why it is remembered as controversial in its political context, not simply its legal content.
2. Not a valid reason. Every constitutional amendment, without exception, must be passed with the special majority Article 368 requires — this is a fixed procedural requirement, not something that can be skipped even in an emergency. The chapter gives no indication that the 42nd Amendment was passed without this special majority; its controversy came from what it did and the circumstances it was passed in, not a procedural shortcut.
3. Not a valid reason, for the same underlying reason: ratification by State legislatures is required only for the specific category of amendments that touch the distribution of powers between the Centre and the States or matters of representation, and there is nothing in the chapter suggesting the 42nd Amendment bypassed a State-ratification requirement that actually applied to it. …