UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES

PANJAB UNIVERSITY

CHANDIGARH

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
Directive Principles of State Policy

Submitted to : Dr. Shruti Bedi

Submitted By : Dishu Kumar

B.Com. L.L.B. (Hons.)

Section - C

University Roll No. 236/18

 Acknowledgement

First and foremost I would like to thank our Professor Dr. Shruti Bedi, who
assigned me the assignment on Directive principles of state policy In India. I
would like to thank her for her constant guidance and support in making this
assignment a success. I would like to show my gratitude towards her for clearing
my queries and guiding me with the preparation of the assignment.

For the success of any assignment, research is the most essential component and
the presentation of the same. Therefore, I would like to thank my colleagues who
helped me in my research work and also guided me for my presentation.

Any thanksgiving is incomplete without thanking the loved ones who helped in all
they could. Thus, I would like to thank my friends and family who supported,
guided and blessed me with all their help.

Hence I feel privileged to thank and show my gratitude towards all without whose
support and guidance this assignment would not have been a success.
 Contents
1) Table of Cases

2) Introduction

3) List of DPSPs under Indian Constitution

4) Reflection of Preamble

5) DPSPs and its Intricacies

6) Enforceability of DPSPs

7) DPSPs and Fundamental Rights

8) DPSPs and Amendments

9) DPSP and its Implementation

10) Importance of DPSPs for an Indian citizen

11) Conclusion
 Table of Cases
1) Madras vs Champakan
2) Kerala Education Bill
3) Venkataraman v. State of Madras
4) I. C. Golaknath & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr.
5) Keshavnanda Bharati vs the State of Kerala
6) Unnikrishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh

Directive principles of state policy (DPSP)

Directive principles of state policy (DPSP) have been in vogue since India got
independence. Its contravention with the Fundamental Rights (FR) has been the
point of contention in the courts. The non-justiciability of DPSPs has always been
a moot point in India legal system. DPSPs are the non-justiciable part of the
Constitution which suggests that a person cannot enforce them in the Court.

The Concept of DPSP is not an indigenous one. Our Constitution makers borrowed
this concept from Irish Constitution (Article 45), it has its genesis in Spanish
Constitution. Part IV of the Constitution of India deals with Directive Principles of
State Policies. To understand the meaning of the directive principle of state policy,
we need to understand the meaning of each word i.e. Directive + principle + state
+ policy which suggest that these are the principles that direct the state when it
makes policies for its people. These DPSPs act as a guideline for the state and are
needed to be taken into consideration while coming up with any new law but a
citizen cannot compel the state to follow DPSPs.

List of DPSPs under Indian Constitution

Article
Number
What it says
Defines State as same as Article 12 unless the context otherwise
Article 36
defines.
Article 37 Application of the Principles contained in this part.
It authorizes the state to secure a social order for the promotion of the
Article 38
welfare of people.
Article 39 Certain principles of policies to be followed by the state.
Article 39A Equal justice and free legal aid.
Article 40 Organization of village panchayats.
Article 41 Right to work, to education and to public assistance in certain cases.
Provision for just and humane conditions of work and maternity
Article 42
leaves.
Article 43 Living wage etc. for workers.
Article 43-
Participation of workers in management of industries.
A
Article 43-
Promotion of cooperative societies.
B
Article 44 Uniform civil code for the citizens.
Provision for early childhood care and education to children below the
Article 45
age of six years.
Promotion of education and economic interests of SC, ST, and other
Article 46
weaker sections.
Duty of the state to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of
Article 47
living and to improve public health.
Article 48 Organization of agriculture and animal husbandry.
Article 48- Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of
A forests and wildlife.
Protection of monuments and places and objects of national
Article 49
importance.
Article 50 Separation of judiciary from the executive.
Article 51 Promotion of international peace and security.

Reflection of Preamble
The Preamble of the Constitution is called the key to the mind of the drafters of the
Constitution. It lays down the objectives that our Constitution seeks to achieve.
Many scholars believe that DPSPs is the kernel of the Constitution. The Directive
Principles of the State Policy (DPSPs) lay down the guidelines for the state and are
reflections of the overall objectives laid down in the Preamble of Constitution. The
expression “Justice- social, economic, political” is sought to be achieved through
DPSPs. DPSPs are incorporated to attain the ultimate ideals of preamble i.e.
Justice, Liberty, Equality and fraternity. Moreover, it also embodies the idea of the
welfare state which India was deprived of under colonial rule.

DPSPs and its Intricacies

Constitution Drafters divided rights of the citizen into two parts i.e., Justiciable and
Non Justiciable part. Part III of the Constitution was made Justiciable and the non-
justiciable part was added in Part IV (Article 36 to Article 51) of the Indian
Constitution. This part is called the Directive Principles of State Policy.

DPSPs are positive obligations on the state. DPSPs were not made justiciable
because India did not have sufficient financial resources. Moreover, its
backwardness and diversity were also a hindrance in implementing these principles
at that time. At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, India was a newly born
independent state and was struggling with other issues and making DPSPs
justiciable would have put India in great difficulty.

Article 37 defines the nature of DPSP. It states that DPSPs are not enforceable in
the courts but at the same time, it defines DPSPs as a duty of the state. Moreover,
the same Article defines DPSPs as principles that are fundamental to the
governance of any country. It shows the relevance and significance of DPSPs in
the constitution and in the governance of a country.

Enforceability of DPSPs
Many times the question arises that whether an individual can sue the state
government or the central government for not following the directive principles
enumerated in Part IV. The answer to this question is in negative. The reason for
the same lies in Article 37 which states that:

“The provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court, but
the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of
the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making
laws.”

Therefore by the virtue of this Article no provision of this part can be made
enforceable in the court of law thus these principles cannot be used against the
central government or the state government. This non-justiciability of DPSPs make
the state government or the central government immune from any action against
them for not following these directives.

Another question arises that whether Supreme Court or High Court can issue the
writ of mandamus if the state does not follow the directive principles. The literal
meaning of mandamus is “to command.” It is a writ which is issued to any person
or authority who has been prescribed a duty by the law.This writ compels the
authority to do its duty.

The Writ of mandamus is generally issued in two situations. One is when a person
files writ petition or when the Court issues it suo moto i.e. own motion. As per
Constitutional Principles, a Court is not authorized to issue the writ of mandamus
to the state when the Directive Principles are not followed because the Directive
Principle is a yardstick in the hand of people to check the performance of
government and not available for the courts. But the Court can take suo moto
action when the matter is of utmost public importance and affect the large interest
of the public.

Fundamental Rights are the legal obligation of the state to respect, whereas the
DPSPs is the moral obligation of the state to follow. Article 38 lay down the broad
ideals which a state should strive to achieve. Many of these Directive Principles
have become enforceable by becoming a law. Some of the DPSPs have widened
the scope of Fundamental Rights.

DPSPs and Fundamental Rights

The compatibility between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs have always been
contentious. The applicability of both the concepts need to be understood because
if the Constitution is a coin then Fundamental Rights and DPSPs are two facades
of that coin.

On the one hand Part III i.e. Fundamental Rights limit the power of government
and restrains the state from making any law which contravenes the interests of its
people, on the other hand, Part IV helps the state in making a law which
harmonizes the interest of its people. Both Fundamental rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy hold equal relevance and significance in the current legal
scenario and cannot overlook each other. Many people argue that DPSPs are
useless because of its non-justiciability but we need to understand that these are not
only the guiding principles but also lay down the broad objectives and ideals that
India strives to achieve.

Judicial Pronouncements

The question that whether Fundamental Rights precedes DPSPs or latter takes
precedence over former has been the subject of debate for years. There are judicial
pronouncements which settle this dispute.

of Madras vs Champakan (AIR 1951 SC 226) (see here), the Apex Court was of the
view that if a law contravenes a Fundamental right, it would be void but the same
is not with the DPSPs. It shows that Fundamental rights are on a higher pedestal
than DPSPs.

In Kerala Education Bill (1957) (1959 1 SCR 995) (see here) Court said that in
case of conflict between Fundamental Right and DPSPs, the principle of
harmonious construction should be applied. But still after applying the doctrines of
interpretation, there is a conflict between fundamental right and DPSPs, then the
former should be upheld.

In Venkataraman v. State of Madras (1966 AIR 1089) (see here), Court gave
precedence to Fundamental rights over DPSPs.

In I. C. Golaknath & Ors vs State Of Punjab & Anr. (1967 AIR 1643), (see here)
The Court was of the view that Fundamental rights cannot be curtailed by the law
made by the parliament. In furtherance of the same the Court also said that if a law
is made to give effect to Article 39(b) and Article 39(c) which come under the
purview of DPSPs and in the process the law violates Article 14, Article 19 or
Article 31, the law cannot be declared as unconstitutional and void merely on the
ground of said contravention.

The 42nd Constitution Amendment widened the scope of Article 31C to cover all
the directive principles laid down in the Constitution. Prior to the Amendment
Article 31C saved only those laws which gave effect to the Directive Principles of
State Policy specified in Article 39(b) and 39(c).

In Keshavnanda Bharati vs the State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225), (see here) The
Apex Court placed DPSPs on the higher pedestal than Fundamental Rights.
Ultimately in the case of Minerva Mills vs Union of India (AIR 1980 SC 1789) (see
here), the question before the court was whether the directive principles of State
policy enshrined in Art IV can have primacy over the fundamental rights conferred
by Part III of the Constitution. The court held that the doctrine of harmonious
construction should be applied because neither of the two has precedence to each
other. Both are complementary therefore they are needed to be balanced.

In Unnikrishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh (1993 SCC (1) 645) (see here) The
Court was of the view that Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are not
exclusive to each other therefore they should not be read in exclusion. Moreover,
the Court said that the Fundamental Rights are the means through which the goals
enumerated in Part IV are achieved.

DPSPs and Amendments

For amending the Directive Principles of State Policies, the Constitutional
amendment is required. It has to be passed by the special majority of both the
houses of the Parliament. Post-independence there have been number of
amendments to the constitution and some of them are pertaining to DPSPs.

Beginning with the 42nd Constitutional Amendment 1976, it made four changes in
DPSPs. Firstly, it amended Article 39 which obligates the state to secure a social
order for the promotion of the welfare of the people. Moreover, it added Article
39-A which makes it the duty of the state to provide for equal justice and free legal
aid. By the virtue of this Article, Parliament came up with the law called the Legal
Services Authorities Act, 1987. It also added Article 48A which deals with the
protection and improvement of environments. The Water Pollution, Air Pollution,
Environmental Pollution Acts, The Forest Act etc demonstrate the application of
the principles laid down in Article 48A.

44th Constitutional Amendment, 1978 added Article 38 clause (2) which directs the
state to minimize inequalities in income, to eliminate inequalities in status,
facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals but also amongst groups
of people residing in different areas or engaged in different vocations.

73rd Constitutional Amendment, 1992 which brought Panchayats in Part IX of the

Constitution had its genesis in Article 40 of the constitution. It deals with the
Organization of village Panchayats.

86th Constitutional Amendment, 2002 inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of

India. It provides Right to free and compulsory education of all children in the age
group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right. The roots of this
amendment are in Article 41 which talks about Right to work, to education and to
public assistance in certain cases.

97th Constitutional Amendment 2011 added Article 43-B it authorizes the state to
promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control and
professional management of the co-operative societies.

DPSP and its Implementation

Although the implementation of the principles laid down in Part IV are not directly
visible yet there are a plethora of laws and government policies which reflect the
application of the principle of Part IV. In the Judicial History of India, many laws
and legal provisions were created by judicial reasoning. In such cases, DPSPs
played a very vital role and the courts took the directive principles into
consideration very cautiously.

Policies like Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act

(MGNREGA) get their authority from Article 39(a) which talks about the right to
adequate means of livelihood. Laws such as the Child Labour (Prohibition and
Regulation) Act 1986 bolster the canons of Article 39(g) which deals with the
protection of children.

Laws pertaining to prohibition of slaughter of cows and bullocks get their sanctity
from Article 48 which deals with the organization of agriculture and husbandry.
Laws such as Workmen Compensation Act, Minimum Wages Act, Industrial
Employment (Standing Orders) Act, The Factories Act, Maternity Benefit Act
depict the implementation of Article 41, Article 42 and Article 43A.

Government Policies such as Integrated Rural Development Program (IRDP),

Integrated Tribal Development Program (ITDP), and Pradhan Mantri Gram
Sadak Yojana etc. are the reflections of the principle objectives enumerated in
Article 47 which talks about raising the standard of living and to improve public
health.

In the end, all these laws and policies try to achieve goals and principle given in
Article 38 i.e. the creation of welfare state.

Importance of DPSPs for an Indian citizen

Regardless of the non-justiciable nature of DPSPs, a citizen should be aware of
them. As the Article 37 itself describes these principles as fundamental in the
governance of the country. The objective of the DPSPs is to better the social and
economic conditions of society so people can live a good life. Knowledge of
DPSPs helps a citizen to keep a check on the government.

A citizen can use DPSPs as a measure of the performance of the government and
can identify the scope where it lacks. A person should know these provisions
because ultimately these principles act as a yardstick to judge the law that governs
them. Moreover, it also constrains the power of the state to make a draconian law.
Through various judicial pronouncements, it is settled principle now that balancing
DPSPs and Fundamental rights is as important as maintaining the sanctity of
Fundamental Rights. Non following a directive principle would directly or
indirectly affect the Fundamental Right which is considered as one of the most
essential parts of the Constitution.

Conclusion
This Article tries to prove that the relevance and significance of DPSPs cannot be
overlooked only on the basis of its non-justiciability. Our constitutional drafters
did not add these provisions just for the sake of existence, rather they added these
principles to facilitate the governance of the country. They added this part to meet
the main objectives and the ultimate goal of a country. Moreover, after looking at
the above-mentioned information, it would be wrong to say that DPSPs are not
implemented. Every policy and law that the state comes up with has to meet the
standards of Part IV. Thus, even after being non-justiciable, they hold equal
relevance and significance as Fundamental rights or any other provision of the
Constitution.

Bibliography
1) Kumar, Professor Narendra , Constitutional Law of India (Delhi, Published by
Pioneer Publications, Edition,1997)

2)Jain M.P, Indian Constitutional Law(Nagpur. Published by Wadhwa and

Company, Edition 2003)

3)Shukla V.N, Constitution of India (Lucknow, Published by Eastern Book

Company, Edition 2001)