Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs)
:part 2
Directives Outside DPSP
Besides Part IV, the Constitution contains certain directives scattered in other parts:
| Directive | Article & Part | Content |
|---|---|---|
| Claims of SCs and STs to Services | Article 335, Part XVI | Consideration must be given to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes in public appointments while ensuring administrative efficiency. |
| Instruction in Mother Tongue | Article 350-A, Part XVII | States and local authorities should provide primary education to children of linguistic minorities in their mother tongue. |
| Development of Hindi Language | Article 351, Part XVII | The Union should promote Hindi as a medium of expression for India’s cultural diversity. |
Conflict Between DPSPs and Fundamental Rights
FRs are justiciable, DPSPs are non-justiciable, creating potential conflicts when implementing DPSPs might violate FRs.
Key Cases and Amendments
Champakam Dorairajan Case (1951)
Supreme Court: FRs take precedence over DPSPs.
Parliament responded with 1st, 4th, and 17th Amendments to enforce certain DPSPs.
Champakam Dorairajan Case (1951)
Supreme Court: FRs take precedence over DPSPs.
Parliament responded with 1st, 4th, and 17th Amendments to enforce certain DPSPs.
Golaknath Case (1967)
Parliament cannot curtail Fundamental Rights to implement DPSPs.
24th Amendment Act
Empowered Parliament to amend FRs through constitutional amendments.
25th Amendment Act
Introduced Article 31C:
Laws implementing Article 39(b) & 39(c) cannot be invalidated for violating Articles 14, 19, or 31.
Courts cannot question laws claiming to give effect to such policies.
Parliament cannot curtail Fundamental Rights to implement DPSPs.
24th Amendment Act
Empowered Parliament to amend FRs through constitutional amendments.
25th Amendment Act
Introduced Article 31C:
Laws implementing Article 39(b) & 39(c) cannot be invalidated for violating Articles 14, 19, or 31.
Courts cannot question laws claiming to give effect to such policies.
Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973): Second provision struck down; first provision upheld.
42nd Amendment Act (1976)
Extended Article 31C to all DPSPs, giving them primacy over FRs.
42nd Amendment Act (1976)
Extended Article 31C to all DPSPs, giving them primacy over FRs.
Minerva Mills Case (1980)
Supreme Court struck down the extension; FRs regain supremacy, but Article 39(b) & 39(c) DPSPs remain partially protected.
Current Position:
FRs are supreme, but DPSPs can guide legislation and be implemented through constitutional amendments without violating the basic structure.
Courts emphasize a balance between FRs and DPSPs.
Features and Significance of DPSPs
Influence of Irish Constitution
DPSPs were inspired by Ireland’s social justice directives.
Ambedkar’s Vision
DPSPs as a socialistic and comprehensive economic, social, and political programme.
Philosophy of the Constitution
DPSPs and FRs are complementary, collectively achieving the goals of the Preamble.
Promotes Socio-Economic Justice
FRs ensure political democracy; DPSPs provide social and economic democracy.
Promotes Welfare State
DPSPs aim for social justice, equal opportunity, and improved living standards, unlike colonial “police state”.
Contains Progressive Measures
Encourages education, public health, and protection of marginalized groups (SC/ST, backward classes).
Constitutional Guidance
Though non-justiciable, DPSPs guide government laws and policies.
Political Sanctions
Many DPSPs influence political party manifestos and government policies, sometimes converted into enforceable laws.
Long-Term Vision
DPSPs provide a roadmap for national development, ensuring governments strive toward constitutional ideals over time.
Supreme Court struck down the extension; FRs regain supremacy, but Article 39(b) & 39(c) DPSPs remain partially protected.
Current Position:
FRs are supreme, but DPSPs can guide legislation and be implemented through constitutional amendments without violating the basic structure.
Courts emphasize a balance between FRs and DPSPs.
Features and Significance of DPSPs
Influence of Irish Constitution
DPSPs were inspired by Ireland’s social justice directives.
Ambedkar’s Vision
DPSPs as a socialistic and comprehensive economic, social, and political programme.
Philosophy of the Constitution
DPSPs and FRs are complementary, collectively achieving the goals of the Preamble.
Promotes Socio-Economic Justice
FRs ensure political democracy; DPSPs provide social and economic democracy.
Promotes Welfare State
DPSPs aim for social justice, equal opportunity, and improved living standards, unlike colonial “police state”.
Contains Progressive Measures
Encourages education, public health, and protection of marginalized groups (SC/ST, backward classes).
Constitutional Guidance
Though non-justiciable, DPSPs guide government laws and policies.
Political Sanctions
Many DPSPs influence political party manifestos and government policies, sometimes converted into enforceable laws.
Long-Term Vision
DPSPs provide a roadmap for national development, ensuring governments strive toward constitutional ideals over time.
limitations of Directive Principles of State Policy
Lack of Legal Force
DPSPs are non-justiciable, meaning they cannot be enforced in a court of law.
Critics argue that this makes them moral or political aspirations rather than legally binding obligations.
This non-justiciable nature may allow political or economic elites to influence or ignore implementation.
Lack of Logical Arrangement
DPSPs are scattered across Articles 36–51 without a clear systematic order.
There is a mixing of social, economic, and political directives, which some experts feel lacks coherence.
Conservative Nature
Sir Ivor Jennings and other scholars noted that these directives were framed to suit mid-20th century
Lack of Legal Force
DPSPs are non-justiciable, meaning they cannot be enforced in a court of law.
Critics argue that this makes them moral or political aspirations rather than legally binding obligations.
This non-justiciable nature may allow political or economic elites to influence or ignore implementation.
Lack of Logical Arrangement
DPSPs are scattered across Articles 36–51 without a clear systematic order.
There is a mixing of social, economic, and political directives, which some experts feel lacks coherence.
Conservative Nature
Sir Ivor Jennings and other scholars noted that these directives were framed to suit mid-20th century
India.
Their relevance and applicability to 21st-century socio-economic conditions may be questioned.
Constitutional Conflict
Potential clashes between Centre and States in implementing DPSPs.
President’s power to withhold bills that violate DPSPs may conflict with state legislature intentions.
Conflicts may arise within states, e.g., between Governor and Chief Minister, regarding enforcement of these principles.
Their relevance and applicability to 21st-century socio-economic conditions may be questioned.
Constitutional Conflict
Potential clashes between Centre and States in implementing DPSPs.
President’s power to withhold bills that violate DPSPs may conflict with state legislature intentions.
Conflicts may arise within states, e.g., between Governor and Chief Minister, regarding enforcement of these principles.
Leave a Reply