Directive Principles of State Policy

Introduction

There was a time, known as the laissez faire era, when the state was mainly concerned with the maintenance of law and order and defence of the country against external aggression. Such a restrictive concept of the state no longer remains valid. The drafters of the Constitution realised that in a country like India, political democracy would be useless without economic democracy. Hence the drafters incorporated a few provisions in the Constitution with a view to achieve mitigation of the socio-economic condition of the masses.

The Directive Principles constitute a very comprehensive social, economic and political programme for a modern and welfare state. These principles emphasises that the State shall try to promote welfare of people by providing them basic facilities like shelter, food and clothing. Directive Principles of State Policy are mentioned in the Part 4 of the Indian constitution from articles 36 to 51. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described these principles as ‘novel features’ of the Constitution.

Provisions in the Constitution

Article 36 - Defines State, to be same as defined under Article 12 unless the context otherwise defines.

Article 37 - Application of the Principles contained in this part.

Article 38 - Authorizes the state to secure a social order for the promotion of the 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.

Article 42 - Provision for just and humane conditions of work and maternity leaves.

Article 43 - Living wage for workers.

Article 43A - Participation of workers in management of industries.

Article 43B - Promotion of cooperative societies.

Article 44 - Uniform civil code for the citizens.

Article 45 - Provision for early childhood care and education to children below the age of six years.

Article 46 Promotion of education and economic interests of SC, ST, and other weaker sections.

Article 47 - Duty of the state to raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living and to improve public health.

Article 48 - Organization of agriculture and animal husbandry.

Article 48A - Protection and improvement of environment and safeguarding of forests and wildlife.

Article 49 - Protection of monuments and places and objects of national importance.

Article 50 - Separation of judiciary from the executive.

Article 51 - Promotion of international peace and security.

Detail Discussion

Today we are living in an era of welfare state which seeks to promote the prosperity and wellbeing of the people. The Directive Principles strengthen and promote this concept by seeking to lay down some socio-economic goals which the various governments in India have to strive to achieve.

The Directive Principles are designed to usher in a social and economic democracy in the country. These principles obligate the state to take positive act ion in certain directions in order to promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy. These principles give directions to the legislatures and the executive in India as regards the manner in which they should exercise their power. The apex court in Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengalheld that “The Constitution of India envisages the establishment of a welfare state at the federal level as well as the State level. In a welfare state the primary duty of the Government is to secure the welfare of the people”.

Emphasizing upon the concept of the DPSP, Dr. Ambedkar obseved in his speech that “It is the objective of this assembly that in the future both the executive and legislature should not merely look upon these principles as a mere writen provisions enacted in this part, but these provisions should be looked upon as the provisions of a better governance”.

The Preamble, the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles can be characterised as the trinity of the constitution. The Directive Principles seek to give certain directions to the legislatures and governments in India as to how, and in what manner and for what purpose, they are to exercise their power. But, these principles are specifically made non-enforceable by any Court of law. Article 37 of the Constitution states: "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."

Relationship between the Directive Principles and the Fundamental Rights

The question of the relationship between the Directive Principles and the Fundamental Rights has caused some difficulty, and the judicial attitude has undergone transformation on this question over time. What if a law enacted to enforce a directive principle infringes a Fundamental Right? On this question, the judicial view has veered round from irreconcilability to integration between the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles and, in some of the more recent cases, to giving primacy to the Directive Principles. This point was settled by the Supreme Court in State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, where a government order in conflict with Art. 29(2), a Fundamental Right, was declared invalid, although the government did argue that it was made in pursuance of Art. 46, a Directive Principle. The Court ruled that while the Fundamental Rights were enforceable, the Directive Principles were not, and so the laws made to implement Directive Principles could not take away Fundamental Rights. The Directive Principles should conform, and run as subsidiary, to the Fundamental Rights.

In course of time, a perceptible change came over the judicial attitude on this question. The Supreme Court came to adopt the view that although Directive Principles, as such, were legally non-enforceable, nevertheless, while interpreting a statute, the Courts could look for light to the "lodestar" of the Directive Principles. For e.g. In Re Kerala Education Bill the apex court held that “Nevertheless, in determining the scope and ambit of the Fundamental Rights relied upon by or on behalf of any person or body, the Court may not entirely ignore these Directive Principles of State Policy laid down in Part IV of the Constitution but should adopt the principle of harmonious construction and should attempt to give effect to both as much as possible”. In Golak Nath v. State of Punjab the court opined that “the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles formed an ‘integrated scheme’ which was elastic enough to respond to the changing needs of the society”.  In Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala it was observed that “Both Parts III (Fundamental Rights) and IV (Directive Principles) have to be balanced and harmonised then alone the dignity of the individual can be achieved. They were meant to supplement each other”.

The Supreme Court's Judgement in the Minerva Mills case (1980 AIR 1789) is considered to be a revolutionary judgement relating to the inter relation between Part III and Part IV of the Indian Constitution. The then Chief Justice Y.V. Chandrachude in a majority opinion observed that "to destroy the guarantees given by Part III in order purportedly to achieve the goals of Part IV is plainly to subvert the Constitution by destroying its basic structure;" he further observed that "the goals set out in part IV have, therefore, to be achieved without the abrogation of the means provided for by Part III. It is in this sense that Parts III and IV together constitute the case of our Constitution and combine to form its conscience. Anything that destroys the balance between the two parts will ipso facto destroy an essential element of the basic structure of our Constitution."

The biggest beneficiary of this approach has been Art. 21. By reading Art. 21 with the Directive Principles, the Supreme Court has derived therefrom a bundle of rights. To name a few of these:

• The right to live with human dignity. The Supreme Court has stated in Bandhua Mukti Morcha, that the right to live with human dignity enshrined in Art. 21 derives its life breath from the Directive Principles of State Policy.

• Right to education implicit in Art. 21 is to be spelled out in the light of the Directive Principle contained in Art. 41 and 45.

Conclusion

Today we are living in an era of welfare state which seeks to promote the prosperity and wellbeing of the people. The Directive Principles strengthen and promote this concept by seeking to lay down some socio-economic goals which the various governments in India have to strive to achieve. The Directive Principles are designed to usher in a social and economic democracy in the country. These principles obligate the state to take positive act ion in certain directions in order to promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy. These principles give directions to the legislatures and the executive in India as regards the manner in which they should exercise their power.

(1996) 4 SCC 37

AIR 1951 SC 226.

AIR 1958 SC 956.

AIR 1967 SC 1643

AIR 1973 SC 1461.

AIR 1984 SC 802.

Unnikrishnan v. A.P. AIR 1993 SC 2178.