The Dynamic Interplay Between Directive Principles

Of State Policy and Fundamental Rights in Indian

Constitution
By Piyali Ghow, LL.M Sem-1

Contents of this articles:

1. Abstract

2. Introduction

3. Definition

4. Relationship between directive principle of state policy and Fundamental Rights

5. Landmark judgement on this topic

6. Conclusion
 Abstract

The Directive Principles of State Policy and the Fundamental Rights constitute two
foundational pillars of the Indian Constitution. Pursuant to directives issued by the
Supreme Court and legislative enactments, various states have implemented legal
principles and statutes aimed at advancing the social and economic welfare of the
citizens. Although the Directive Principles are not justiciable and hence not legally
enforceable in a court of law, there have been instances where certain Fundamental
Rights have been subject to reasonable restrictions in light of overarching constitutional
goals. This article seeks to examine the intrinsic relationship between the Directive
Principles and the Fundamental Rights as envisaged by the framers of the Constitution. It
explores how the State, while enacting legislation and implementing policies, must
ensure adherence to Fundamental Rights to maintain a harmonious balance between the
two. Through a doctrinal analysis of landmark judicial pronouncements, this study
contends that the evolving legal landscape demonstrates a complementary and reinforcing
relationship between these two constitutional mandates, thereby affirming the
transformative vision of a welfare state governed by the rule of law.

Keywords: Directive principles of state policy (DPSP), Fundamental Rights (FR),

welfare society, harmonious balance.
 Introduction

The Indian Constitution, under Articles 12 to 35 in Part III, guarantees Fundamental

Rights to all citizens, ensuring their right to live with dignity and respect. In instances
where these rights are violated or hindered, the judiciary plays a pivotal role in upholding
justice and protecting constitutional guarantees. Fundamental Rights serve as essential
safeguards for individual liberty, equality, and dignity, acting as a bulwark against
arbitrary and discriminatory actions by the State. These rights are not mere legal
entitlements but represent the collective vision of a just, inclusive, and humane society.
They form the cornerstone of the rule of law and constitutional governance, mandating
that state power be exercised with fairness, accountability, and regard for human dignity.
Furthermore, various international treaties and conventions have influenced the
formulation and interpretation of these rights, reinforcing their universal significance.

The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs), enshrined in Articles 36 to 52 under

Part IV of the Constitution, direct the State to formulate and implement policies aimed at
securing social and economic justice. Although these principles are non-justiciable and
not legally enforceable in a court of law, they hold significant moral and political
authority. The concept of DPSPs was adopted from the Irish Constitution, which itself
drew inspiration from the Spanish Constitution. Through landmark judicial
interpretations, DPSPs have played a crucial role in guiding the legislature in the
enactment of welfare-oriented laws aimed at the holistic development of society.

Together, Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles form the dual foundation of
India's constitutional ethos. While the former ensures civil, political, and religious
liberties, the latter provides a framework for achieving socio-economic justice. The
Indian Constitution reflects a harmonious construction between these two components,
embodying a dynamic balance that seeks to secure both individual freedoms and
collective welfare. This symbiotic relationship underscores the transformative nature of
the Constitution, aiming to establish a democratic, secular, and socialist republic
committed to the holistic development of its people.
1. Definition of Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy under the Indian
Constitution1

 Fundamental Rights:

Fundamental Rights represent the essential legal and moral entitlements conferred upon
individuals by the Indian Constitution, primarily enshrined in Part III (Articles 12 to 35).
These rights are foundational to human existence and are instrumental in safeguarding
individual liberty, dignity, and equality against arbitrary action by the State. The concept
of Fundamental Rights in India is deeply influenced by international human rights
instruments, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR), which affirms the inherent right to life and liberty for all persons irrespective of
caste, creed, race, or religion.

Categories of Fundamental Rights Available Primarily Against the State:

I. Right to Equality (Articles 14–18):

- Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws.
- Prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
- Ensures equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.

II. Right to Freedom (Articles 19–22):

- Encompasses the freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement,
residence, and profession.
- Includes protection in respect of conviction for offenses and safeguards for personal
liberty.

III. Right against Exploitation (Articles 23–24):

- Prohibits human trafficking, forced labour, and employment of children in hazardous
occupations.

IV. Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25–28):

- Secures the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practice, and
propagate one’s religion.

V. Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29–30):

- Protects the rights of minorities to conserve their culture, language, and script.

1
Constitutional law of India by Dr. J.N.Pandey
- Grants minorities the right to establish and administer educational institutions of their
choice.

VI. Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32):

- Empowers individuals to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of
Fundamental Rights through appropriate writs.

 Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs):

The Directive Principles of State Policy, contained in Part IV (Articles 36 to 51) of the
Indian Constitution, serve as guiding principles for the State in formulating policies and
enacting laws. Although these provisions are non-justiciable—meaning they are not
enforceable by any court—they are nonetheless fundamental to the governance of the
country. The DPSPs aim to establish a socio-economic and political order based on
justice, equality, and the overall welfare of the people.

Key Features and Classifications of Directive Principles:

I. Social and Economic Justice:

Reflected in Articles 38, 39, 41, 42, and 43, these provisions direct the State to reduce
inequality, provide social security, and ensure adequate means of livelihood and humane
conditions of work. They embody the vision of a welfare state that seeks to secure a
decent standard of living for all citizens.

II. Gandhian Principles:

Inspired by the philosophy of Mahatma Gandhi, these principles emphasize rural
development, self-governance (Panchayati Raj), and the upliftment of the weaker sections
of society. Relevant Articles include 40, 43, 46, 47, and 48.

III. Liberal-Intellectual Principles:

These aim to foster individual liberty, environmental sustainability, legal reform, and
international cooperation. Articles 44, 45, 48A, 49, 50, and 51 reflect these modern
values and the aspirations of a progressive and responsible State.

Together, Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles reflect a unique constitutional

symbiosis. While the former provides enforceable guarantees of individual freedoms, the
latter lays down the broader goals of social justice and national development. The Indian
Constitution strives for a harmonious construction between civil, political, religious, and
socio-economic rights, thereby creating a comprehensive framework for justice and
governance in a democratic society.
2. Relationship Between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of
State Policy2

The Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are integral
components of the Indian Constitution, working in tandem to realize the vision of a just,
equitable, and inclusive society as enshrined in the Preamble. While Fundamental Rights
ensure political democracy by safeguarding individual liberties, the DPSPs aim to
establish social and economic democracy through affirmative obligations imposed upon
the State. Though DPSPs are non-justiciable, they are nonetheless crucial in guiding
legislative and executive action toward the common good. The relationship between these
two constitutional instruments can be outlined as follows:

a) Supplementary and Complementary in Nature

Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are supplementary to each other, both aimed
at achieving the larger constitutional goal of establishing a welfare state. While
Fundamental Rights secure individual freedoms, the Directive Principles guide the State
in designing policies that promote social and economic justice. Together, they strive to
bring about a peaceful social revolution, ensuring the dignity of the individual and the
unity and integrity of the nation.

b) Harmony and Harmonious Construction

The judiciary has consistently adopted the doctrine of harmonious construction to

interpret the Constitution in a manner that upholds both Fundamental Rights and
Directive Principles. Courts have recognized that these two sets of principles are not
antithetical but must be read together. It is the constitutional duty not only of the
legislature and the executive but also of the judiciary to ensure that DPSPs are
implemented without abrogating the essence of Fundamental Rights. This approach has
been endorsed in landmark judgments such as Minerva Mills v. Union of India and
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala.

c) Directive Principles as a Source of Expansion for Fundamental Rights

Over time, the Supreme Court has interpreted certain DPSPs to expand the scope and
content of Fundamental Rights. For instance, Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal
2
lawbhoomi
Liberty) has been interpreted to include the Right to Livelihood, Right to Health, Right to
Education, and Right to a Clean Environment, all of which are rooted in DPSPs. In this
way, DPSPs have given a new dimension to Fundamental Rights, acting as a source of
their substantive enrichment.

d) Subordination of DPSPs in Case of Conflict

In situations where there is a direct and unavoidable conflict between Fundamental

Rights and Directive Principles, the judiciary has generally held that Fundamental Rights
prevail. This is because Fundamental Rights are justiciable and enforceable, whereas
DPSPs are only guiding principles. However, the courts encourage efforts to reconcile
both wherever possible. This principle was reaffirmed in Champakam Dorairajan v. State
of Madras, where it was held that DPSPs cannot override Fundamental Rights.

e) Balancing Equality Rights with Economic DPSPs

The Right to Equality (Articles 14–18) ensures legal equality, prohibits discrimination,
and guarantees equal opportunity. At the same time, economic directives under Articles
38, 39, 41, 42, 43, and 43A guide the State to reduce inequalities, provide social security,
and ensure adequate means of livelihood. A balance between these ensures that economic
justice is pursued without compromising the individual's right to equality. Courts have
recognized that affirmative action programs and socio-economic legislation are valid
when they serve both these objectives in tandem.

f) Right to Education and Directive Principles

The Right to Education, originally a part of the DPSPs under Article 45, was later
elevated to the status of a Fundamental Right by the 86th Constitutional Amendment,
which inserted Article 21A. This demonstrates the organic relationship between the two:
DPSPs can serve as precursors to enforceable rights. Additionally, Articles 41 to 43 also
emphasize the right to work, education, and public assistance, reinforcing the idea that
socio-economic rights must be progressively realized through coordinated constitutional
interpretation.
Landmark Judgements:

1. Champakam Dorairajan v. State of Madras3

 Context:
The State of Madras reserved seats in educational institutions based on caste,
citing Article 46 of the DPSPs (promotion of educational and economic interests
of weaker sections).

 Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights prevail over DPSPs in case
of conflict.

 Significance:
Led to the First Constitutional Amendment (1951), which introduced Article
15(4), empowering the State to make special provisions for the advancement of
backward classes.

2. Golaknath v. State of Punjab 4

 Context:
Laws enacted to implement land reforms were challenged for violating
Fundamental Rights, particularly the right to property.

 Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights
under Article 368.

 Significance:
Asserted the primacy of Fundamental Rights over DPSPs.
This stance was reversed later in Kesavananda Bharati (1973).

3. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala 5

 Context:
Challenge to constitutional amendments affecting property rights and socio-
economic reforms based on DPSPs.

3
AIR1951 SC226
4
1967 AIR 1643,1967 SCR (2)762
5
AIR 1973 SC 1461
  Judgment:
Introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine, ruling that Parliament can amend the
Constitution but cannot alter its basic structure.

 Significance:
Established the doctrine of harmonious construction between Fundamental
Rights and DPSPs, ensuring neither is sacrificed for the other.

4. Minerva Mills v. Union of India6

 Context:
Challenge to the 42nd Constitutional Amendment, which gave primacy to
DPSPs over Fundamental Rights.

 Judgment:
Supreme Court struck down the amendment provisions, holding that limited
amending power is part of the Basic Structure.

 Significance:
Reaffirmed that balance between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs is essential,
and one cannot be used to destroy the other.

6
AIR 1980 SC 1789
Conclusion:

The constitutional framework of India envisages a harmonious interplay between Part III
(Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy). While
Fundamental Rights are enforceable and guarantee civil and political liberties, DPSPs are
non-justiciable guidelines aimed at securing socio-economic justice. Jurisprudence has
oscillated between the supremacy of Fundamental Rights and the significance of DPSPs,
especially in landmark cases like Champakam Dorairajan, Golaknath, Kesavananda
Bharati, and Minerva Mills. These decisions have not only clarified constitutional
positions but have also exposed interpretative conflicts and legislative limitations.

Loopholes arise where DPSP-based policies infringe upon Fundamental Rights,

compelling the judiciary to mediate between individual liberty and collective good. The
lack of enforceability of DPSPs limits their direct applicability, often depending on the
political will of the State. However, the judiciary’s application of the doctrine of
harmonious construction has facilitated an evolving synergy, transforming some DPSPs
into enforceable rights through constitutional amendments—e.g., Article 21A.

From a legal research standpoint, while conflicts persist, DPSPs act as a vital
constitutional compass guiding legislative intent and policy reform. Ensuring their
progressive realization without derogating Fundamental Rights remains the cornerstone
of India's transformative constitutionalism and the goal of establishing a just and
egalitarian society.