PART IV: DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY
Executive Summary & Snapshot:
- Location: Contained in Part IV of the
Constitution from Articles 36 to 51.
- Constitutional Origin: Borrowed from the Irish
Constitution of 1937 (which copied them from the Spanish Constitution).
- Sapru Committee (1944): Non-justiciable nature was recommended by the Tej Bahadur Sapru Committee Report (1944) and Sir B.N. Rau.
- Key Descriptions:
- Dr. B.R. Ambedkar: Described them as “Novel
Features” and the “Soul of the
Constitution”, aiming for Economic Democracy.
- Granville Austin: Called FRs and DPSPs together the “Conscience of the Constitution”.
- L.M. Singhvi: Called them the "life-giving provisions of the
Constitution" representing its philosophy of social justice.
- Core Aim: Establish a Welfare State and
achieve social & economic democracy (overturning colonial "Police State" model).
- Enforceability: Non-justiciable &
Non-self-executory under Article 37, yet fundamental in the governance of the
country.
1. Origin, Background & Constitutional Intentions
The Directive Principles of State Policy constitute a comprehensive socio-economic and political roadmap
for creating a modern, just, and equitable Indian society.
Q1 What were the primary influences on the Constitution
makers?
The framers drew inspiration from multiple historical and philosophical sources:
- 1937 Irish Constitution: Primary borrowing source (which derived from
Spanish constitutional traditions).
- B.N. Rau & Sapru Committee (1944): Constitutional Advisor Sir B.N. Rau and
the Tej Bahadur Sapru Committee recommended dividing individual rights into two categories:
• Justiciable Rights: Civil & Political rights within immediate reach of
individuals (Fundamental Rights - Part III).
• Non-Justiciable Rights: Socio-economic rights beyond immediate financial
reach at Independence (DPSPs - Part IV).
- Government of India Act, 1935: Resembles the “Instrument of Instructions” issued by the British Crown to the
Governor-General and Governors. Dr. Ambedkar noted that DPSPs are instructions addressed to
the Legislature and Executive.
- Socialist & Gandhian Philosophies: Freedom movement commitments to
eradicate poverty, illiteracy, and social inequality.
Welfare State vs. Police State:
Colonial rule maintained a "Police State" focused merely
on law enforcement, taxation, and maintaining order. DPSPs transform India into a Welfare State committed to inclusive growth, social justice, and
economic democracy (one person, one value) alongside political democracy (one person, one vote).
2. Core Features & Articles 36–37
Article 36: Definition of "State"
Article 36 specifies that the term "State" in Part IV has the same meaning as in Part III (Article 12). It includes:
- The Government and Parliament of India.
- The Government and Legislatures of each of the States.
- All local authorities (Panchayats, Municipalities, District Boards).
- All other statutory and non-statutory public authorities (e.g., LIC, ONGC, SAIL, KVIC).
Article 37: Application & Non-Justiciable Nature
Article 37 contains two critical constitutional mandates:
- Non-Justiciable: The provisions contained in Part IV shall
not be enforceable by any court. No writ can be issued by SC (Art 32) or HC (Art 226)
to compel the government to enact a DPSP.
- Fundamental in Governance: Nevertheless, the principles laid
down are fundamental in the governance of the country, and it shall be the duty of the
State to apply these principles in making laws.
Rationale Why did the Constituent Assembly make DPSPs
non-justiciable?
The framers deliberately kept Part IV non-justiciable due to practical historical realities:
- Financial & Administrative Constraints: The newly independent State lacked
financial resources to immediately guarantee universal employment, social security, or
education.
- Vast Diversity & Backwardness: Mass illiteracy, widespread poverty, and
regional backwardness made rigid legal enforcement impossible.
- Avoid Litigation Overburden: Enforceable socio-economic rights would have
crippled state administrative machinery with endless court cases.
- Pragmatic Faith in Progressive Democracy: Framers relied on public opinion
and elections as the ultimate political sanction—governments that ignore DPSPs must answer
to voters at election time.
3. Ideological Classification of Directive Principles
Although the Constitution does not formally classify DPSPs, scholars (notably Dr. M. P.
Sharma) divide them into three broad ideological categories based on content and direction:
📊 Classification of DPSPs (Framework by Dr. M. P. Sharma)
graph TD
Root["📜 DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES (Part IV)"]
Root --> G["🌱 Gandhian Principles
Grassroot Democracy & Rural Upliftment"]
Root --> S["⚖️ Socialist Principles
Conventional Economic & Egalitarian Growth"]
Root --> L["🧠 Liberal-Intellectual
Civil Rights & Self-Development"]
subgraph GANDHI ["Gandhian Focus"]
G --> G1["Panchayati Raj (Art 40)"]
G --> G2["Cottage & Co-ops (Art 43 & 43B)"]
G --> G3["SC/ST Welfare & Prohibition (Art 46 & 47)"]
end
subgraph SOC ["Socialist Focus"]
S --> S1["Welfare Order & Policy (Art 38 & 39)"]
S --> S2["Work, Education & Assistance (Art 41)"]
S --> S3["Humane Work & Worker Mgmt (Art 42 & 43A)"]
end
subgraph LIB ["Liberal Focus"]
L --> L1["Uniform Civil Code (Art 44)"]
L --> L2["Environment & Heritage (Art 48A & 49)"]
L --> L3["Judiciary Separation & Peace (Art 50 & 51)"]
end
1. Socialistic Principles
These principles lay down the framework of a democratic socialist state to secure social and economic
justice.
| Article |
Constitutional Provision |
Syllabus Focus & Key Enactments / Schemes |
| Article 38(1) |
Promote welfare of people by securing a social order permeated by social, economic, and
political justice. |
Foundation of Welfare State.
Examples: Nationalisation of Life Insurance
(1956), Nationalisation of 14 major commercial banks (1969). |
| Article 38(2) |
Minimize inequalities in income, status, facilities, and opportunities (FOSI). |
Added by 44th CAA, 1978. Focuses on reducing group and
individual economic disparities. |
| Article 39(a) |
Right to adequate means of livelihood for all citizens. |
Livelihood programs & social security schemes. |
| Article 39(b) |
Equitable distribution of material resources of the community to subserve the common good.
|
Overrides Arts 14 & 19.
Landmark SC 8:1
Ruling: Supreme Court held that not all private property can automatically be
deemed a "material resource of the community". |
| Article 39(c) |
Prevention of concentration of wealth and means of production. |
Anti-monopoly laws (MRTP Act, Competition Act 2002). Overrides
Arts 14 & 19. |
| Article 39(d) |
Equal pay for equal work for both men and women. |
Enforced by the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976. |
| Article 39(e) |
Protection of health and strength of workers, women, and children against forced economic
abuse. |
Labour welfare legislations & occupational safety rules. |
| Article 39(f) |
Children given opportunities for healthy development in freedom and dignity, protected
against exploitation. |
Added by 42nd CAA, 1976. Child rights protection
frameworks. |
| Article 39A |
Equal justice and free legal aid to the poor. |
Added by 42nd CAA, 1976. Implemented via NALSA Act, 1987 &
free legal service clinics. |
| Article 41 |
Right to work, education, and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness,
and disablement (DOSU). |
Directly implemented by MGNREGA (2005), Swarnajayanti Gram
Swarozgar Yojana, and National Social Assistance Programme (NSAP). |
| Article 42 |
Just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief. |
Enforced by Factories Act, 1948 & Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act
2017. |
| Article 43 |
Securing a living wage (includes health, education, insurance), decent standard of life, and
social/cultural opportunities for workers. |
Implemented by Minimum Wages Act 1948, Payment of Wages Act, and Floor Wage guidelines. |
| Article 43A |
Participation of workers in the management of industrial undertakings. |
Added by 42nd CAA, 1976. Industrial Disputes Act 1947 &
joint management councils. |
| Article 47 (Part 1) |
Duty of the State to raise the level of nutrition and standard of living and improve public
health. |
Primary Health Centres (PHCs), Mid-Day Meal Scheme (PM-POSHAN), ICDS, POSHAN Abhiyaan,
disease eradication programs. |
2. Gandhian Principles
These principles represent Mahatma Gandhi's programme of reconstruction, emphasizing rural self-reliance,
village industries, and moral upliftment.
| Article |
Constitutional Provision |
Syllabus Focus & Key Implementation |
| Article 40 |
Organization of village panchayats as units of self-government. |
Precursor to Panchayati Raj Institutions (PRIs). Constitutionalized via 73rd CAA, 1992 (Part IX). |
| Article 43 (Part 2) |
Promote cottage industries on an individual or co-operation basis in rural areas. |
Khadi and Village Industries Commission (KVIC), National Small Industries Corporation
(NSIC), Handloom Boards. |
| Article 43B |
Promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control, and professional
management of co-operative societies. |
Added by 97th CAA, 2011 (Part IX-B). Multi-State
Co-operative Societies Act 2002. |
| Article 46 |
Promote educational and economic interests of SCs, STs, and other weaker sections,
protecting them from social injustice. |
Protection of Civil Rights Act 1976, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, NCSC, NCST,
NCBC, 10% EWS reservation. |
| Article 47 (Part 2) |
Prohibition of the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs injurious to health. |
State subject (Entry 51 State List). Complete liquor ban in Bihar, Gujarat, Nagaland,
Lakshadweep. FSSAI regulations & NDPS Act 1985. SC 500m highway ban. |
| Article 48 (Part 1) |
Prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves, and other milch and draught cattle. |
Anti-cow slaughter legislations across various Indian states. |
3. Liberal-Intellectual Principles
These principles reflect the ideology of modern liberalism, advocating civil liberties, scientific
advancement, environmental conservation, and global peace.
| Article |
Constitutional Provision |
Syllabus Focus & Key Implementation |
| Article 44 |
Secure for all citizens a Uniform Civil Code (UCC) throughout the territory of India. |
Uttarakhand became the 1st state to enact UCC (Jan 27, 2025). Goa follows Portuguese Civil
Code 1867. Cases: Shah Bano (1985) & Shayara Bano (2017). |
| Article 45 |
Provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of
six years. |
Amended by 86th CAA, 2002 (shifting 6-14 age group to FR
Art 21A & RTE Act 2009). Implemented via ICDS scheme. |
| Article 48 (Part 2) |
Organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines. |
High-Yielding Variety seeds, fertilizers, irrigation projects, Indian Council of
Agricultural Research (ICAR). |
| Article 48A |
Protect and improve the environment and safeguard the forests and wildlife of the country.
|
Added by 42nd CAA, 1976. Enforced via Wildlife Protection
Act 1972, Forest Conservation Act 1980, Water Act, Air Act. |
| Article 49 |
Protect monuments, places, and objects of artistic or historic interest of national
importance. |
Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (1951), Archaeological Survey of
India (ASI). |
| Article 50 |
Separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State. |
Enforced by Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1973, separating Judicial Magistrates from
Executive Magistrates. |
| Article 51 |
Promote international peace and security:
• Maintain just & honourable relations between
nations.
• Foster respect for international law & treaty obligations.
• Encourage
settlement of international disputes by arbitration. |
Panchsheel Agreement, Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), UN Peacekeeping operations. |
4. Amendments & Addition of New DPSPs
Part IV has been modified by four major constitutional amendments since 1950:
Master Summary of DPSP Amendments:
- 42nd Amendment Act, 1976 (Mini-Constitution): Added 4 new DPSPs:
- Art 39(f): Healthy development opportunities for children.
- Art 39A: Equal justice and free legal aid to the poor.
- Art 43A: Workers' participation in industrial management.
- Art 48A: Environmental, forest, and wildlife protection.
- 44th Amendment Act, 1978: Added Article 38(2) directing the
State to minimize inequalities in income, status, facilities, and opportunities (FOSI).
- 86th Amendment Act, 2002: Modified Article 45 text to focus on
early childhood care/education until age 6, making 6–14 education a Fundamental Right under
Article 21A.
- 97th Amendment Act, 2011: Added Article 43B to promote
voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, and professional management of co-operative
societies.
5. Conflict & Evolution: Fundamental Rights vs. DPSPs
The relationship between Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles (Part IV) has been one of
the most dynamic legal battles in Indian constitutional history.
| Landmark Case / Amendment |
Judicial Verdict / Constitutional Impact |
Key Principle Established |
| Champakam Dorairajan Case (1951) |
Supreme Court ruled that Fundamental Rights prevail over DPSPs. DPSPs must run as subsidiary to Fundamental Rights. However, FRs can be amended
by Parliament. |
Subordination of DPSPs to FRs. (Led to 1st, 4th, and 17th CAAs inserting Art 31A & 9th
Schedule). |
| Kerala Education Bill Case (1957) |
Court propounded the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction.
Courts should attempt to give effect to both FRs and DPSPs without destroying either. |
Harmonious Construction between Part III and Part IV. |
| Golaknath Case (1967) |
Supreme Court ruled that Fundamental Rights are sacrosanct and transcendental; Parliament
cannot amend or abridge FRs to implement DPSPs.
|
Absolute primacy of FRs over DPSPs. |
| 24th & 25th CAA (1971) |
Parliament inserted Article 31C: Laws enacting Article
39(b) & (c) DPSPs cannot be challenged for violating Articles 14, 19, or 31. Barred judicial
review of such laws. |
Article 39(b) & (c) granted primacy over Articles 14 and 19. |
| Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973) |
Upheld 1st part of Article 31C (giving primacy to Art 39(b) & (c) over Arts 14/19). Struck
down 2nd part (barring judicial review) as violation of the Basic
Structure. |
Judicial Review is a Basic Feature of the Constitution. |
| 42nd Amendment Act (1976) |
Parliament attempted to accord primacy to ALL DPSPs over
Articles 14, 19, and 31. |
Attempted total subordination of FRs to DPSPs. |
| Minerva Mills Case (1980) |
Supreme Court struck down the 42nd CAA extension of Article 31C. Declared that the
Constitution is founded on the bedrock of balance between FRs and
DPSPs. |
Famous Quote: "FRs and DPSPs are complementary like two wheels of a chariot." |
| I.R. Coelho Case (2007) |
Affirmed that laws placed in the 9th Schedule after April 24, 1973, are open to judicial
review if they damage the Basic Structure. |
Judicial review applies to 9th Schedule additions. |
Present Legal Position (Current Status):
- Fundamental Rights generally hold supreme constitutional status over Directive Principles.
- EXCEPTION: Laws enacted to implement Article
39(b) (resource distribution) and Article 39(c)
(wealth concentration check) strictly override Articles 14 (Equality)
and 19 (Freedoms).
- Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights to implement DPSPs as long as the amendment does not
violate or damage the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Potential Centre-State & Executive Deadlocks Over DPSPs:
Constitutional critic K. Santhanam pointed out that DPSPs could trigger major institutional
conflicts:
- Centre vs. States (Art 256 / 365): The Centre could issue directions to a State
to implement a DPSP. If the State fails to comply, the Centre could invoke Article 365 to impose President's Rule!
- Fiscal Strain: Central directives to implement DPSP schemes can severely strain
the fiscal autonomy of poorer States.
- President vs. Prime Minister: A President could withhold assent to a bill
passed by Parliament on the pretext that it violates a Directive Principle.
6. Similarities & Comparative Matrix: FRs vs. DPSPs
Core Similarities Between FRs and DPSPs
- Both are borrowed constitutional features (USA & Ireland).
- Both are directed towards achieving inclusive, equitable national growth.
- Both are backed by broader constitutional guarantees and form the "Conscience of the
Constitution".
- Both serve as a Guiding Light for the Judiciary in examining the constitutional
validity of laws.
- Both share a common genesis in the social consciousness of the Constituent Assembly.
Distinction Between Fundamental Rights & DPSPs
| Parameter |
Fundamental Rights (Part III) |
Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV) |
| Constitutional Source |
USA (Bill of Rights) |
Ireland (1937 Constitution) |
| Nature & Character |
Negative Connotation (Prohibits State from doing certain
actions) |
Positive Connotation (Enables State to take affirmative
policy actions) |
| Enforceability & Writs |
Justiciable & Legally Enforceable via SC (Art 32) & HC
(Art 226) |
Non-Justiciable & Not Legally Enforceable directly in
courts |
| Type of Democracy |
Establishes Political Democracy |
Establishes Social and Economic Democracy |
| Core Focus & Target |
Focuses on Individual Welfare (personal & individualistic)
|
Focuses on Community Welfare (societarian & socialistic)
|
| Implementation Requirement |
Automatically enforced (no separate legislation required for most FRs) |
Requires Parliamentary/State legislation to implement |
| Judicial Invalidation |
Laws violating FRs are declared null and void by Judiciary |
Laws violating DPSPs are not invalidated; court can uphold law if enacted to give effect to
DPSP |
| Driving Force / Sanction |
Legal Sanctions |
Moral and Political Sanctions (Public opinion & Elections) |
7. Case Studies in Practical DPSP Implementation
The Indian Parliament and State Legislatures have enacted landmark laws to translate Part IV directives
into public policy:
Case Study 1 Maternity Benefit (Amendment) Act 2017
(Article 42)
Implements Article 42 (maternity relief and humane work conditions). Received Presidential assent on
March 27, 2017, amending the 1961 Act.
- Increased paid maternity leave from 12 weeks to 26 weeks (for first two
children; 12 weeks for 3rd child onwards).
- Provides 12 weeks paid leave for adoptive and commissioning mothers.
- Mandates crèche facilities in establishments employing 50 or more employees (permitting 4
visits daily).
- Introduces options for "work from home" post leave expiry. Applicable to establishments with
10+ employees.
Case Study 2 MGNREGA — Historical Evolution & Features
(Article 41)
Implements Article 41 (Right to work and public assistance).
- Historical Evolution: Started as a pilot scheme in 1991 under P.V.
Narasimha Rao (Employment Assurance Scheme), merged with Food for Work Programme, and
enacted as NREGA on Sept 7, 2005 (renamed MGNREGA).
- Core Guarantee: Guarantees 100 days of unskilled
wage employment per financial year to rural households.
- Financial Model: Central Govt bears 100% unskilled labour cost + 75%
material cost.
- Audit & Transparency: Annual audit reports prepared by Central Employment
Guarantee Council (CEGC) and State Employment Guarantee Councils (SEGC) presented to
legislatures.
- Covid-19 Relief: Wage hiked by ₹2,000 during March 2020 pandemic lockdown.
Case Study 3 Liquor Prohibition — Critical Analysis &
ADRI Data (Article 47)
Implements Article 47 (Prohibition of intoxicating drinks and health-injurious drugs).
- Constitutional Status: Alcohol is a State Subject under Entry 51 of the State List (7th Schedule).
- Complete Prohibition States: Gujarat (since 1960), Nagaland (NLTP Act
1989), Bihar (2016), and Lakshadweep. Gujarat and Bihar prescribe the death penalty for
hooch manufacturers in fatal spurious liquor cases.
- SC Highway Ban (Dec 2016): Banned liquor sales within 500
metres of National/State highways to counter drunk driving (400 road deaths/day
in India). Clarified later as non-applicable to licensed outlets in municipal limits.
- Empirical ADRI Study on Bihar Prohibition:
• Crime Reduction: 66.6% drop in ransom kidnappings, 28.3% drop in murders,
2.3% drop in dacoities.
• Nutrition Shift: Surge in sales of honey (380%), cheese (200%), buttermilk
(40%), flavoured milk (28.4%), and lassi (19.7%).
• Social Impact: 58% of women reported higher household respect/decision-making
role; 19% of households created new productive assets from money saved on alcohol.
- NCRB Statistic: 15 people die daily in India (1 every 96 minutes) due to
alcohol effects.
- Policy Reform Needs: Uniform legal drinking age, banning alcohol ads,
linking de-addiction centres with Primary Health Centres (PHCs), adopting the Brasilia
Declaration on Road Safety.
Case Study 4 Uniform Civil Code — UCC (Article
44)
Implements Article 44 (Uniform Civil Code for all citizens throughout India).
- Uttarakhand Enactment (Jan 27, 2025): Became the 1st state
post-independence to implement UCC (exempting Scheduled Tribes under Art 342).
- Goa Portuguese Civil Code 1867: Muslim men registered in Goa cannot
practice polygamy; pre-nuptial agreements are customary; 50-50 property division upon
divorce.
- Hindu Personal Law Codification (1955–1956): Hindu laws (applying to Sikhs,
Jains, Buddhists) were split into 4 secular acts:
1. The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
2. The Hindu Succession Act, 1956
3. The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956
4. The Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956
- Muslim Personal Law: Governed by the uncodified Muslim Personal Law
(Shariat) Application Act, 1937.
- Judicial Push: Shah Bano Case (1985), Sarla Mudgal
(1995), and Shayara Bano Triple Talaq Case (2017).
- Law Commission Report (2018): Stated UCC is "neither necessary nor
desirable at this stage", emphasizing that secularism cannot contradict plurality.
- Way Forward: Adopt a progressive "Piecemeal"
approach. "Uniform" means uniform principles of gender and human justice
(modernizing and humanizing personal laws), not enforcing a single monolithic culture.
Case Study 5 Minimum Wages Act 1948 & Labour Codes
(Article 43)
Implements Article 43 (Living wages, decent standard of life, and social/cultural opportunities for
workers).
- Statutory Empowerment: Empowers Union and State Governments to fix and
revise minimum wages for scheduled employments.
- National Floor Wage: Central Govt sets the National Floor Wage below which
no state can set minimum wages.
- State Flexibility: No uniform national wage rate; individual States set
specific rates based on local economic conditions and cost of living.
- Skill-Level Tiers: Wages are categorized and scaled by skill level
(Unskilled < Semi-Skilled < Skilled < Highly Skilled).
- Flexible Pay Intervals: Wage rates can be fixed on an hourly, daily,
weekly, or monthly basis.
- Mandatory 5-Year Inflation Revision: Mandatory revision of minimum wage
rates at least once every 5 years to keep pace with inflation (Consumer
Price Index).
- Wages in Kind: Allows payment of wages in kind (e.g. food grains, housing)
where customary and approved.
- Record Keeping: Employers are statutorily required to maintain wage
registers, records, and inspection logs.
8. Criticisms & Scholar Opinions
Critics have attacked Part IV for its non-justiciable character, illogical layout, and potential for
constitutional deadlocks.
Famous Scholar Quotes & Criticisms:
- Prof. K.T. Shah: Described DPSPs as “pious
superfluities” and famously compared them to “a cheque on a bank, payable only
when the resources of the bank permit.”
- T.T. Krishnamachari: Called Part IV a “veritable
dustbin of sentiments”.
- K.C. Wheare: Called DPSPs a “Manifesto of aims and
aspirations”.
- Sir Ivor Jennings: Characterized them as “pious
aspirations”, arguing they were based on outdated 19th-century English political
philosophy (Fabian Socialism without socialism), unsuitable for modern governance.
- Nasiruddin Ahmad: Termed DPSPs as nothing more than “New Year’s resolutions” that are broken on January 2nd.
- N. Srinivasan: Criticized DPSPs as illogically arranged, mixing vital
socio-economic questions with minor, trivial issues without clear priority.
- L.M. Singhvi (Positive Assessment): "The Directives are the life-giving
provisions of the Constitution. They constitute the stuff of the Constitution and its
philosophy of social justice."
- Modern Political Criticism: "Freebie Culture" / "Revri Culture" used by
political parties for populist election gains under the guise of implementing DPSPs.
9. Utility, Significance & Practical Purpose
Despite heavy criticism, constitutional jurists agree that Part IV serves indispensable functions in
Indian democracy:
- Common Minimum Programme: DPSPs act as a non-negotiable manifesto for any
incoming government regardless of political ideology.
- Guide, Friend & Philosopher: Acts as a guide for the ruling party in framing
executive and legislative acts.
- Guiding Light / Beacon to Judiciary: Assists courts in interpreting ambiguous
statutes and determining whether legislative restrictions on rights are "reasonable".
- Stability & Policy Continuity: Ensures continuous socio-economic direction in
domestic and foreign policies across political regime changes.
- Yardstick for Opposition & Citizens: Serves as an objective benchmark for
voters and opposition parties to evaluate government performance and hold the executive
accountable.
- Hussainara Khatoon Case (1979): Supreme Court linked Article 39A (free legal
aid) with Article 21 to declare Speedy Trial a Fundamental Right for prisoners.
9.5 "Traps" and Misconceptions of DPSP's
- "DPSP's are optional for the state": False. Although non-enforceable in court,
they are a constitutional obligation on the State.
- "DPSP's belong to only one ideology": False. They are a mix of
socialist, Gandhian, and liberal-intellectual ideologies.
- "DPSP's never change": False. Their scope has been expanded via amendments such
as the 42nd, 44th, 86th, and 97th.
- "DPSP's were borrowed ONLY from Ireland": False. While borrowed majorly from
Ireland, they are also influenced by the Spanish and US Constitutions.
- "DPSP's override Fundamental Rights": False. They are intended to
prevail in harmony.
- "DPSP's bind ONLY Parliament": False. They bind the Centre, States, and
whatever comes under the definition of "State".
- "DPSP's and Fundamental Rights have no relation": False. Together, they form
the "Justice" mentioned under the Preamble.
- "DPSP's cannot lead to enforceable rights": False. Many Fundamental Rights
(e.g., Right to Education, Free Legal Aid, PRI) have evolved from DPSP's.
- "Courts cannot use DPSP's": False. Courts can use DPSP's for judicial
interpretation.
- "DPSP's are legally useless": False. The Supreme Court calls them
fundamental in the governance of India.
10. Directive Principles Outside Part IV
Besides Part IV, the Constitution contains three explicit non-justiciable Directive Principles in other
Parts:
| Article & Part |
Subject Matter & Directives |
Syllabus Focus |
| Article 335 (Part XVI) |
Claims of SCs and STs to Services: The claims of members of Scheduled
Castes and Scheduled Tribes shall be taken into consideration, consistently with the
maintenance of efficiency of administration, in appointments to public services. |
Balances affirmative action reservations with administrative efficiency. |
| Article 350-A (Part XVII) |
Instruction in Mother Tongue: It shall be the endeavour of every State and
local authority to provide adequate facilities for instruction in the mother tongue at the
primary stage of education to children belonging to linguistic minority groups. |
Linguistic minority rights at primary school level. |
| Article 351 (Part XVII) |
Development of Hindi Language: It shall be the duty of the Union to promote
the spread of the Hindi language, to develop it so that it may serve as a medium of
expression for all the elements of the composite culture of India. |
Promotion of Hindi as a link language. |
11. Landmark Supreme Court Rulings on DPSP Implementation
| Landmark Case |
Article Concerned |
Supreme Court Ruling |
| State of Gujarat v. Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat (2005) |
Article 48 & Article 48A |
7-Judge Bench upheld complete ban on slaughter of cows and progeny (bulls and bullocks) as a
reasonable restriction under Art 19(6) in furtherance of DPSP under Art 48. |
| M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986) |
Article 48A & Article 51A(g) |
Held that environment protection (Art 48A) imposes absolute liability on hazardous
industries and mandates environmental education in all educational institutions. |
Synthesis of lecture notes from Prashant Tiwari (StudyIQ)
and Jatin Gill Sir (UPSC/Punjab PCS). Compiled into Khosa Polity Notes System.