Relationship Between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy 

A Constitution is a set of rules and regulations guiding the administration of a country. The Constitution is the backbone of every democratic and secular fabric of the nation. The Constitution of India is the longest Constitution in the world, which describes the framework for political principles, procedures, and powers of the Government. It was framed by a Constituent Assembly, which was established in 1946, and Dr. Rajendra Prasad was elected President of the Constituent Assembly.

A Drafting Committee was also appointed to draft the Constitution, and Dr B.R. Ambedkar was appointed as the Chairman. The making of the Constitution took a total of 166 days, which was spread over 2 years, 11 months, and 18 days. Some of the salient features of the British, Irish, Swiss, French, Canadian, and American Constitutions were incorporated while designing the Indian Constitution. The Constitution of India was completely written on Nov. 26, 1949, and came into force on Jan. 26, 1950.

The Indian Constitution is the lengthiest in the world. It had 395 articles in 22 parts and 8 schedules at the time of commencement. Now, it has 448 articles in 25 parts and 12 schedules. There are 104 amendments (took place on Jan. 25, 2020, to extend the reservation of seats for SCs and STs in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies) that have been made in the Indian Constitution so far. One of the unique features of Indian Constitution is that it is not as rigid as the American Constitution or as flexible as the British Constitution. It means it is partly fixed and partly flexible. Owing to this, it can easily change and grow with the change of times.

The Indian Constitution is a comprehensive framework that enshrines its citizens’ rights, principles, and aspirations. At its core, it strikes a delicate balance between safeguarding individual liberties and promoting the collective welfare of society.

This intricate balance is reflected in the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) – two essential pillars that guide the governance and progress of the nation.

What are fundamental rights?

Fundamental rights, often called “basic rights,” are essential for human beings to live with dignity in a civilised society. They are also known as negative or individual rights because they impose limitations on the State to prevent encroachment on individual liberty. 

Fundamental rights are also known as Inherent rights because they are inherent to every person by birth. These are the rights that provide an individual with some basic rights for survival. No discrimination is made on the basis of religion, caste, race, etc., and if any person feels that his fundamental rights are being infringed, they can seek legal recourse.

In the Indian Constitution, fundamental rights are outlined in Part III, from Article 12 to Article 35. This chapter of the Constitution of India has very well been described as the Magna Carta of India, which was the first written document relating to the fundamental rights of the citizens. There were seven fundamental rights originally, but the Right to Property was repealed after the Abolition of the Zamindari Act. The six remaining fundamental rights are as follows:

• Right to equality (Article 14-18)
• Right to Freedom (Article 19-22)
• Right against exploitation (Article 23-24)
• Right to Freedom of religion (Article 25-28)
• Cultural and educational rights (Article 29-30)
• Right to constitutional remedies (Article 32-35)

Right To Equality

Article 14 – Equality before the law.

Article 15 – Prohibition of discrimination on the grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.

Article 16–Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.

Article 17–Abolition of untouchability.

Article 18–Abolition of titles.

Equality before Law and Equal Protection Laws, and the prohibition of discrimination on certain grounds such as religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth gives equality of opportunity in matters of public employment. Abolish the untouchability and prohibit its practice. Abolition of all titles except military and academic.

Right to freedom

Article 20 – Protection in respect of conviction for offences.

Article 19 – protection of certain rights regarding Freedom of speech, etc.

Article 21 – Protection of life and personal liberty.

Article 21A – Right to education.

Article 22–Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.

Protection of six rights regarding Freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession. These six rights are protected against only state action and not private individuals. These rights are not available to foreigners but available only to the citizens. Grants protection against excessive and arbitrary punishment to an accused person. It is available for both citizens and foreigners. The right to Freedom also states that no person shall be underprivileged of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. It also provides that the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years. It grants protection to persons who are arrested or detained.

Right against exploitation

Article 23 – Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour

Article 24 – Prohibition of employment of children in factories, etc.

It prohibits human trafficking, forced labour, and other similar forms of forced labour. It also prohibits the employment of minor children below the age of 14 years in any mine, factory, or other hazardous activities like construction work or railway.

Right to freedom of religion

Article 25–Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion.

Article 26 – Freedom to manage religious affairs.

Article 27 – Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion.

Article 28 – Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions.

All persons are equally allowed Freedom of conscience and the right to freely practise, propagate, and profess religion. Every religious section shall have the following rights:

1. Maintain and establish institutions for religious and charitable purposes

2. Manage its affairs in matters of religion

3. Acquire and own movable and immovable property

4. Administer such property in accordance with the law

It gives Freedom from Taxation for the Promotion of a Religion which means no person shall be compelled to pay any taxes for the maintenance or promotion of any particular religious denomination or section.

Cultural and educational rights

Article 29 – Protection of interests of minorities.

Article 30–Rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.

Any section of the citizens in any part of India having a definite script, culture or language of its own, shall have the right to conserve the same.No citizen shall be denied admission into any educational institution maintained by the State or receiving aid out of State funds on grounds only of caste, language, religion or race. All minorities shall have the right to administer and establish educational institutions of their choice.

Right to constitutional remedies

Article 32 – Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this part.

Article 33 – Power of Parliament to modify the rights conferred by this part in their application to Forces, etc.

Article 34–Restriction on rights conferred by this part while martial law is in force in any area.

Article 35 – Legislation to give effect to the provisions of this part.

The Right to Constitutional Remedies is one of the fundamental rights guaranteed to the citizens of India under Article 32 and Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. The 6th fundamental right, the right to constitutional remedies, ensures that citizens have access to justice and can seek redressal for the violation of their fundamental rights. It is also called the right to get the Fundamental Rights protected is in itself a fundamental right. Article 32 empowers the Parliament to authorise any other court to issue these writs, and Article 226 empowers all the high courts of India to issue the writs. The courts have the authority to issue various types of orders, including writs such as:

HABEAS CORPUS: it simply means to ‘Produce the Body’. This writ is issued to produce a detained person before the court and ensure their Freedom if the detention is found to be illegal.

MANDAMUS: This means ‘We Command’. It is a writ that orders a public official or authority to perform a specific duty that they are legally obligated to do but have not fulfilled.

PROHIBITION: it is basically known as ‘Stay Order’. It is issued by a higher court to prevent a lower court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction.

CERTIORARI:this means To Be Certified’. It is a writ that is issued by a higher court to quash the decision of a lower court or tribunal if it is found to be beyond its jurisdiction or against the principles of natural justice.

QUO WARRANTO: it signifies ‘By What Authority?’. This writ challenges the right or authority of a person holding a public office to inquire into the legality of their appointment.

What Are Directive Principles of State Policy?

The Directive Principles of State Policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution set out the aims and objectives to be taken up by the States in the governance of the country. And are also regarded as positive rights since they place affirmative responsibilities on the State.

This novel feature of the Constitution is borrowed from Article 45 of the Constitution of Ireland, which had copied it from the Spanish Constitution.

Articles 36-51 of the Indian Constitution encompass the Directive Principles of the State Policy.

Directive Principles of the State Policy imposes a duty upon the State not only to protect and acknowledge the Fundamental rights of the individuals but also to achieve Socio-economic goals. Certain guidelines are present for the state authority to work upon them for the protection of society. It mostly focuses on welfare and improvement of society altogether. The Directive principles lay down certain economic and social policies to be pursued by the various governments in India; they impose certain obligations on the State to take positive action in certain directions in order to promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy.

Directive Principles are not enforceable by the court of law if the Government is not abiding by them, nor can the court declare void any law, which is otherwise valid on the ground, that it contravenes any of the directives. But the Directive Principles can be enforced through certain legislations. And In case of any violation of the DirectivePrinciples which is itself a violation of the Fundamental Rights or of Constitutional goals, or in any case of conflict between the two, then the court will act upon it in a harmonious construction.

Directive Principles

Article 38 – State to secure a social order for the promotion of the welfare of the people.

Article 39 – certain principles of policy to be followed by the State.

Article 39A – Equal justice and free legal aid.

Article 40– Organisation 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 relief.

Article 43 – Living wage, etc, for workers.

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

Article 43B – Promotion of co-operative 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 educational and economic interests of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes 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 – organisation 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 of national importance.

Article 50–Separation of judiciary from executive.

Article 51 – Promotion of international peace and security.

Difference between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy

Case Laws on the Relationship between Fundamental Rights and DPSP

To better understand the conflict between Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) and Fundamental Rights, let’s examine some important case laws that shed light on the matter. By studying these cases, we can determine what happens when a conflict arises between DPSP and Fundamental Rights.

In the case of the State of Madras Vs. Champakam Dorairajan[1], the Supreme Court ruled that Directive Principles of the State Policy, which by Article 37 are expressly made unenforceable by Courts cannot override the provisions of Part III of the Constitution,which includes Fundamental Rights, are expressly made enforceable by appropriate writs, orders, or directions under Article 32. The Directive Principles of State Policy have to conform and must operate subsidiary to Fundamental Rights and should not contradict them. However, so long as there is no infringement of any fundamental right to the extent conferred by the provisions in Part III, there can be no objection for the State to act in accordance with the Directive Principles, subject to other provisions of the Constitution.

In the State of Bihar vs. Kameshwar Singh[2], the Court relied on Article 39 in deciding that a certain Zamindari Abolition Act had been passed for a public purpose within the meaning of Article 31.

Finally, in Re Kerala Education Bill[3], the Supreme Court observed that though the Directive Principles cannot override the Fundamental Rights, nevertheless, in determining the scope and ambit of Fundamental Rights the court may not entirely ignore the Directive Principles but should adopt “the principle of Harmonious Construction and should attempt to give effect to both as much as possible”.

Now, what is the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction?

According to the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction, the Constitution’s provisions should be interpreted and constituted to allow Fundamental Rights and DPSP to work in harmony, avoiding conflicts between them. The court aims to construe each provision of the Constitution so they can function together seamlessly.

The court held that no conflict will arise if there is no inherent conflict. However, suppose a conflict arises due to the court’s interpretation of a particular law. In that case, the court should make efforts to give effect to both Fundamental Rights and DPSP as much as possible.

The objective is to connect Fundamental Rights and DPSP without requiring any amendments. If conflicts persist despite attempts to maintain balance, the court must prioritise the implementation of Fundamental Rights over DPSP.

In the case of Ranjan Dwivedi vs. Union of India[4], it was held that the Courts have the responsibility to interpret the provisions of the Constitution in such a way as to ensure the implementation of the Directive Principles and to harmonise the social objectives underlying the directives with the individual rights. This is the mandate of the Constitution not to the Legislature and the Executive only, but to the Courts as well.

In Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala[5], the Supreme Court held that fundamental Rights and Directive Principles aim at the same goal of bringing about a social revolution and establishment of a Welfare State and they can be interpreted and applied together. They are supplementary and complementary to each other. It can well be said that Directive Principles prescribe the goal to be attained and the Fundamental Rights lay down the means by which the goal is to be achieved.

In Unni Krishnan vs. State of Andhra Pradesh[6], the Supreme Court reiterated the same principle that ‘the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are supplementary and complementary to each other and the provisions in Part III should be interpreted having regard to the preamble and Directive Principles of the State Policy’.

The Directive Principles are also relevant to consider what are reasonable restrictions under Article 19. Article 19 permits the imposition of a reasonable restriction on the Fundamental Right. A restriction which promotes any objective embodied in the Directive Principles is usually considered reasonable by the courts of law.

In the State of Bombay vs. F.N. Balsara[7], the Supreme Court gave weight to Article 47 which directs the State to bring about prohibition of consumption of intoxicating drinks except for medical purposes – to support its decisions that the restriction imposed by the Bombay Prohibition Act was a reasonable restriction on the right to engage in any profession or carry on any trade. In Bijoy Cotton Mills vs. State of Ajmer[8], the Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional validity of the Minimum Wages Act, 1948, because it was enacted to give effect to Directive Principles of State Policy in Article 43 of the Constitution. It was held that the fixation of the wages for labourers did not violate Freedom of trade under Article 19 (5). Thus, it was considered as a reasonable restriction.

Minerva Mills vs. Union of India[9], the Supreme Court held that the law under Article 31(C) would be protected only if it is enacted to implement the directive in Article 39(b) and (c) and not for any other Directive Principle. Previously, protection was given to all Directive Principles, but after this case, such protection was restricted. It was declared that protecting all Directive Principles would render them void and unconstitutional.

Relationship Between Directive Principles of State Policy and Fundamental Rights

The relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) can be described as follows:

Complementary Nature

Fundamental Rights and DPSP are considered complementary to each other. While Fundamental Rights focus on individual rights and liberties, Directive Principles of State Policy emphasises the goals and principles the State should strive to achieve in the social and economic spheres. Both sets of provisions aim to secure a just and equitable society.

Non-Justiciability of DPSP

Unlike Fundamental Rights, which are justiciable and can be enforced in courts, Directive Principles are non-justiciable. This means that individuals cannot directly approach courts for their enforcement. However, Directive Principles provides guiding principles to the State in formulating policies and legislation.

Harmony and Harmonious Construction

The courts have emphasised the need for harmony between Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy. The Doctrine of Harmonious Construction guides the interpretation of constitutional provisions in a way that avoids conflicts between the two sets of rights and seeks to give effect to both as far as possible.

Subordination of DPSP

While Fundamental Rights enjoy higher legal protection, Directive Principles are considered subordinate to Fundamental Rights. In a conflict between the two, the courts generally prioritise the protection of Fundamental Rights.

State Obligation

Directive Principles of State Policy impose positive obligations on the State to promote social justice, welfare and equitable distribution of resources. The State is expected to take steps to implement Directive Principles over time, subject to its available resources and other considerations.

 Progressive Realisation

Directive Principles are principles and goals that are gradually realised over time. The State is expected to make reasonable efforts to progressively fulfil these principles, considering its financial capacity and socio-economic conditions.

Conclusion

The relationship between fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy is a crucial aspect of constitutional law and governance in any democratic nation. These two concepts, although distinct, are closely intertwined and complement each other in the overall objective of achieving social justice and ensuring a just and equitable society.

Fundamental rights are individual rights that are guaranteed and protected by the Constitution. These rights are considered essential for the dignity and well-being of every citizen and are enforceable through legal remedies.

On the other hand, directive principles of state policy are a set of guidelines and principles that aim to direct the State in formulating policies and laws that promote the welfare of the people and establish a just society. While not legally enforceable, these principles are fundamental in guiding the Government in its decision-making process.

The relationship between these two concepts lies in their shared objective of establishing a just and equitable society. Both fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy aim to protect and promote the well-being of individuals and ensure social justice. The fundamental rights provide individuals with legal protections against any violation of their rights, while the directive principles guide the State in formulating policies that work towards the larger goal of a just society. Furthermore, fundamental rights and directive principles are interconnected and interdependent in their application. The judiciary plays a crucial role in this relationship by interpreting and safeguarding fundamental rights while also considering the directive principles.

In conclusion, the relationship between fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy is key to establishing a just and equitable society. While fundamental rights protect and ensure individual liberties, directive principles guide the State in promoting social welfare and establishing social justice. Their interplay is essential in creating a harmonious and balanced legal framework that upholds the principles of democracy and human rights.

Footnotes

[1]AIR 1951 SC 226.

[2]AIR 1952 SC 352. 

[3]AIR 1957 SC 956. 

[4]AIR 1983 SC 624.

[5]AIR 1973 SC 1461.

[6](1993) 1 SCC 645. 

[7]AIR 1951 SC 318 at p. 329. 

[8]AIR 1955 SC 33.

[9]AIR 1980 SC 1789.

This article has been contributed by Angel Singh, a student at Army Institute of Law, Mohali.