Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Submitted To:
Ms. Madhurima De Sarkar
(Faculty Member, Constitutional Governance-I)
Submitted By:
Prashant Choudhary
Roll No: 110, Section C, Semester III
B.A. L.L.B. (HONS.)
DECLARATION
I hereby declare that the project work entitled Relationship Between Fundamental Rights and
Directive Principles of State Policy: A Critical Analysis submitted to Hidayatullah National Law
University, Raipur, is a record of an original work done by me under the able guidance of Ms.
Madhurima De Sarkar, Faculty-in-charge, Constitutional Governance-I, Hidayatullah National Law
University, Raipur.
Prashant Choudhary
Semester III
Roll No. 110
Section C
Page | 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I feel highly elated to work on the topic Relationship Between Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy: A Critical Analysis. This research venture has been made possible due
to the generous co-operation of various persons. To list them all is not practicable, even to repay them
in words is beyond the domain of my lexicon.
May I observe the protocol to show my deep gratitude to the venerated Faculty Member, Ms.
Madhurima De Sarkar, for her kind gesture in allotting me such a wonderful and elucidating research
topic. Her consistent supervision, constant inspiration and invaluable guidance have been of immense
help in understanding and carrying out the nuances of the project report.
Page | 2
CONTENTS
Declaration.................................................................................................................... 1
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................ 2
Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4
Objective Of The Study................................................................................................. 5
Scope Of The Study ...................................................................................................... 5
Research Methodology ................................................................................................. 5
Fundamental Rights And Directive Principles Of State Policy: About ................. 6
Fundamental Rights And Dpsp: The Relationship .................................................. 7
Purpose Of Insertion Of Part Iii And Part Iv .......................................................... 7
Tussle Between The Legislature And Judiciary ....................................................... 8
Fundamental Rights And Directive Principles Of State Policy: Conflicting Or
Complimentary .......................................................................................................... 11
Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 13
References .................................................................................................................. 14
Page | 3
INTRODUCTION
The justiciability of Fundamental Rights and non-justiciability of Directive Principles on the one hand
and the moral obligation of State to implement Directive Principles (Article 37) on the other hand
have led to a conflict between the two since the commencement of the Constitution. In the Champakam
Dorairajan case (1951), the Supreme Court ruled that in case of any conflict between the Fundamental
Rights and the Directive Principles, the former would prevail. It declared that the Directive Principles
have to conform to and run as subsidiary to the Fundamental Rights.
But, it also held that the Fundamental Rights could be amended by the Parliament by enacting
constitutional amendments acts. As a result, the Parliament made the First Amendment Act (1951),
the Fourth Amendment Act and the Seventeenth Amendment Act
Directives. The above situation underwent a major change in 1967 following the Supreme Court's
judgement in the Golaknath case (1967).
Whenever conflicts arise between fundamental rights and directive principles, fundamental rights
prevail over the directive principles because, in terms of Arts. 32 and 226, fundamental rights are
enforceable by the courts. If a law is in conflict with a fundamental right, it is declared void by the
Supreme Court. But no law can be declared void on the ground that it is violative of a directive
principle. In 1951, in Champakam Dorairajan vs. the state of Madras, the Supreme Court held The
chapter on Fundamental Rights is sacrosanct and not liable to be abridged by any legislative or
executive act. The Directive Principles of State Policy have to conform and are subsidiary to the
chapter on Fundamental Rights.
Page | 4
To analyze and understand the concepts of Fundamental rights and DPSPs individually.
To find out the relationship between the two concepts of Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy.
To study the tussle of the legislature and Judiciary regarding both the concepts
To study in brief some important court judgments which lead to the current situation of the
Fundamental Rights and DPSPs
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research methodology adopted is descriptive analytical. Through my project I aim to describe and
analyze the relationship that exists between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs and also discuss the whole
development procedure which was followed to reach to the proper conclusion over Fundamental rights
and DPSPs' applicability and ambit. The sources of data in the project include - books, websites,
discussions on the topic with the subject teacher, seniors and friends.
Page | 5
The
amendment simultaneously stated that laws prohibiting "antinational activities or the formation of
antinational associations could not be invalidated because they infringed on any of the Fundamental
Rights. It added a new section to the constitution on "Fundamental Duties" that enjoined citizens "to
promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood among all the people of India, transcending
religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities." However, the amendment reflected a new
emphasis in governing circles on order and discipline to counteract what some leaders had come to
perceive as the excessively freewheeling style of Indian democracy. After the March 1977 general
election ended the control of the Congress (Congress (R) from 1969) over the executive and legislature
for the first time since independence in 1947, the new Janata - dominated Parliament passed the Fortythird Amendment (1977) and Forty-fourth Amendment (1978). These amendments revoked the Fortysecond Amendment's provision that Directive Principles take precedence over Fundamental Rights
and also curbed Parliament's power to legislate against "antinational activities."
Page | 6
Page | 7
Where two judicial choices are available, the construction in conformity with the social
philosophy of the Directive Principles has preference. The courts therefore could interpret a
statute so as to implement Directive Principles instead of reducing them to mere theoretical ideas.
This is on the assumptions that the law makers are not completely unmindful or obvious of the
Directive Principles.
Further the courts also adopted the view that in determining the scope and ambit of Fundamental
rights, the Directive Principles should not be completely ignored and that the courts should adopt
the principles of harmonious construction and attempt to give effect to both as far as possible.
Page | 8
Page | 9
Page | 10
Page | 11
The Supreme Court said in State of Kerala v. N.M Thomas4, that the Directive Principles and
Fundamental rights should be construed in harmony with each other and every attempt should be made
by the court to resolve any apparent in consistency between them.
Page | 12
CONCLUSIONS
The Directive principles and Fundamental rights are not now regarded as exclusionary of each other.
They are regarded as supplementary and complementary to each other. The directive principles which
have been declared to be fundamental in the governance of the country cannot be isolated from
fundamental rights. The directive principles have got to be read into the fundamental rights. An
example of such relationship is furnished by the right to education.
By and large this assimilative strategy has resulted in broadening, and giving greater depth and
dimension to, and even creating more rights for the people over and above the expressly stated,
fundamental rights. That biggest beneficiary of this approach has been Art 21.
At the same time, the values underlying the directive principles have also become enforceable by riding
on the back of the fundamental rights. Courts have used directive principles not to restrict, but rather
to expand, the ambit of the fundamental rights.
The theme that fundamental rights are but a means to achieve the goal indicated in the directive
principles and the fundamental rights must be construed in the light of the directive principles has
been advocated by the Supreme Court time and again.
Accordingly, the directive principles are regarded as a dependable index of public purpose. If a law
is enacted to implement the socio-economic policy envisaged in the directive principles, then it must
be regarded as one for public purpose. Thus, in State of Bihar v. kameshwar, the supreme court relied
on Art. 39 to decide that the law to abolish zamindari had been enacted for a public purpose within
the meaning of Art. 31.
It may be concluded by saying that, one should try to establish harmony between fundamental rights
and Directive Principles, since maintenance of harmony between them is a basic feature to the
constitution
Page | 13
REFERENCES
1. http://www.facts-about- india.com/fundamental-rights- in-India.php
2. http://www.importantindia.com/2041/fundamental-rights-and-directive-principles-of-statepolicy/
3. http://www.vajiramandravi.in/conflict-between-fundamental-rights-and-directiveprinciples.html
4. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2478587
5. http://www.gktoday.in/conflict-between-fundamental-rights-and-directive-principles-of-statepolicy/
6. https://abhijeetgautam.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/inter-relationship-between- fundamentalrights-and-directive-principles/
7. http://www.iupindia.in/1401/Law%20Review/Evolution_of_the_Relationship.html
8. http://www.grkarelawlibrary.yolasite.com/resources/LLM-Const-1-Queency.pdf
Page | 14