DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY (DPSP)

DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY (DPSP)

INTRODUCTION

Definition: The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are constitutional instructions or recommendations enumerated in Part IV of the Constitution (Articles 36 to 51) that guide the State in formulating policies and enacting laws.

Origin: The concept was borrowed from the Irish Constitution of 1937, which itself copied it from the Spanish Constitution. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar described these principles as ‘novel features’ of the Indian Constitution.

Constitutional Significance: According to Granville Austin, the Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights together form the ‘Conscience of the Constitution’. They contain the philosophy and soul of the Constitution.

KEY FEATURES OF DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

1. Definition and Scope

• Denote the ideals that the State should keep in mind while formulating policies and enacting laws

• Apply to all State entities: legislative and executive organs of Central and State governments, local authorities, and public authorities

• According to Article 36, “State” has the same meaning as in Part III (Fundamental Rights)

2. Historical Connection

• Resemble the ‘Instrument of Instructions’ enumerated in the Government of India Act of 1935

• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar explained: They are instructions to the legislature and executive (as opposed to instructions to the Governor-General under the 1935 Act)

3. Nature and Scope

• Constitute a comprehensive economic, social and political programme for a modern democratic state

• Aim at realizing high ideals of justice, liberty, equality and fraternity (from the Preamble)

• Embody the concept of a ‘welfare state’ (not a ‘police state’ of colonial era)

• Seek to establish economic and social democracy in the country

4. Non-Justiciable Nature

• NOT legally enforceable by courts for their violation

• Government cannot be compelled to implement them through court proceedings

• However, Article 37 states that these principles are fundamental in governance and the State has a duty to apply them in making laws

5. Judicial Application

• Though non-justiciable, courts use them when examining constitutional validity of laws

• Supreme Court has ruled that if a law seeks to give effect to a Directive Principle, it may be considered ‘reasonable’ in relation to:

  • Article 14 (equality before law)

  • Article 19 (six freedoms)

• This protection saves such laws from being declared unconstitutional

CLASSIFICATION OF DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Although the Constitution does not provide official classification, Directive Principles can be classified into three broad categories based on content and direction:

A. SOCIALISTIC PRINCIPLES

Based on socialist ideology, these lay down the framework of a democratic socialist state and aim at providing social and economic justice.

Note on Living Wage: Different from minimum wage (bare needs of food, shelter, clothing), a living wage includes education, health, insurance, etc.

B. GANDHIAN PRINCIPLES

Based on Gandhian ideology, representing Gandhi’s reconstruction programme during the national movement.

C. LIBERAL-INTELLECTUAL PRINCIPLES

Based on liberal ideology, representing modern, progressive thought.

NEW DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES (AMENDMENTS)

42nd Amendment Act (1976) – Added Four Directives

1. Secure opportunities for healthy development of children (Article 39)

2. Promote equal justice and free legal aid to poor (Article 39A)

3. Secure participation of workers in management of industries (Article 43A)

4. Protect and improve environment; safeguard forests and wildlife (Article 48A)

44th Amendment Act (1978)

• Added directive to minimize inequalities in income, status, facilities and opportunities (Article 38)

86th Amendment Act (2002)

• Changed subject-matter of Article 45

• Made elementary education a fundamental right under Article 21A

• Article 45 now requires State to provide early childhood care and education until age 6

97th Amendment Act (2011)

• Added new directive on cooperative societies (Article 43B)

• Requires State to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control and professional management of cooperative societies

SANCTION BEHIND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Constitutional Basis for Non-Justiciability

Article 37 explicitly states: “These principles are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.”

Moral and Political Sanctions

Though non-justiciable, Directive Principles have:

• Moral Obligation: State authorities must apply them

• Political Sanction: Real force comes from public opinion

Key Statements:

• Alladi Krishna Swamy Ayyar: “No ministry responsible to the people can afford lightheartedly to ignore provisions in Part IV”

• Dr. B.R. Ambedkar: “A government resting on popular vote can hardly ignore Directives while shaping policy. If any government ignores them, it will have to answer before the electorate at election time”

Reasons for Non-Justiciability

The framers made Directive Principles non-justiciable because:

1. Economic Constraints: Country lacked sufficient financial resources for implementation

2. Social Diversity: Vast diversity and backwardness would impede implementation

3. Pragmatic Approach: Newly independent state needed flexibility in deciding the order, time, place and mode of fulfillment

The Constitution makers believed more in awakened public opinion than in court procedures as the ultimate sanction for fulfilling these principles.

CRITICISMS OF DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

1. Lack of Legal Force

Critics: K.T. Shah, Nasiruddin, T.T. Krishnamachari, K.C. Wheare, Sir Ivor Jennings

Arguments:

• Called “pious superfluities” (K.T. Shah)

• Compared to “a cheque on a bank, payable only when resources permit” (K.T. Shah)

• “No better than New Year’s resolutions, broken on January 2nd” (Nasiruddin)

• Described as “a veritable dust-bin of sentiments” (T.T. Krishnamachari)

• Called “manifesto of aims and aspirations” and “mere moral homily” (K.C. Wheare)

• Considered “pious aspirations” (Sir Ivor Jennings)

2. Illogical Arrangement

Critic: N. Srinivasan

Arguments:

• Neither properly classified nor logically arranged

• Mix of relatively unimportant issues with vital economic and social questions

• Incongruous combination of modern with old

• Mixes provisions based on reason and science with those based on sentiment and prejudice

• No consistent philosophy (Sir Ivor Jennings)

3. Conservative Nature

Critic: Sir Ivor Jennings

Arguments:

• Based on political philosophy of 19th century England

• Expresses “Fabian Socialism without the socialism”

• Based on ideals of Sydney Webb and Beatrice Webb

• Probably unsuitable for 21st century; likely to become outmoded

4. Constitutional Conflicts

Critic: K. Santhanam

Arguments: Directives create potential conflicts between:

• Centre and States

• President and Prime Minister

• Governor and Chief Minister

Example: Centre can direct States on implementation; non-compliance could lead to state government dismissal

UTILITY AND IMPORTANCE OF DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Despite criticisms, Directive Principles are valuable and necessary components of the Constitution.

Views of Constitutional Experts

L.M. Singhvi (eminent jurist and diplomat):

• “Directives are the life-giving provisions of the Constitution”

• “Constitute the stuff of the Constitution and its philosophy of social justice”

M.C. Chagla (former Chief Justice of India):

• “If all these principles are fully carried out, India would be a heaven on earth”

• “India would be not only a political democracy but also a welfare state”

Dr. B.R. Ambedkar:

• Directives have great value as they establish that Indian polity’s goal is ‘economic democracy’ as distinguished from ‘political democracy’

Granville Austin:

• Directive Principles aimed at furthering goals of social revolution

• Establish conditions necessary for achieving this revolution

Sir B.N. Rau (Constitutional Advisor):

• Intended as moral precepts for state authorities

• Have at least an educative value

Practical Utility (M.C. Setalvad – former Attorney General)

Four Ways Directives are Significant:

1. Instrument of Instructions: Like general recommendations addressed to all authorities in the Indian Union; remind them of basic principles of new social and economic order the Constitution aims to build

2. Judicial Guide: Served as useful beacon-lights to courts; helped courts exercise power of judicial review (determining constitutional validity of laws)

3. Administrative Guide: Form dominating background to all State action, legislative or executive; guide courts in some respects

4. Amplification of Preamble: Amplify the Preamble’s solemn resolution to secure justice, liberty, equality and fraternity

Additional Roles

1. Policy Continuity: Facilitate stability and continuity in domestic and foreign policies across political, economic and social spheres despite changes in party in power

2. Supplementary Function: Supplementary to Fundamental Rights; fill vacuum in Part III by providing for social and economic rights

3. Enabling Rights Enjoyment: Implementation creates favourable atmosphere for full and proper enjoyment of Fundamental Rights; political democracy without economic democracy has no meaning

4. Opposition Function: Enable opposition to exercise influence and control over government operations; can blame ruling party for activities opposed to Directives

5. Performance Test: Serve as crucial test for government performance; people can examine government policies and programmes against constitutional declarations

6. Common Manifesto: Serve as common political manifesto; any ruling party, irrespective of ideology, must recognize Directives as “guide, philosopher and friend” in legislative and executive acts

CONFLICT BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Initial Position – Champakam Dorairajan Case (1951)

Supreme Court Ruling:

• In conflict between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles, Fundamental Rights prevail

• Directive Principles must conform to and run subsidiary to Fundamental Rights

• However, Fundamental Rights could be amended by Parliament through Constitutional Amendment Acts

• Result: Parliament enacted First Amendment (1951), Fourth Amendment (1955), and Seventeenth Amendment (1964) to implement some Directives

Major Change – Golaknath Case (1967)

Supreme Court Ruling:

• Parliament cannot take away or abridge any Fundamental Rights

• Fundamental Rights are ‘sacrosanct’ in nature

• Fundamental Rights cannot be amended for implementing Directive Principles

Parliamentary Response – 24th and 25th Amendment Acts (1971)

24th Amendment Act (1971):

• Declared that Parliament has power to abridge or take away any Fundamental Rights

• This power exercised through Constitutional Amendment Acts

25th Amendment Act (1971) – Article 31C:

Two Provisions:

1. First Provision: No law implementing socialistic Directive Principles specified in Article 39(b) and (c) shall be void on ground of contravening Fundamental Rights under:

   • Article 14 (equality before law and equal protection)

   • Article 19 (six rights regarding speech, assembly, movement, etc.)

   • Article 31 (right to property)

2. Second Provision: No law containing declaration for giving effect to such policy shall be questioned in court on ground that it does not give effect to such policy

Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973)

Supreme Court Ruling:

• Second provision of Article 31C declared unconstitutional and invalid

• Reason: Judicial review is a basic feature of Constitution and cannot be taken away

• First provision held constitutional and valid

42nd Amendment Act (1976)

Extended Article 31C:

• Scope extended to protect laws implementing any Directive Principle (not merely Article 39(b) and (c))

• Result: Directive Principles given legal primacy and supremacy over Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 19, 31)

Minerva Mills Case (1980)

Supreme Court Ruling:

• Extended scope of 42nd Amendment declared unconstitutional and invalid

• Directive Principles once again made subordinate to Fundamental Rights

• However, Fundamental Rights (Articles 14, 19) accepted as subordinate to Directive Principles in Article 39(b) and (c)

• Article 31 (right to property) was abolished by 44th Amendment Act (1978)

Key Principle Established:

• “Indian Constitution founded on bedrock of balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles”

• “Together constitute core of commitment to social revolution”

• “Like two wheels of a chariot, one no less than the other”

• “To give absolute primacy to one over the other is to disturb harmony of Constitution”

• “This harmony and balance is an essential feature of basic structure of Constitution”

• “Goals of Directive Principles must be achieved without abrogation of means provided by Fundamental Rights”

Present Constitutional Position

Hierarchy:

• Fundamental Rights enjoy supremacy over Directive Principles

• This does not prevent implementation of Directives

• Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights for implementing Directive Principles

• Amendment must not damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution

DISTINCTION BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

IMPLEMENTATION OF DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Since 1950, successive governments at Centre and States have implemented Directives through various laws and programmes:

1. Economic Planning

• Planning Commission established (1950) to develop country in planned manner

• Successive Five Year Plans aimed at securing socio-economic justice and reducing inequalities

2. Land Reforms

• Almost all states passed land reform laws to improve agrarian society and rural masses’ conditions

• Measures include:

  • Abolition of intermediaries (zamindars, jagirdars, inamdars)

  • Tenancy reforms (security of tenure, fair rents)

  • Ceiling on land holdings

  • Distribution of surplus land to landless labourers

  • Cooperative farming

3. Labour Protection Laws

• Minimum Wages Act (1948)

• Payment of Wages Act (1936)

• Payment of Bonus Act (1965)

• Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act (1970)

• Child Labour Prohibition and Regulation Act (1986)

• Bonded Labour System Abolition Act (1976)

• Trade Unions Act (1926)

• Factories Act (1948)

• Mines Act (1952)

• Industrial Disputes Act (1947)

• Workmen’s Compensation Act (1923)

• Child labour banned (2006)

4. Women Workers Protection

• Maternity Benefit Act (1961)

• Equal Remuneration Act (1976)

5. Resource Utilization for Common Good

• Nationalization of Life Insurance (1956)

• Nationalization of 14 leading commercial banks (1969)

• Nationalization of General Insurance (1971)

• Abolition of Privy Purses (1971)

6. Legal Aid and Justice

• Legal Services Authorities Act (1987) – established nationwide network for:

  • Free and competent legal aid to poor

  • Lok adalats for promoting equal justice

  • Lok adalat: statutory forum for conciliatory settlement of legal disputes; status of civil court; awards enforceable, binding and final

7. Cottage Industries Development

• Khadi and Village Industries Board

• Khadi and Village Industries Commission

• Small-Scale Industries Board

• National Small Industries Corporation

• Handloom Board

• Handicrafts Board

• Coir Board

• Silk Board

8. Rural Development Programmes

• Community Development Programme (1952)

• Hill Area Development Programme (1960)

• Drought-Prone Area Programme (1973)

• Minimum Needs Programme (1974)

• Integrated Rural Development Programme (1978)

• Jawahar Rozgar Yojana (1989)

• Swarnajayanti Gram Swarozgar Yojana (1999)

• Sampoorna Grameena Rozgar Yojana (2001)

• National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme (2006)

9. Environment and Wildlife Protection

• Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972

• Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980

• Water and Air Acts – established Central and State Pollution Control Boards

• National Forest Policy (1988) – protection, conservation and development of forests

10. Agricultural Development

• Modernization through improved inputs, seeds, fertilizers, irrigation facilities

• Organization of animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines

11. Panchayati Raj System

• Three-tier system established at village, taluka and zila levels

• 73rd Amendment Act (1992) – provided constitutional status and protection to panchayati raj institutions

• Translates Gandhi’s dream of every village being a republic

12. Protection of SCs, STs and Weaker Sections

• Seats reserved in educational institutions, government services and representative bodies

• Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 – renamed as Protection of Civil Rights Act (1976)

• Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989

• 65th Constitutional Amendment Act (1990) – established National Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes

• 89th Constitutional Amendment Act (2003) – bifurcated into two separate commissions

13. Judiciary-Executive Separation

• Criminal Procedure Code (1973) – separated judiciary from executive in public services

• Previously: District authorities (collector, subdivisional officer, tehsildar) exercised both judicial and executive powers

• After separation: Judicial powers vested in district judicial magistrates under direct control of state high court

14. Monument Protection

• Ancient and Historical Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (1951)

15. Public Health

• Primary health centres and hospitals established throughout country

• Special programmes to eradicate diseases: malaria, TB, leprosy, AIDS, cancer, filaria, kala-azar, guineaworm, yaws, Japanese encephalitis

16. Cow Protection

• Laws enacted in some states to prohibit slaughter of cows, calves and bullocks

17. Social Security

• Old age pension schemes initiated in some states for people above 65 years

18. International Relations

• India follows non-alignment policy and panchsheel to promote international peace and security

Limitations of Implementation

Despite above efforts, Directive Principles not fully and effectively implemented due to:

• Inadequate financial resources

• Unfavourable socio-economic conditions

• Population explosion

• Strained Centre-State relations

DIRECTIVES OUTSIDE PART IV

Apart from Part IV, some other Directives are contained in other Parts of Constitution (all are non-justiciable):

1. Article 335 (Part XVI) – Claims of SCs and STs to Services

Claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes members shall be considered (consistent with administrative efficiency) in making appointments to Union or State services and posts

2. Article 350-A (Part XVII) – Instruction in Mother Tongue

Endeavour of every state and local authority shall be to provide adequate facilities for mother-tongue instruction at primary education stage to children belonging to linguistic minority groups

3. Article 351 (Part XVII) – Development of Hindi Language

Duty of Union to promote spread of Hindi language and develop it so it may serve as medium of expression for all elements of India’s composite culture

Judicial Approach: These Directives given equal importance and attention by judiciary on ground that all parts of Constitution must be read together

ARTICLES RELATED TO DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES – AT A GLANCE

QUICK REVISION POINTS

Key Concepts:

• DPSP are non-justiciable but fundamental to governance

• Moral and political sanctions, not legal

• Three categories: Socialistic, Gandhian, Liberal-Intellectual

• Balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles is essential

• Article 37: Constitutional mandate for State implementation

Important Cases:

• Champakam Dorairajan (1951): FRs prevail

• Golaknath (1967): FRs cannot be amended

• Kesavananda Bharati (1973): Second provision of Article 31C invalid

• Minerva Mills (1980): Balance between FR and DP is basic structure

Critical Amendments:

• 42nd Amendment (1976): Added four new Directives

• 44th Amendment (1978): Reduced property rights

• 86th Amendment (2002): Elementary education as FR

• 97th Amendment (2011): Cooperative societies Directive

Indian Polity