DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE OF POLICY: CHALLENGES

NAME OF THE STUDENT:

BURIDI DAALU RAJA ASHISH

ROLL NO.: 19LLB027

SEMESTER: 2

NAME OF THE PROGRAM:

5 YEAR (B.A., LL.B. / LL.M.)

NAME OF THE FACULTY MEMBER:

DR. ARUNA KAMMILA

DATE OF SUBMISSION: 12TH DEC

DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

NYAYAPRASTHA “, SABBAVARAM,
VISAKHAPATNAM – 531035, ANDHRA PRADESH

1|P ag e
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT:-
I w0uld like t0 express my gratitude t 0 “DR. ARUNA KAMMILA” wh0 have given me the
0pp0rtunity t0 d0 this w0nderful Research paper 0n the TOPIC “DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

OF STATE POLICY”, which als0 helped me in d0ing l0t 0f research and thr0ugh which I came
t0 kn0w s0 many new things.

Sec0ndly, I w0uld als0 like t0 thank my friends wh0 als0 helped me a l0t in c0mpleti0n 0f Research
paper within the limited time.

2|P ag e
 ABSTRACT

Directive Principles of State Policy provide essential guide-lines both for the state as well as the
citizens for establishing economic democracy in India. The Constitution makers in India did not
force on the people any particular economic system but they only tried to suggest a system which
could be most suited to Indian conditions. With the passing of Forty-Second Constitution
Amendment Act, ii has been provided that India shall be a socialist democracy but socialism is not
in the traditional sense but in the sense which suits Indian conditions. The Sapru Committee had
recommended a division of fundamental rights into two classes — judiciable and non-judiciable.
The Constitution Act of India, 1935, itself provided for ‘Instruments of Instructions’ which were
a fruitful idea. Ambedkar said. The above statement of Dr. Ambedkar makes it crystal clear that
these principles are not binding upon the Government. The Government is to strive. If it does not
fulfil these principles despite its striving, nobody can challenge it in the court or law. Liberal
Intellectualistic, This category includes those things on which the liberal intellectuals have been
insisting for the last many years, e.g., ft) The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a
uniform civil code throughout the territory of India. Though Basu’s fears are genuine, yet we must
not efface from our mind a naked reality that the President’s or Governor’s powers to veto a Bill
passed by the Legislature is only limited. In the words of Dr. Ambedkar “The Directive Principles
cannot be pressed into service either by the President or the State Governor for the purposes of
vetoing a law passed by the legislature”. in a parliamentary form of government, the constitutional
rulers cannot be assertive. If they are, they cannot be tolerated.

3|P ag e
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. SYNOPSIS 5
2. INTRODUCTION 7
3. IMPORTANCE OF DPSP FOR AN INDIAN CITIZEN 8
4. FEATURES OF THE DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES 8
5. CLASSIFICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES 9
6. NEW DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES 12
7. SANCTION BEHIND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES 13
8. SEVERAL ACTIONS OF GOVERNMENT FOLLOWING DPSP 14
9. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE POINTS OF CRITICISM ADVANCED AGAINST
THE DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES: 16
10. CONCLUSION 24
11. BIBLIOGRAPHY 25

4|P ag e
 SYNOPSIS

INTRODUCTION: Directive Principles of State Policy provide essential guide-lines both for the
state as well as the citizens for establishing economic democracy in India. The Constitution makers
in India did not force on the people any particular economic system but they only tried to suggest
a system which could be most suited to Indian conditions. With the passing of Forty-Second
Constitution Amendment Act, ii has been provided that India shall be a socialist. Democracy but
socialism is not in the traditional sense but in the sense which suits Indian conditions.

OBJECT OF THE STUDY:

The object of the study is to know
1. Importance of DPSP for an Indian Citizen
2. Features of DPSP
3. Criticism against Directive Principles

SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

The scope of study is limited to Art 36-51. To understand the different aspects of Directive
principles of State Policy.

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY:

The study helps to understand how these Articles 36-51(DPSP) are useful for Indian Citizens.

LITERATURE REVIEW:
Information is taken from secondary sources like case laws, articles and online sources.
ARTICLES

1. “Directive Principles of State Policy under the Indian Constitution” by Lokesh Vyas
2. “Directive Principles of State of Policy: How Relevant in Governance” by Manharman
3. “The Potential of Directive Principles of State Policy for the Judicial Enforcement of
Socio-Economic Rights” by Berihun Adugna Gebeye

BOOKS

5|P ag e
 1. Indian Polity, 5th Edition by M Laxmikanth.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:
The research methodology is doctrinal.

TYPE OF RESEARCH:
The research is descriptive.

HYPOTHESIS:
 The Directive Principles constitute a very comprehensive economic, social and political
programme for a modern democratic State.
 The Directive Principles are non-justiciable in nature

RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
 Whether DPSP has challenges in the road of enforcement or not?

6|P ag e
INTRODUCTION
Directive Principles of State Policy provide essential guide-lines both for the state as well as the
citizens for establishing economic democracy in India. The Constitution makers in India did not
force on the people any particular economic system but they only tried to suggest a system which
could be most suited to Indian conditions. With the passing of Forty-Second Constitution
Amendment Act, ii has been provided that India shall be a socialist. Democracy but socialism is
not in the traditional sense but in the sense which suits Indian conditions. According to our
Constitution Directive Principles, as against Fundamental Rights, are not justifiable in the courts
of law. It is for the first time that a Part of Constitution (Part IV) has been devoted to these
Principles. Earlier to this, the Government of India Act, 1935 also contained an Instrument of
Instructions to the Governor-General and the Governors, but these instructions were for the
executive government. Present Directives are however, for the Parliament and state legislatures.
Whereas the Instrument of Instructions had no public opinion behind it, the directives have force
of public opinion behind them. Constitution makers in India drew their inspiration from the Irish
constitution for incorporating these Directives in the constitution. There are some other countries
of the world which have also incorporated directive principles in their constitutions. Thus,
Constitution of India is not the first constitution to contain Directive Principles of State Policy. 1

These Directives thus constitute the national objectives and portray the national conscience.
Whosoever is victorious at the polls will not be free to violate them. According to Alladi
Krishnaswamy Ayyar, “No minister responsible to the people can afford lightheartedly to ignore
the provisions in Part IV of the Constitution.” They have served as a signpost for the Union
Parliament and State Legislatures. They are cited by the courts to support their decisions.

M.C. Setalvad rightly said, “These fundamental axioms of State Policy though of no legal effect
have served as useful beacon-lights to the courts.” The governmental bodies thus have been
invariably guided by these provisions.

1
Balasubramanian T, Directive Principles of State Policy in India 10, Indian Journal of Natural Sciences 18111,
18117, (2020), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339817284 Directive Principles of State Policy in India.

7|P ag e
Importance of DPSPs for an Indian citizen
Regardless of the non-justifiable nature of DPSPs, a citizen should be aware of them. Article 37
describes these principles as fundamental in the governance of the country. The objective of the
DPSPs is to better the social and economic conditions of society so people can live a good life.
Knowledge of DPSPs helps a citizen to keep a check on the government. A citizen can use DPSPs
as a measure of the performance of the government and can identify the scope where it lacks. A
person should know these provisions because ultimately these principles act as a yardstick to judge
the law that governs them. Moreover, it also constrains the power of the state to make a draconian
law Through various judicial pronouncements, it is settled principle now that balancing DPSPs
and Fundamental rights is as important as maintaining the sanctity of Fundamental Rights. Non-
following a directive principle would directly or indirectly affect the Fundamental Right which is
considered as one of the most essential parts of the Constitution.

FEATURES OF THE DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

1. The phrase ‘Directive Principles of State Policy’ denotes the ideals that the State should keep in
mind while formulating policies and enacting laws. These are the constitutional instructions or
recommendations to the State in legislative, executive and administrative matters. According to
Article 36, the term ‘State’ in Part IV has the same meaning as in Part III dealing with Fundamental
Rights. Therefore, it includes the legislative and executive organs of the central and state
governments, all local authorities and all other public authorities in the country.

2. The Directive Principles resemble the ‘Instrument of Instructions’ enumerated in the

Government of India Act of 1935. In the words of Dr B R Ambedkar, ‘the Directive Principles are
like the instrument of instructions, which were issued to the Governor-General and to the
Governors of the colonies of India by the British Government under the Government of India Act
of 1935. What is called Directive Principles is merely another name for the instrument of
instructions. The only difference is that they are instructions to the legislature and the executive’.

3. The Directive Principles constitute a very comprehensive economic, social and political
programme for a modern democratic State. They aim at realising the high ideals of justice, liberty,
equality and fraternity as outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution. They embody the concept

8|P ag e
of a ‘welfare state’ and not that of a ‘police state’, which existed during the colonial era.2 In brief,
they seek to establish economic and social democracy in the country.

4. The Directive Principles are non-justiciable in nature, that is, they are not legally enforceable
by the courts for their violation. Therefore, the government (Central, state and local) cannot be
compelled to implement them. Nevertheless, the Constitution (Article 37) itself says that 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.

5. The Directive Principles, though non-justiciable in nature, help the courts in examining and
determining the constitutional validity of a law. The Supreme Court has ruled many a times that
in determining the constitutionality of any law, if a court finds that the law in question seeks to
give effect to a Directive Principle, it may consider such law to be ‘reasonable’ in relation to Article
14 (equality before law) or Article 19 (six freedoms) and thus save such law from
unconstitutionality.

CLASSIFICATION OF THE DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

The Constitution does not contain any classification of Directive Principles. However, on the basis
of their content and direction, they can be classified into three broad categories, viz, socialistic,
Gandhian and liberal–intellectual.

SOCIALISTIC PRINCIPLES

These principles reflect the ideology of socialism. They lay down the framework of a democratic
socialist state, aim at providing social and economic justice, and set the path towards welfare state.
They direct the state:

2
A ‘Police State’ is mainly concerned with the maintenance of law and order and defence of the country against
external aggression. Such a restrictive concept of state is based on the nineteenth century theory of individualism or
laissez-faire.

9|P ag e
1. To promote the welfare of the people by securing a social order permeated by justice—social,
economic and political—and to minimise inequalities in income, status, facilities and
opportunities3 (Article 38).

2. To secure (a) the right to adequate means of livelihood for all citizens; (b) the equitable
distribution of material resources of the community for the common good; (c) prevention of
concentration of wealth and means of production; (d) equal pay for equal work for men and
women; (e) preservation of the health and strength of workers and children against forcible abuse;
and (f) opportunities for healthy development of children4 (Article 39).

3. To promote equal justice and to provide free legal aid to the poor5 (Article 39 A).

4. To secure the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old
age, sickness and disablement (Article 41).

5. To make provision for just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief (Article 42).

6. To secure a living wage6, a decent standard of life and social and cultural opportunities for all
workers (Article 43).

7. To take steps to secure the participation of workers in the management of industries7 (Article
43 A).

8. To raise the level of nutrition and the standard of living of people and to improve public health
(Article 47).

3
This second provision was added by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act of 1978.
4
The last point (f) was modified by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.
5
This Directive was added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.
6
‘Living wage’ is different from ‘minimum wage’, which includes the bare needs of life like food, shelter and
clothing. In addition to these bare needs, a ‘living wage’ includes education, health, insurance, etc. A ‘fair wage’ is a
mean between ‘living wage’ and ‘minimum wage’.
7
This Directive was added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.

10 | P a g e
GANDHIAN PRINCIPLES

These principles are based on Gandhian ideology. They represent the programme of reconstruction
enunciated by Gandhi during the national movement. In order to fulfil the dreams of Gandhi, some
of his ideas were included as Directive Principles. They require the State:

1. To organise village panchayats and endow them with necessary powers and authority to enable
them to function as units of self-government (Article 40).

2. To promote cottage industries on an individual or co-operation basis in rural areas (Article 43).

3. To promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control and professional

management of co-operative societies (Article 43B).

4. To promote the educational and economic interests of SCs, STs, and other weaker sections of
the society and to protect them from social injustice and exploitation (Article 46).

5. To prohibit the consumption of intoxicating drinks and drugs which are injurious to health
(Article 47).

6. To prohibit the slaughter of cows, calves and other milch and draught cattle and to improve their
breeds (Article 48).

LIBERAL–INTELLECTUAL PRINCIPLES

The principles included in this category represent the ideology of liberalism. They direct the state:
1. To secure for all citizens a uniform civil code throughout the country (Article 44).

2. To provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six
years8 (Article 45).

3. To organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines (Article 48).

8
This Directive was changed by the 86th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2002. Originally, it made a provision for
free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the age of 14 years.

11 | P a g e
4. To protect and improve the environment and to safeguard forests and wild life 9 (Article 48 A).

5. To protect monuments, places and objects of artistic or historic interest which are declared to
be of national importance (Article 49).

6. To separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State (Article 50).

7. To promote international peace and security and maintain just and honourable relations between
nations; to foster respect for international law and treaty obligations, and to encourage settlement
of international disputes by arbitration (Article 51).

NEW DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 added four new Directive Principles to the original list. They
require the State:

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

2. To promote equal justice and to provide free legal aid to the poor (Article 39 A).

3. To take steps to secure the participation of workers in the management of industries (Article 43
A).

4. To protect and improve the environment and to safeguard forests and wild life (Article 48 A).

The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 added one more Directive Principle, which requires the State
to minimise inequalities in income, status, facilities and opportunities (Article 38).

The 86th Amendment Act of 2002 changed the subject-matter of Article 45 and made elementary
education a fundamental right under Article 21 A. The amended directive requires the State to
provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years.

9
This Directive was added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1976.

12 | P a g e
The 97th Amendment Act of 2011 added a new Directive Principle relating to co-operative
societies. It requires the state to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic
control and professional management of co-operative societies (Article 43B).

SANCTION BEHIND DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES

Sir B N Rau, the Constitutional Advisor to the Constituent Assembly, recommended that the rights
of an individual should be divided into two categories—justiciable and non-justiciable, which was
accepted by the Drafting Committee. Consequently, the Fundamental Rights, which are justiciable
in nature, are incorporated in Part III and the Directive Principles, which are non-justiciable in
nature, are incorporated in Part IV of the Constitution.

Though the Directive Principles are non-justiciable, the Constitution (Article 37) makes it clear
that ‘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’. Thus, they impose a moral obligation on the
state authorities for their application, but the real force behind them is political, that is, public
opinion. As observed by Alladi Krishna Swamy Ayyar, ‘no ministry responsible to the people can
afford light-heartedly to ignore the provisions in Part IV of the Constitution’. Similarly, Dr B R
Ambedkar said in the Constituent Assembly that ‘a government which rests on popular vote can
hardly ignore the Directive Principles while shaping its policy. If any government ignores them, it
will certainly have to answer for that before the electorate at the election time.’ 11

The framers of the Constitution made the Directive Principles nonjusticiable and legally non-
enforceable because:

1. The country did not possess sufficient financial resources to implement them.

2. The presence of vast diversity and backwardness in the country would stand in the way of their
implementation.

3. The newly born independent Indian State with its many preoccupations might be crushed under
the burden unless it was free to decide the order, the time, the place and the mode of fulfilling
them.

13 | P a g e
‘The Constitution makers, therefore, taking a pragmatic view, refrained from giving teeth to these
principles. They believed more in an awakened public opinion rather than in court procedures as
the ultimate sanction for the fulfilment of these principles’

SEVERAL ACTIONS OF GOVERNMENT FOLLOWING DPSP’S

If we make a critical estimate of the achievements of the Governments at the Centre in

implementing these directives, we feel encouraged. Panchayats have been established in the
remotest villages of our country covering about 98% of the rural population. They are being
restored to their pristine glory. Nationalization of certain industries, setting up of corporations,
heavier taxation of bigger incomes, recovery of deliberately concealed taxes, courageous steps to
bring Dalmias in the clutches of law, abolition of zamindari system, nationalization of banks,
abolition of privy purses of native rulers, acquisition of private property, curtailing the right to
private property, reflect that the State has been doing its best to avoid concentration of wealth and
furthering the cause of socialism in the past.

The establishment of the poor house at the capital to wipe out begging a great slur on the fair name
of Indian democracy was a substantial step towards provision of adequate means of livelihood to
the poor. The state-owned factories, industries, and government corporations have been gradually
expanding; hence more and more people have been getting employed. The Employees’ State
Insurance Act10 and the Workmen’s Compensation Act 11 are very significant steps to provide
assistance to the workers during old age disablement or undeserved want. Cottage industries have
been encouraged.

Several Statutory Boards have been set up for the development of cottage and small scale
industries. The Minimum Wages Acts have been passed to ameliorate the lot of labourers of
various categories. To benefit the weaker sections of the society, a former Prime Minister launched
20 Points Programme first in 1975 and again in 1982. The Community Development Programmes
followed by Rural Development Programmes (1978-79). National Rural Employment Programme,

10
Employees State Insurance act, 1948 No. 34
11
The Workmen’s compensation act, 1923 No.8

14 | P a g e
Desert Development Programmes help in raising standard of living. Efforts have been consolingly
made to make available primary education to the children below the age of 14 years.

The inclusion of right to education through an amendment has cleared the intentions of the
government to educate children up to 14 years of age.12 The assistance to Scheduled Castes,
Scheduled Tribes, Backward Classes and lately OBC’s in the form of stipends, scholarships,
remission of their school and college fees, concession in the age, for employment in the
Governments—Central or State, fees limits and up to 27% reservation in central educational
institutions including IITs and IIMs to the OBCs except the creamy layers (as per Supreme Court
decision on April 10, 2008), job reservations for those applying for jobs through Public Service
Commissions or Service Selection Boards are significant steps to uplift down-trodden castes of
Hindus. Agriculture is being organized on scientific lines.

The attempts to improve the breed of the cattle are being made. Slaughter of cows and calves in
some of the States has been prohibited. The passages of Ancient Monuments Acts are steps in the
direction of the fulfillment of the Directives enshrined in Article 49. The Criminal Procedure
Amendment’ Act of 197313 has gone a long way in realizing the aim of separating judiciary from
the Executive. Andhra Pradesh tried for prohibition followed by Haryana but it proved to be a
drain on the State exchequer.

In the fulfillment of principles pertaining to international peace and security, the efforts of our
successive Prime Ministers can hardly be minimized. “Panch Sheel” is a laudable step in this
direction. Pt. Nehru was hailed as a cultural ambassador of spiritual East to the material West, ever
craving for fostering peace and amity and making sincere efforts for its attainment. Pt. Nehru was
raised to the pedestal of glory even by the pseudo-democrats of U.S.A. and Britain and bulk of
orthodox and fanatic Muslims of the Arab world. Our policy of Non-alignment aimed at extending
friendship to all nations with malice to none and play constructive role for striving for ushering in
era of peace and amity in the world.

12
INDIA, CONST, Art 21a
13
The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, No.13

15 | P a g e
THE FOLLOWING ARE THE POINTS OF CRITICISM ADVANCED AGAINST THE
DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES:

(i) Not Enforceable:

Lack of legal force behind them is the main ground of criticism. Since they impose no legal
obligations on the State, the critics denounce them as mere pious superfluities or political
manifestoes devoid of any constitutional importance. Nassiruddin, a member of the Constituent
Assembly, characterized them as a set of New Year resolutions. Prof. K.T. Shah described them
as ‘a cheque payable by the bank concerned at its convenience.’

Prof. K.C. Wheare portrays them as “manifesto of aims and aspirations.” T.T. Krishnamachari
holds them as a ‘veritable dustbin of sentiments…” B.N. Rau opines, “The Directive Principles of
State Policy are in the nature of moral precepts for the State authorities and are open to the facile
criticism that the Constitution is not the place for moral precepts.” It is emphasized that a
constitution, is not a place for moral precepts. The inclusion of provisions, which are legally not
enforceable, is, of no practical utility for the Indian masses.

(ii) Vague and Mere Generalities:

Dr. Jennings holds that the Directive Principles like Fundamental Rights are not based upon
consistent philosophy. They are vague. Dr. Wheare describes these principles as “generalities.”
They are neither properly arranged nor logically classified. Comparatively the unimportant issues
like protection of monuments have been mixed up with very important economic and social
questions.

In the words of Prof. Srinivasan, “It combines rather incongruously the modern with the old and
provisions suggested by reason and science with provisions based purely on sentiment and
prejudice.” Ambiguity of some of these principles becomes self-evident when we critically analyze
them. It is rather beyond comprehension of a student of political science as to how India can foster
and maintain just and honorable relations among nations most of which suffer from superiority
complex and are keen for hegemonic role in the world politics or in the economic domain.

(iii) Misfit in a Sovereign State:

16 | P a g e
It is rather unnatural for a sovereign state to adopt these principles. A superior government may
lay down such instructions for an inferior government but there is hardly any necessity of such
instructions or directions for a sovereign nation. Why should a nation give direction to itself?
Moreover, how can these principles be followed and accepted in all times and climes? These
principles constitute merely a political philosophy. Hence they are construed as a “parade of high
sounding sentiments couched in vainglorious verbiage.”

(iv)Neither Practicable nor Sound:

Their practicability and soundness also has been challenged by some critics. The directive
principle concerning ‘prohibition’, for instance, is very strongly criticized by the economists of
our country. The so-called moralistic reform is a drain on the national exchequer. Money collected
through ‘excise duty’ on liquor or other intoxicants is sizable and can easily be utilized for the
benefit of the masses. Moreover, it is contended that prohibition can hardly turn drunkards into
moralists.

Morality cannot be enforced. Rather where ever practiced, it has given fillip to crimes of illicit
distillation and illegal gratification of corrupt officials who keep their eyes shut to the continuance
of this illegal trade when their palms are greased. The very fact that the policy of prohibition has
been abandoned in the States like Haryana and Andhra Pradesh where it was initiated reflects that
the Government has realized the futility of implementation of this principle. It proved to be a big
drain on state funds and failed to dissuade people to drink.

(v) Possibility of Conflict between Head of the State and that of the Government:
Santhanam expressed this apprehension in the Constituent Assembly that these Directive
Principles may lead to a conflict between the President of India and the Prime Minister on the one
hand and between the Governor and the State Chief Minister on the other hand. “What happens if
the Prime Minister of India ignores these instructions? he asked on the floor of the Assembly. The
President of India, as the guardian of the Constitution, may impose a penal dissolution on a council
of ministers (which under the head ship of a Prime Minister got a law passed in contravention of
the Directive Principles), by withholding his assent to such a Bill.

17 | P a g e
He may like to justify his position on the ground that though the directives are ‘fundamental in the
governance of the country’ yet, if frequently applied, they may result in mutual conflicts between
the High ups that matter. However, there is no limit to such unfounded speculation.

(vi)Means to Achieve Ends Ignored:

Dr. Jennings discerns the ghost of Sydney and Beatrice Web through the pages of the text. In his
views, “Part IV of the Constitution expresses Fabian Socialism without Socialism, for a specific
mention regarding nationalization of the means of production, distribution and exchange is
missing. Nationalization for the Fabians was simply a means to an end and not the end in itself.

(vii) May Prove Reactionary and Regressive:

Dr. Jennings expresses apprehensions that the ideals “may not simply become outmoded and
antiquated in the next century. They might act as citadels of reaction as well and thus clog national
progress”.14 It is realized that some of the directives like introduction of prohibition are not in tune
with the times. The curtailment of excise duty on liquor may affect economic progress of the
country adversely.

(viii) They Embody British Experience of 19th Century:

Dr. Jennings goes to the extent of emphasizing that, “Directive Principles are nothing but
collection of political principles derived from English political experiences of the 19th century.
They are deemed to be unsuited for India, in the middle of the 20th century.” In other words they
embody philosophy of British liberalism devoid of clear-cut socialism.

(ix) Detrimental to the Interest of Minorities:

Article 44 enjoins on the State to take steps for establishing a uniform civil code throughout the
territory of India. The critics opine that it would amount to tyrannizing the minorities. The laws
emanating from the minds of the majority would be thrust on the minorities whose culture,
customs, rites, etc. differ fundamentally from the majority community. Hence such a step will sow
the seeds of dissensions and cause communal feuds.

2. Their Evaluation:

14
VISHNOO BHAGWAN et al., INDIAN ADMINISTRATION, (S Chand & company Ltd, 4th ed, 2010)

18 | P a g e
Despite vehement criticism by some critics, these principles are not as meaningless as they are
deemed to be. Their utility has been well established.

(i) Sanctions Behind the Principles:

It is wrong to say that there is no force behind them. In this age of democracy, ‘vigilant public
opinion’ is the real force behind an institution which stands for the benefit of the individuals. The
Government in a Parliamentary system is under a Constant fire of criticism both at the hands of
the press and the platform speakers. The actions of the government are subject to scrutiny by the
masses and the distinguished leaders of the party. If the Government pursues a policy in accordance
with the principles of the Constitution, people appreciate it; otherwise they oust it at the hustings.

Since the Directive Principles have been embodied in the Constitution, the Governments are apt
to implement them. They may not have the legal force behind them but the highest tribunal of the
country i.e., the public opinion stands behind them. No party in power can afford to ignore these
Directives, if it is not keen to doom its future for all times to come.

Some of the amendments of the Constitution clearly reflect that Directive Principles pertaining to
socialism have been implemented at the cost of our fundamental right- right to private property
which has ceased to be a fundamental right now. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 made them
justiciable as well. However the position stood reversed again after Supreme Court’s decision of
May 9, 1980. It struck down section 55 of 42nd amendment act which vested unlimited powers
with the Parliament to amend the Constitution. The Court also struck down section 4 of the Act
which accorded primacy to the Directive Principles over the Fundamental Rights.

(ii) Their Constitutional Sanctity not Challengeable:

It is evident from the above fact that though the Directive Principles are not enforceable, their
constitutional sanctity is an undisputed fact. Their violation contravenes the Constitution as
violation of a constitutional principle, legally enforceable. In the words of Gledhill, “If the Indian
Constitution becomes vested with the code of sanctity essential to its durability, it will be difficult
for any public figure to propose any legislative measure without making an appeal to Fundamental

19 | P a g e
Right or Directive Principles.”15 The contrary measures will be attacked by the opposition as
unconstitutional to the directive principles.

16
In Gopalan v. State of Madras, C.J. Kania opined that being a part of the Constitution, the
Directive Principles do not “represent a temporary will of the majority, but the deliberate wisdom
of the nation expressed through the Constituent Assembly…By declaring them to be fundamental
in the country, the Constitution has invested them with a certain sanctity…”

(iii) Guide to Succeeding Governments:

The framers of our Constitution were judicious enough to realize that in a democratic system of
Government, the swing of public opinion may put different parties in power at different times. At
one time, the party at the helm of affairs may be conservative in outlook while at another time; the
reins of Government may fall in the hands of a party radical in leanings. These principles will
induce the conservatives to introduce reforms necessitated by the exigencies of the time and also
exercise restraint on the radicals if they would be keen to introduce reforms of sweeping nature.
Thus, the Directive Principles would act as signposts to all succeeding governments.

In the words of Dr. Ambedkar, “They have left enough room for people of different ways of
thinking with regard to reaching of the ideal of economic democracy.” According to
Raghavachariar, “Whoever may capture the government power, he will have to respect these
instruments of instructions. He may certainly have to answer for them before the electorate when
the next election comes.”

(iv)Their Significance as Moral Precepts:

Even if the Directive Principles are to be considered as mere moral precepts or pious resolutions,
their significance cannot be under-estimated Gledhill opines, “The lives of the countless millions
have been shaped and directed by moral precepts impinging on their minds and it is not difficult
to find instances of similar precepts directing the course of history and nations. Despite the fact
that well known landmarks like Magna Carta, the French Declaration of Rights and the Preamble

15
Venkatesh Nayak, The Basic Structure of the Indian Constitution, Constitution Net,
https://constitutionnet.org/vl/item/basic-structure-indian-constitution
16
A. K Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.

20 | P a g e
to the American Constitution do not have any legal sanction behind them, their impact in their
respective countries cannot be considered less vital.

Just as the provisions of these landmarks cannot be considered ineffectual, the principles contained
in these directive principles are apt to shape the destiny of a developing nation and guide the
policies of our future governments. Hence, they shall not be dismissed as idealistic moral precepts.

(v) Their Importance as Principles of Social and Economic Order:

The ideals embodied in the Directives are conceived as the fundamental principles of a new social
and which was the ultimate goal of the Fathers of Indian Constitution. It is clearly stated in the
Constitution that these economic order principles though legally not enforceable are nevertheless
fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these
principles in making laws.

Article 38 prescribes, “The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and
protecting, as effectively as it may, a social order, in which justice, social, economic and political
shall inform all the institutions of national life.” Article 39 goes further in enumerating certain
principles of socialism.

The framers of the Constitution were conscious of the fact that political democracy alone is not
enough, hence they were endeavoring to promote the concept of welfare state by laying down these
fundamental principles of social and economic order which the legislators and executives could
not easily ignore. Dr. Ambedkar’s statement in the Constituent Assembly in this respect is
revealing: “Their intention was that howsoever adverse circumstances that stand in the way of
government in giving effect to these principles and how-so-ever impropitious the time might be,
they should always strive for the fulfillment of these principles.” 17

The abolition of Zamindari system, the nationalization of banks, the curtailment of the right to
property through controversial 24th and 25th amendments, the abolition of the privy purses of the
rulers of the princely states according to the 26th amendment reflect that these principles have not

17
Constituent Assembly Debates - Vol II, 44.

21 | P a g e
been reduced to mere musty parchments. They have been given weight by our Parliamentarians
with a view to establish socialism in the country.

In fact, they were given precedence over the right to property, emphasizing the importance of the
Directive Principles vis-a-vis Fundamental Rights in the Kesavananda case. 18 Niren Dev, the
Attorney General of India said, “The amendments (24th or 25th) were enacted to achieve the
primary objects of the Directive Principles of State Policy. Nothing in the Constitution should or
can stand in the way of achieving these objectives.” However, as already stated, the Apex Court
in 1980 reversed the position.

(vi) A Panacea for Removal of Ambiguities of the Constitution:

If we make an analytical appraisal of the decisions of the Supreme Court removing certain (1973)
4 ambiguities of the Fundamental Rights provisions, we find that Directive Principles have come
to the rescue of the judges. Since the Directive Principles constitute a part of the Constitution,
whenever a question regarding the interpretation of a vague provision in the Constitution crops up,
a reference to the Directive Principles is made to come out of the thicket of constitutional
ambiguities. Article 19,19 for example, permits the imposition of reasonable restrictions on the
Fundamental Rights.

If a conflict on the interpretation of “reasonable restrictions” ensues, a reference to the Directive

Principles can be easily made. A restriction promoting any objective embodied in the Directive
principles is usually declared reasonable by court of law. If a question as to whether a certain
matter is in the interest of the public or not arises, reference to the Directive Principles is made.

In Gopalan v. State of Madras,20 Chief Justice Kania remarked, “It has no doubt been repeatedly
made clear that the courts cannot uphold a Directive Principle when it comes in conflict with a
specific provision of the Constitution, relating to Fundamental Rights. However, in the
interpretation of these provisions, the Directive Principles can serve a very useful purpose. Most

18
Keshavananda Bharati v. Union of India, (1973) 4 SCC 225.
19
INDIA. CONST. Art, 19.
20
A. K Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27.

22 | P a g e
of the Fundamental Rights are subject to reasonable restrictions which may be imposed for public
purpose or in public interest.

The courts can be and have been guided by the Directive Principles in determining whether the
actual restrictions placed by law in the exercise of Fundamental Rights are reasonable or in public
interest or whether they sub serve a public purpose.” Prof. Alexandrowics opines that the courts
“should give the greatest possible weight to the Directive Principles for the purpose of their
interpretation of the provision relating to Fundamental Rights.”

In Bombay vs. F.M. Balsara,21 case, the Supreme Court gave weight to Article 47—aiming at
prohibition to support its decision that the restriction imposed by the Bombay Prohibition Act was
a reasonable restriction on the right to acquire any profession or carry on any trade. In Bijoy Cotton
Mills v. State of Ajmer 22 the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Minimum
Wages Act 1948, by taking into consideration Article 43. In the opinion of the Court, the fixation
of wages for labourers did not violate freedom of trade under article 19(5).

M.C. Setalvad, Attorney General of India, summed up the utility of the Directive Principles:
“…These fundamental axioms of state policy though of no legal effect have served as a useful
beacon light to courts…Restrictions imposed by law on the freedom of citizens may well be
reasonable if they are imposed in furtherance of the Directive Principles…”

The decision of the Supreme Court on the 24th and 25th amendments which aimed at giving
precedence to the Directive Principles over the Fundamental Rights clarified a constitutional
anomaly as to whether or not Parliament through an amendment can amend the Fundamental
Rights. It further makes it evident that constitutional ambiguities can be removed by invoking the
Directive Principles. The latter decision of the Supreme Court delivered on May 9, 1980 in
Minerva Mills’ case however complicated the matter, as it reversed the earlier decision of the Apex
Court.

(vii) Nominal Executive Heads cannot Misuse them:

21
State of Bombay v. F.M Balsara, AIR 1951 SC 318.
22
Bijoy Cotton Mills v. State of Ajmer, AIR 1955 SC 33.

23 | P a g e
D.D. Basu, a well known commentator on the Indian Constitution, apprehended that President or
the Governor might refuse to assent to a Bill passed by their respective legislatures on the plea that
such a bill is inconsistent with the Directive Principles. It might, therefore, lead to deadlocks
between the President and the Union Council of Ministers or the Governor and the State Council
of Ministers, since the council of Ministers are responsible for passing an important legislation.

Though Basu’s fears are genuine, yet we must not efface from our mind a naked reality that the
President’s or Governor’s power to veto a Bill passed by a Legislature is only limited, a sort of
suspensive veto. In the words of Dr. Ambedkar, “The Directive Principles cannot be pressed into
service either by the President or the State Governor for the purposes of vetoing a law passed by
the legislature.”23 In a Parliamentary form of government, a constitutional ruler like President at
the Centre and Governor in the state can hardly be assertive if they are keen to retain their
respective offices.

(viii) Their Impact on Planning Commission:

In the words of Venkataraman, “The importance of the Directive Principles is increasingly realized
by Planning Commission set up by the Government of India.” The Planning Commission has
realized that economic pattern to be achieved through National Planning has been very well
portrayed by the Directive Principles of State Policy. Hence the formulators and executors of Five-
Year Plans can hardly ignore these principles, as they usher in an era of economic democracy.

CONCLUSION:
These Directives thus constitute the national objectives and the national conscience and whosoever
is victorious at the polls will not be free to violate them. According to Mr. Alladi Krishnaswamy
Ayyar, “No ministry responsible to the people can afford light heartedly to ignore the provisions
in Part IV of the constitution.”24 They have served as a guide for the Union Parliament and state
legislatures. They are cited by the courts to support decisions. The governmental bodies have been
invariably guided by these provisions.”

23
Supra, note 1 at 1.
24
M LAKSHMIKANTH, INDIAN POLITY, 65 (Mc Graw Hill, Education 5th ed., 2017)

24 | P a g e
Still much is to be achieved. Economic imbalances and social disparities still persist. Standard of
living of the people is far from satisfactory due to back-breaking inflation. Unemployment is yet
to be eradicated though a beginning has been made in Punjab, Haryana and some other states to
introduce unemployment benefits for the unemployed. The efforts of UPA Government headed by
Dr. Manmohan Singh are also laudable in this direction. However Socialism has become a far cry.

In the current era, the concepts of free market economy, globalization and liberalisation are getting
a boost which is a great setback to Socialism as envisaged by the founding fathers. This switch
over to liberalisation and modernization stand for at stabilizing our hither-to-four shattered
economy. Consequently, the GDP is fast going up Dollar goes down and our rupee appreciates.
Hence it can be concluded that, Government’s efforts in the implementation of these objectives
have not proved futile. In fact they are considerably fruitful.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

ARTICLES

4. “Directive Principles of State Policy under the Indian Constitution” by Lokesh Vyas
5. “Directive Principles of State of Policy: How Relevant in Governance” by Manharman
6. “The Potential of Directive Principles of State Policy for the Judicial Enforcement of
Socio-Economic Rights” by Berihun Adugna Gebeye

BOOKS

2. Indian Polity, 5th Edition by M Laxmikanth.

25 | P a g e