Chapter - I

Introduction
1.1 GENERAL

The ruling political gospel of the nineteenth century was laissez faire which
manifested itself in the theories of individualism, individual enterprise and self-help.1
The philosophy envisaged minimum Government control, maximum free enterprise
and contractual freedom. At this time, State was characterized as the “law and order”
State and its role was conceived to be negative as its interest extended primarily to
defending the country from external aggression, maintaining law and order within
country, dispensing justice to its subjects and collection a few taxes to finance these
activities. It was an era of free enterprise and minimum Government responsibility
and functions.2 At one time, it was thought that the State was mainly concerned with
the maintenance of law & order and protection of life, liberty & property of its
subjects.3 The management of social and economic life was not regarded as
Government responsibility. But the laissez faire doctrine resulted in human misery. It
came to be realized that the bargaining position of every person was not equal and
uncontrolled contractual freedom led to exploitation of the weaker by the stronger,
e.g., of the labour by the management in industries. On the one hand, slums,
unhealthy and dangerous conditions of work, child labour, widespread poverty, and
exploitation of masses, but on the other hand, concentration of wealth in a few hands,
became the order of the day. It came to be recognized that the State should take active
interest in ameliorating the conditions of the poor. This approach gave rise to the
political dogma of “collectivism” which favoured State intervention in, and social
control and regulation of individual enterprise.4

Before 1947, India was a police State. The ruling foreign power was primarily
interested in strengthening its own domination; the administrative machinery was
used mainly with that object in view and the civil service came to be designed as the

1
A.V. Dicey, Law and Public Opinion in England 126-210 (University of California Press, California,
1961).
2
M P Jain & S N Jain, Principles of Administrative Law 2 (Wadhwa & Company, Nagpur, 5th edn.,
2005).
3
4
J.N.Pandey, The Constitutional Law of India 433(Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 50th edn., 2013).
Supra note 1 at 212-302.
 Introduction

“steel frame”.5 The British authority recognized and regulated India’s economy in the
interest of British trade and industry and organized a modern administrative system to
guarantee order and security. Because of the industrial revolution which had begun in
the middle of the eighteenth century, the British wanted to make India a big market
for their goods.6

The State did not concern itself much with the welfare of the people. But all
this changed with the advent of independence on 15 August 1947 and the task of
developing a Constitution for the Nation was undertaken by the Constitutional
Assembly of India.7 So, a conscious effort began to be made to transform the country
into a welfare State. The State started to act in the interests of social justice; it
assumed a ‘positive’ role. In the course of time, out of dogma of collectivism
emerged the concept of the “social welfare State” which lays emphasis on the role of
the State as a vehicle of socio-economic regeneration and welfare of the people.8 The
emergence of the social welfare State9 concept has affected the democracies very
profoundly. It has led to State activism, there has occurred a phenomenal increase in
the area of State operation; it has taken over a number of functions which were
previously left to private enterprise. The State today pervades every aspect of human
life; it runs buses, railways and postal services; it undertakes planning of social and
economic life of the community with a view to raise the living standards of the people
and reduce concentration of wealth; it improves slums, plans urban and rural life,
looks after health, moral and education of the people; it generates electricity, works
mines and operates key and important industries. It acts as an active instrument of
socio-economic policy, regulates individual life and freedom to a large extent10,
provides many benefits to its citizens,11 and imposes social control and regulation

5
6
Supra note 2 at 3.
Bipin Chandra, History of modern India 114 (Orient Blackswan Pvt.Ltd., New Delhi, 2009).
7
D.D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India 18 (LexisNexis Butterworths, Wadhwa, Nagpur,
20th edn., 2009).
8
Calvin Woodard, “Reality and Social Reform: The Transition from Laissez Faire to the Welfare
State” 72 Yale LJ 286 (1963).
9
A welfare State is a concept of Government where the State plays a key role in the protection and
promotion of the economic and social well-being of its citizens. It is based on the principles of equality
of opportunity, equitable distribution of wealth, and public responsibility for those unable to avail
themselves of the minimal provisions for a good life. The general term may cover a variety of forms of
economic and social organization. Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_State _ (Visited
on September 10, 2012).
10
Bernard Schwartz, “Crucial Areas in Administrative Law” 34 George Washington LR 401 (1966).
11
Charles A. Reich, “Individual Rights and Social Welfare: The Emerging Legal Issues” 74 Yale LJ
1245 (1965).

[2]
 Introduction

over private enterprise. The philosophy of welfare State has been expressly engrained
in the Indian Constitution.12 The fact that the Indian Constitution was conceived and
drafted in the mid-twentieth century when the concept of social welfare State is the
rule of the day, gave an advantage to its makers in so far as they could take
cognizance of the various constitutional processes operating in different countries of
the world and thus draw upon a rich fund of human experience, wisdom, heritage and
traditions in the area of governmental process in order to fashion a system suited to
the political, social and economic conditions in India.13 The makers of the
Constitution had also realized that in a poor country like India, political democracy
would be useless without economic democracy. Accordingly, they incorporated a few
provisions in the Constitution with a view to achieve amelioration of the socio-
economic condition of the masses. The Constitution, i.e. the Supreme Law of the
Land is thus pervaded with the modern outlook regarding the objectives and functions
of the State. It embodies a distinct philosophy of Government, and explicitly declares
that India will be organized as social welfare State, i.e. a State which renders social
services to the people and promotes their general welfare.

The Preamble to the Constitution of India records the solemn resolve of the
Indian people to establish a “Socialist”14society based on socio-economic justice.
Socio-economic justice15, however, has to be attained in a democratic way by the rule
of law. The egalitarian principle of democracy requires not only one man one vote,
but also the equal and effective right of each and every man to live full human life, to

12
Supra note 5.
13
M.P.Jain, Indian Constitutional Law 10, 15 (Lexis Nexis, Gurgaon, 7th edn., 2014).
14
The word socialist was not there in the Preamble at the time of adoption of Constitution of India at
26 November, 1949, but it was added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment in 1976. As being a
socialist State, the Government is required to take steps to ensure that the minimum facilities of life are
provided to every person, and there are equalities of income and material resources as far as
democratically possible. A socialist State strives to achieve many ideals that are contained in Part IV of
the Constitution.
15
Under the concept of social justice the State is required to ensure that the dignity of socially
excluded groups is not violated by the powerful, and they are considered on equal footing with others.
“Social justice, equality and dignity of person are corner stones of social democracy. The concept
'social justice' which the Constitution of India engrafted, consists of diverse principles essential for the
orderly growth and development of personality of every citizen.” Under economic justice it is
contemplated that the State would not make any distinction among its citizens on the basis of their
possession of economic resources. Economic justice also requires the State to try to narrow down the
gap of resourceful and poor by distributive justice in terms of income and wealth. To achieve the ideals
of social and economic welfare the State is required to involve in different social welfare schemes as
like reservation for SC/ST/OBCs, MGNREGA, Mid Day Meal Scheme, Sarva Siksha Abhiyan, etc.
See Consumer Education and Research Centre v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 922.

[3]
 Introduction

develop his personality in accordance with the tenets of freedom, equality and justice.
This preambulary message of socio economic justice has been translated into several
Articles dealing with its different facets in Part III (Articles 12-35) and IV (Articles
36-51) of the Constitution.16 The former contains the Fundamental Rights of the
citizens and latter deals with the Directive Principles of State Policy.17 Both aim at
the establishment of an egalitarian social order and give sustenance to the rule of
law.18 They aim at the betterment of the individual as an integrated component of the
society. Though, the rights enumerated in Part III of the Constitution have been
designated as fundamental or enforceable rights but if a person does not have “a
minimum of material well being,”19 so as to be able to exercise these rights, how can
he think of enforcing them. In fact, political freedom will have no meaning without
social and economic justice to the common man. This is the theme of Directive
Principles of State Policy. These Principles aim at bringing about a non-violent social
revolution. It is through such a revolution that the Constitution seeks to fulfill the
basic needs of the common man and to change the structure of our society. The
Constitution visualizes that the society as a whole and every member of the society
should participate in these freedoms.20 To quote Austin:21

The core of the commitment to the social revolution lies in the Fundamental
Rights and in the Directive Principles of State Policy. These are the conscience of the
Constitution. Austin’s observation brings out the true position that Fundamental
Rights and Directive Principles are like two wheels of a chariot, one no less
important than the other. You snap one and the other will lose its efficacy. They are

16
Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a Nation 50 (Oxford University press,
New Delhi, 1999).
17
The Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles had their origins in the Indian independence
movement, which strove to achieve the values of liberty and social welfare as the goals of an
independent Indian State. The drafting of the Fundamental Rights was influenced by the adoption of
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by the U. N. General Assembly and the activities of the
United Nations Human Rights Commission as well as decisions of the U. S. Supreme Court in
interpreting the Bill of Rights in the American Constitution. Id. at 73; Directive Principles of Indian
Constitution have been greatly influenced by the State of Irish Constitution. See B.B. Tayal & A.Jacob,
Indian History, World Developments and Civics A-39 (Avichal Publishing Co., Himachal, 2005).
18
State of Mysore v. Workers of Gold Mines, AIR 1958 SC 923; J,K.Cotton Spinning and Weaving
Mills Co. v. Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, AIR 1964 SC 737.
19
Virendra Kumar, “The Institution of Property and the proposed Forty-Forth Amendment of the
Constitution" 38 PULR 62 (1976). The learned author very ably remarks that for a common the
Directive Principles come first, and the Fundamental Rights later, because he must first have “a
minimum
20
of material well being” so as to be able to exercise these rights.
Supra note 17.
21
Ibid.

[4]
 Introduction

like a twin formula for achieving the social revolution. The Fundamental Rights and
Directive Principles, thus, connect India’s future, present and past adding greatly to
the significance of their inclusion in the Constitution and giving strength to the
pursuit of social revolution in India. They aim at making the Indian masses free in the
positive sense, free from the passivity endangered by the centuries of coercion by
society and by nature…. and the physical condition that had prevented them from
fulfilling their best selves. They exhort the State to take positive action by protecting
the minimum of the individual’s right and by reducing the number of those whose
share of utilities of life fall below the minimum level. In fact one cannot exist without
the other. Take for instance, Article 14 of the Constitution which guarantees to every
citizen, equality before law and equal protection of laws. But how this right can be
exercised by those weaker sections of the society who been continuously oppressed,
suppressed and exploited for years together. Similarly, Article 21 gives a right to life
and personal liberty, but how a person who is suffering from starvation can take
benefit of this precious freedom. Article 19 guarantees a number of fundamental
freedoms but such freedoms will remain like an empty slogan for a person who has
no food to eat, no roof under which he can take shelter and no clothes to wear. Article
25 gives religious freedom but the same can be enjoyed by those who have material
means to practice them. In fact, these two chapters read with the Preamble of the
Constitution summarize the legitimate aspirations, lofty ideals and objectives of the
people of the country. But what has happened subsequently is obvious. An
impression has been created that there is conflict between the Fundamental Rights
and the Directive Principles and that two cannot operate in harmony with each other.

The basic distinction between these two fundamental mandates of the

Constitution is that the former are enforceable in the Court of law,22 while the latter
are not enforceable in the Court of law.23 As directives are not enforceable by any
Court it has become common to explore the relationship between enforceable Part III
and unenforceable Part IV. From the journey through various judicial decisions
starting from Champakam Dorairajan case,24 it is possible to discern four stages or
judicial approaches with regard to the inter-relationship between Part III and Part IV

22
Article 32, the Constitution of India.
23
Article 37, the Constitution of India.
24
State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, AIR 1951 SC 226.

[5]
 Introduction

by virtue of Article 37. Accordingly, it is known as the subsidiary period. Thus in

State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan25, the Supreme Court held that the
Directive Principles of State Policy have to conform to and run as subsidiary to the
Chapter of Fundamental Rights because the latter are enforceable in the Courts while
the former are not. In course of time, a perceptible change came over the judicial
attitude on this question of enforceability. The Supreme Court came to adopt the view
that although Directive Principles, as such, were legally non-enforceable,
nevertheless, while interpreting a statute, the Courts could look for light to the
“loadstar” of the Directive Principles. Where two judicial choices are available, the
construction in conformity with the social philosophy of the Directive Principles has
preference.26 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 principle of harmonious construction and
attempt to give effect to both as far as possible.27 However, in Golaknath v. State of
Punjab,28 the Court emphasized that the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
formed an integrated scheme, which was flexible enough to respond to the changing
needs of the society but kept them in the subjection of Fundamental Rights. In the
second period, which is generally known as harmonious construction period, an
attempt was made by the judiciary to draw a balance and harmony between Part III
and Part IV. The observation that the provisions contained in Part III and Part IV, ‘are
complementary and supplementary to each other’ in C.B. Boarding and Lodging v.
State of Mysore29 signaled the dawn of this period.
In Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerela,30 the Supreme Court observed
that the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles constitute the conscience of the
Constitution. There is no antithesis between the both, and one supplements the other.
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 inconsistency between them.31 Later in Minerva Mills v. Union of India,32 it

25
26
Ibid.
Mumbai Kamgar Sabha v. Abdulbhai, AIR 1976 SC 1455.
27
In Re Kerala Educarion Bill, AIR 1958 SC 956
28
29
AIR 1967 SC 1643.
30
AIR 1970 SC 2042.
AIR 1973 SC 1461.
31
State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, AIR 1976 SC 490.
32
AIR 1980 SC 1789; J&K National Panthers Party v. Union of India, AIR 2011 SC 3.

[6]
 Introduction

was held that harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles is an “essential feature” of the basic structure of the Constitution.
Chandrachud C.J., in this case said that the Fundamental Rights “are not end in them
but are the means to an end”. The end is specified in the Directive Principles. It was
further observed in the same case that the Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles together, are the “conscience of the Constitution”. In Ashok Kumar
Thakur v. Union of India,33 Balakrishanan, C.J. said that no distinction can be made
between the two sets of rights. The Fundamental Rights represent the civil and
political rights and the Directive Principles embody social and economic rights.
Merely because the Directive Principles are not justiciable by the judicial process
does not mean that they are of subordinate importance. Later being fueled by the
International revelation and realization34 that the two kinds of human rights namely
civil and political rights and economic and social rights are actually complementary
to one another as civil and political rights cannot be realized without economic and
social rights, the judiciary while interpreting Part III started reading Part IV into Part
III.35 Many of the un-enumerated rights36 are read into the list of Fundamental Rights
by interpreting Part III in the light of Part IV as both are seen complementary to each
other.37

In the Unikrishanan v. State of Andra Pradesh38, J. Jeeven Reddy said that

the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are supplementary and
complementary to each other, and not exclusionary of each other, and that the
Fundamental Rights are but a means to achieve the goals indicated in Directive
Principles. Further, in Rajasthan v. Union of India & Another,39 It has been held that
Fundamental Rights must be construed in the light of the Directive Principles. Since

33
(2008) 6 SCC 1
34
The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), together with the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (1966), make up the International Bill of Human Rights.
35
Article 39A has been found to be an interpretative tool for Article 21 in Madhav Hayawadanrao
Hoskot
36
v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1978 SC 1548.
For example Right to health, Right to Shelter, Right to Education etc. For detail, see Chapter V.
37
The Court’s Path-breaking decision in Manaka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 was the
critical moment in this transformation. Thenceforth, the Court resuscitated judicial activism, mainly to
render Constitutional liberties a living reality for the most vulnerable and powerless sections of Indian
Society.
38
AIR 1993 SC 2178; Dalmia Cement Bharat Ltd. v. Union of India (1996) 10 SCC 104; Rajasthan v.
Union of India & Others (2012) 6 SCC 1; Paramati Educational and Cultural Trust & Others v. Union
of India & Others (2014) 8 SCC 1; Charu Khurana & Others v. Union of India, 2014 Indlaw SC 781.
39
(2012) 6 SCC 1.

[7]
 Introduction

then, it has now become a judicial strategy to read Fundamental Rights along with
Directive Principles with a view to define the scope and ambit of the former, 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. The biggest beneficiary of this approach has
been Article 21. By Article 21 with the Directive Principle, the Supreme Court has
derived a bundle of rights. As, the Supreme Court has stated in Baadhua Mukti
Morcha, that the right to live with human dignity enshrined in Article 21 derives its
life breath from the Directive Principles of State Policy40 particularly Clause (e) and
(f) of Article 39 with Article 47 of the Constitution of India41; Right to life includes
the right to enjoy pollution free water and air and environment42; Right to health and
social justice has been held to be a Fundamental Rights of the workers. The Court has
derived this right by reading Article 21 with Articles 39(e), 41,43, and 48 A43i.e.,
right to health, Right to work, Right to Shelter etc.44 Thus, some DPSPs are actually
enforced as Fundamental Rights.45 This judicial approach indeed led to the third stage
namely enforcement stage. In this period the DPSP, otherwise unenforceable (non-
justiciable) were actually enforced though not directly but indirectly. Initially
provisions of Part IV were used to justify restrictions imposed on the Fundamental
Rights and in this fashion; they were indirectly accorded judicial recognition.46 In
determining the reasonableness of a classification under Article 14 or the
reasonableness of a restriction under Article 19, the Court had regard to the directives
and gave such interpretation to the other Articles of the Constitution which aimed at
promoting the goals contained in the Preamble and the DPSP, envisaging a socialistic

40
41
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802, 811-812.
42
Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India, AIR 2014 SC 49.
Subash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420.
43
Consumer Education & Research Centre v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 922; LIC v. CERC, AIR
1995 SC 1811.
44
Chameli Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1996 SC 1051.
45
Girish Kalyan Kendra Workers Union v Union of India, AIR 1991 SC 1173.
46
For example in State of Bombay v. F.N.Balsara, AIR 1951 SC 318 with reference to Article 47 it
was held that a restriction imposed by a law on the sale and possession of liquor was a reasonable
restriction in the interest of public; in State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh, AIR 1952 SC 252, Article
39 was taken into consideration while upholding abolition of Zamidari System as it was for a public
purpose; Article 43 was used to uphold the validity of Minimum Wages Act,1948 in Bijay Cotton Mills
Ltd v. State of Ajmer, AIR 1955 SC 33; in similar fashion cattle protection laws prohibiting slaughter
of cattle was upheld as it meant to give effect to Article 48 in Md. Hanif Quereshi v. State of Bihar,
AIR 1958 SC 731.

[8]
 Introduction

polity.47 Further, in interpretation of the law and the Constitution, the judiciary does
at times take note of the ideals of a social welfare State even though some of the
ideals may not be expressly incorporated in the Constitution.48

Finally, reference may be made to Article 31C, inserted by the 25th

Amendment Act of 1971 which seeks to upgrade the Directive Principles especially
to Articles 39(b) and (c) over the Fundamental Rights contained in Articles 14, 19
and 31. If laws are made to give effect to the Directive Principles over Fundamental
Rights, they shall not be invalid on the ground that they take away the Fundamental
Rights. In case of conflict between Fundamental Rights and DPSP’s, if the DPSP
aims at promoting larger interest of the society, the Courts shall have to uphold the
case in favor of the DPSP.49 The Supreme Court also emphasized that there is no
disharmony between the Directive Principles and the Fundamental Rights as they
supplement each other in aiming at the goal of bringing about a social revolution and
the establishment of a welfare State, which is envisaged in the Preamble.50 The
Courts, therefore, have a responsibility to so interpreting the Constitution as to insure
implementation of the Directive Principles and to harmonizing the social objectives
underlying therein with individual rights. Justice Mathew went farthest in attributing
to Directive Principles, a significant place in the Constitutional Scheme. According to
him:51

In building up a just social order it is sometimes imperative that the

Fundamental Rights should be subordinated to Directive Principles….Economic
goals have an uncontestable claim for priority over ideological ones on the ground
that excellence comes only after existence. It is only if men exist that there can be
Fundamental Rights.

Thus, Part IV enjoys a very high place in the Constitutional scheme as it

imposes obligations on the State to take positive actions for creating socio-economic

47
S.R.Bansali, Durga Das Basu’s Human Rights in Constitutional Law 334 (Lexis Nexis
Butterworths, Wadhwa, 3rd edn, 2008); A.David Ambrose, “ Directive Principles of State Policy and
Distribution of Material Resources with Special Reference to Natural Resources – Recent Trends” 55
JILI 4 (2013).
48
Mukherjea, C.J., in Ram Jawaya v. State of Punjab, AIR 1955 SC 549, 533; Crown Aluminium
Works v. Workmen, AIR 1958 SC 30; Gujrat Steel Tubes v. Its Mazdoor Sabha, AIR 1980 SC 1896;
Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. v. Union of India (2007) 2 SCC 640.
49
50
Article 31 C, the Constitution of India.
Kesavananda Bharti v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 1461.
51
Ibid.

[9]
 Introduction

conditions in which there will be egalitarian social order with social and economic
justice to all.52 The main intention of including Part IV in the Constitution is that it
may form a set of instructions issued to the prospective lawmakers and executives for
their guidance for good governance.53
These Directive Principles are most glaring examples of the scheme of social
justice in our Constitution, and these principles anticipate a lot of provisions for the
welfare of people at large relating to education, environment, promotion of justice,
free legal aid, living wages, protection of marginalized groups, forest and wildlife,
etc. The Directive Principles are classified under the many categories as: Gandhian,
economic and socialistic, political and administrative, justice and legal,
environmental, protection of monuments and peace and security.54 Article 38 sets out
it unmistakably by providing that the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the
people by securing and promoting as effectively as it may a social order in which
justice – social, economic and political, shall inform all the institutions of national
life. Article 37 makes the Directive Principles of State Policy fundamental in the
governance of the country and provides that it shall be the duty of the State to apply
these principles in making laws. The Article 39 says that the citizens, men and
women equally have the right to an adequate means of livelihood55; that the
ownership and control of material resources of the community should be so
distributed as best to sub-serve the common good56; that the operation of the
economic system should be such as not to result in the concentration of wealth and
means of production to the common detriment57; that there should be equal pay for
equal work for both men and women58; that the health and strength of the workers,
men and women, and the tender age of children is not abused59; that the citizens are
not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations unsuited to their age or strength
and that the children and youth should be protected against exploitation and against

52
Minerva Mills, supra note 35; Suresh & another v. State of Haryana, 2014 Indlaw SC 815.
53
“They are instructions to the Legislature and the Executive. Such thing is to my mind to be
welcomed, wherever there is a grant of power in general terms for peace, order and good government,
it is necessary that it should be accompanied by instructions regarding its exercise”, Ambedkar, III
Constituent
54
Assembly Debates at 41.
55
Part IV, the Constitution of India.
56
Article39(a), the Constitution of India.
57
Article39(b), the Constitution of India.
Article39(c), the Constitution of India.
58
59
Article39(d), the Constitution of India.
Article39(e), the Constitution of India.

[10]
 Introduction

moral and material abandonment.60 These clauses highlight the Constitutional

objectives of building an egalitarian social order and establishing a welfare State, by
bringing about a social revolution assisted by the State, and has been used to support
the nationalization of mineral resources as well as public utilities.61 Children and
youth should be allowed to develop in healthy manner and should be protected
against exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.62 The re-drafted
clause though widens the State obligation towards children but does not add anything
materially to the provisions that are included in Articles 39 & 42. Article 42 imposes
a duty on the State to provide for just and human conditions of work and maternity
relief. Another provision concerning welfare of workers is Article 43A63 which
stipulates participation of workers in the management of industries and makes
workers as partner in the nations’ productive process i.e., participation of workers in
the management of undertakings, establishments or other organizations engaged in
any industry. Beside it, the State shall endeavor to promote voluntary formation,
autonomous functioning, democratic control and professional management of co-
operative societies.64
Article 41 of the Constitution provides that the State shall within the limits of
its economic capacity and development; make effective provision for securing the
right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of unemployment, old
age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want. Article 38
states that the State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people and Article 43
states that the State shall endeavor to secure a living wage and a decent standard of
life to all workers.65 It is no doubt true that Article 38 and Article 43 of the
Constitution insist that the State should endeavor to find sufficient work for the
people so that they may put their capacity to work into economic use and earn a fairly
good living.66 The promotion of the cottage industry and establishment of Panchayti
Raj has been two main ideals of Gandhian philosophy. Speaking from the floor of the
Constituent Assembly, Dr. Ambedkar observed that there was a considerable feeling
in the house in favour of governmental encouragement for the cottage industry.

60
61
Article 39(f), the Constitution of India.
62
D.D. Basu, Shorter Constitution of India 449-450
nd
(Wadhwa & Co., Nagpur, 13th edn., 2003).
63
Article 39 (f) subs. by the Constitution (42 Amendment) Act, 1976, Sec.7 (w.e.f. 3-1-1977).
Ins. by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, Sec. 9 (w.e.f. 3-1-1977).
64 th
Article 43 B ins. by the Constitution (97 Amendment) Act, 2011, Sec. 3 (w.e.f. 15-2-2015).
65
J.N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India 387 (Central Law Agency, Allahabad, 2008).
66
K.Rajendran v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1982 SCC 273.

[11]
 Introduction

Similarly, there was a considerable opinion to enact in the Constitution

decentralization and the Panchayti Raj. But with emphasize on industrialization and a
highly centralist federal system that was adopted, there was no alternative but to place
these ideals among the Directive Principles. In view of this, latter part of Article 43
lays down that the State shall endeavor to promote cottage industries on an individual
or co-operative basis in rural areas. Article 40 enjoins the State to take steps to
establish village panchayats.67 Through 73rd and 74th Amendments to the
Constitution, (1991 & 1992 respectively), Panchayati Raj has been given the
Constitutional status with more powers. Panchayati Raj now covers almost all States
and Union Territories.

Article 39A68 which has been added to invest the legal process with functional
relevance and promotion of social justice enjoins on the State to make provisions for
providing free legal aid to the weaker sections of the society. The State shall ensure
that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basic of equal
opportunity. It also recommends that access to justice should not be denied to the
citizens merely because of economic or other disabilities. This is wholly a desirable
provision. Legal aid generally is expensive. The expenses involved in obtaining
justice have prevented many people from fighting for their rights.

Article 44 stipulates for a Uniform Civil Code. This Article caused

considerable difficulty in the Constituent Assembly. It was opposed on the one side
by an orthodox section of Hindus and, on the other hand, by the minorities who
thought that with a Uniform Civil Code they would lose their identity. This Article
has not been implemented because of consistent opposition by the minorities.
There are other directives in Part IV of the Constitution by which State shall
Endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they
complete the age of six years.69 The State also promote with special care, the
educational and economic interests of weaker sections of the society including the
Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes etc. and shall protect them from social
injustice and all forms of exploitation.70 The State shall regard the raising of the level

67
68
Paras Diwan, Administrativend Law 124 (Allahabad Law Agency, Faridabad, 2004).
Ins. by the Constitution (42 Amendment) Act, 1976, Sec. 8 (w.e.f. 3-1-1977).
69
Article 45 subs. by the Constitution (86th Amendment) Act, 2002, Sec. 3 (w.e.f. 1-4-
70
Article 46, the Constitution of India

[12]
 Introduction

of nutrition and the standard of living.71 Article 47 enacts the national policy of
prohibition and enjoins the State to bring about prohibition of the consumption,
except for medical purposes, in intoxicating drinks and of drugs which are injurious
to health. This directive has been sought to be implemented from the beginning.
In a predominantly agricultural Hindu society of the ancient times emphasis
on the protection of the cow and other cattle connected with the agriculture was
natural. The question is not merely of the Hindu’s reverence towards cow, though
religious aspect of cow protection cannot be ignored, but protection of milk cattle in a
country, which is suffering from acute shortage of milk, is an imperative need. Article
48 deals with this and allied matters. It enjoins on the State to organize agriculture
and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and in particular, to take steps
for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and
calves and other milch and draught cattle.
Article 48A72 provides for safeguarding the wild life and forests of the
country. There is at present a growing consciousness and awareness that suitable
measures be adopted to protect the environment, forests and wild life. Article 49
provides for the protection of monuments and places and objects of artistic or historic
interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament to be of national importance
against destruction and damage. Article 50 enjoins that the judiciary shall be
separated from the executive. Article 51 lays down that the State shall endeavor to
promote international peace and security, to maintain just and honorable relations
between nations and to foster respect for international law and treaties and to
encourage settlement of international disputes by Arbitration.
Thus, the ideals stated in the Preamble are reinforced through the Directive
Principles of State Policy which spell out in greater detail the goal of economic
democracy, the socio-economic content of political freedom, the concept of welfare
State.73 The concept of a welfare State is strengthened by the Directive Principles of
State Policy which set out the economic, social and political goals of the Indian
Constitutional system. In a numbers of pronouncements,74 the Supreme Court has

71
Article 47, the Constitution of India.
72
Ins. by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act, 1976, Sec. 10 (w.e.f. 3-1-1977).
73
Supra note 13 at 1408.
74
Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity v. State of West Bengal (1996) 4 SCC 37; Ashoka Smokeless
Coal India (P) Ltd., supra note 52; Charu Khurana, supra note 41.

[13]
 Introduction

insisted that these Directive Principles seek to introduce the concept of a welfare
State. They act as check on the Government, theorized as a yardstick in the hands of
the people to measure the performance of the Government and vote it out of power if
it does not fulfill the promises made during the elections. To quote B.R. Ambedkar:75

If any Government ignores them, they will certainly have to answer for them
before the electorate at the election time.

The Directive Principles are non-justiciable rights of the people. The

Directive Principles, though not justiciable, are fundamental in the governance of the
Country. It shall be the duty of the State76 to apply these principles in making laws.77
The reason behind the legal non-enforceability and non-justiciability of these
principles is that they impose positive obligations on the State. While taking positive
action, Government functions under several restraints, the most crucial of these being
that of financial resources. In the words of the Supreme Court:78

The Directive Principles of State Policy are made non-justiciable for the
reason that the implementation of many of these rights would depend on the financial
capability of the State. Non-justiciable clause was providing for the reason that an
infant State shall not be made accountable immediately for not fulfilling these
obligations. Merely because the Directive Principles are not justiciable by the judicial
process does not mean that they are of subordinate importance.

The Courts do not, however, enforce a Directive Principle, as such, as it does

not create any justiciable right in favour of an individual.79 A Court will not issue an
Order or a Writ of Mandamus to the Government to fulfill a Directive Principle.80

75
VII Constituent Assembly Debates at 41.
76
Article 36 provides that the term “State” shall have the same meaning as in Part III of the
Constitution. This means that not only the Union and State authorities but also local authorities shall
have a moral obligation to follow the directives contained in Part IV. See the Constitution of India. The
term “State” includes all authorities within the territory of India. It includes the Government of India,
the Parliament of India, the Government and legislature of the States of India. It also includes all local
or other authorities such as Municipal Corporations, Municipal Boards, District Boards, Panchayats
etc. See Article 12, the Constitution of India.
77
Article 37, the Constitution of India
78
Supra note 36.
79
In Re Thomas, AIR1953 Mad 21; P.M. Ashurathanarayana Setty v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1989
SC 100.
80
Ranjan Dwivedi v. Union of India, AIR 1983 SC 624; Lily Thomas v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC
1650.

[14]
 Introduction

According to quote V.N. Shukla:81

If the Court can compel Parliament to make laws then Parliamentary

democracy would soon be reduced to an oligarchy of judges. It is for this reason that
the Constitution says that the Directive Principles shall not be enforceable by Courts.
However, it does not mean that the Directive Principles are less important than
Fundamental Rights for the simple reason that they are not judicially enforceable.

The Courts are nevertheless, bound to evolve, affirm and adopt principles of
interpretation which will further not hinder the goal set out in the Directive Principles
of State Policy.82 Thus, all executive agencies should also be guided by these
principles. Even the judiciary has to keep them in mind in deciding cases. 83

In short, the dynamic provisions of the Directive Principles fertilize the static
provisions of the Fundamental Rights. Excellence comes only after existence. This
takes us to a broader spectrum of rights, i.e.,84 social and economic rights which are
embodied in Part IV of the Constitution. The Directive Principles of State Policy are
designed to usher in a social and economic democracy in the country. These
Principles obligate the State to take positive action in certain directions in order to
promote the welfare of the people and achieve economic democracy. These Principles
give directions to the legislatures and executive in India as regard the manner in
which they should exercise their power.85

Austin has rightly said that the Directive Principles were incorporated in our
Constitution with the hope and expectation that someday the tree of true liberty would
bloom in India.86 It is by enacting “Directive Principles of State Policy” in Part IV of
the Constitution that we have endeavored to create a welfare State.87 The idea of

81
Supra note 57 at 494-95; Mahendra.P.Singh, V.N.Shukla’s Constitution of India 345-46 (Eastern
Book Company, Lucknow, 11th edn., 2008); A. David Ambrose, supra note 51 at 1-2.
82
U.B.S.E. Board v. Hari Shankar, AIR 1979 SC 69; Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. National Union
Waterfront Workers, AIR 2001 SC 3527: Orissa Textile & Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa, AIR 2002 SC
708; Ashoka Smokeless supra note 52; State of U.P. v. Jeet S. Bisht (2007) 6 SCC 586.
83
U.B.S.E. Board v. Hari Shankar, AIR 1979 SC 69; Steel Authority of India Ltd. v. National Union
Waterfront Workers, AIR 2001 SC 3527: Orissa Textile & Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa, AIR 2002 SC
708; Ashoka Smokeless supra note 52; State of U.P. v. Jeet S. Bisht (2007) 6 SCC 586.
84
Savita, Supta Das, et.al., Social Science Part-II 29 (National Council of Educational Research and
Training, New Delhi, 2005); S.P.Gupta v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149; Ramon Services (P) Ltd.
v. Subhash Kapoor (2001) 1 SCC 118; Harjinder Singh v. Punjab State Warehousing Corporation
(2010) 3 SCC 192.
85
86
Supra note 79 at 476, 493-94.
87
Supra note 17 at 52.
Ibid.

[15]
 Introduction

welfare State envisaged by our Constitution can only be achieved if the State
endeavors to implement them with a high sense of moral duty.

1.2 OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

The objective of the present study is to analyze as to what extent Directive

Principles of State Policy have been implemented by the State through different laws
and other policies in the country after Independence and how far away is India to
become a social welfare State. The present study also aims to identify and analyze the
philosophy behind the Directive Principles of State Policy and Preamble of
Constitution which also contain the philosophy of the social welfare State. Soon after
the coming into force of the Constitution, the various States in India enacted
legislations in furtherance of the various social welfare policies enshrined in the
Directive Principles of State Policy. These legislative measures were later challenged
before the Courts as violative of the provisions of Fundamental Rights guaranteed in
Part III of the Constitution. This brought the status of Directive Principle under
discussion. In view of above situation, researcher was motivated to take up this aspect
for its closer scrutiny and to assess the implementation of Directive Principle of State
Policy contained in Part IV of the Constitution. The main thrust of the present
research work will be, however, on the role played by the Directive Principles of
State Policy in providing social welfare to the people of India. The implementations
of various social welfare policies contained in the directives have been taken as the
basis to assess the gap between the promises and performances. It has been stressed
that implementative aspect of social welfare policies contained in the directives will
have to be judged not only from what we have achieved but also from what we have
failed to do. It is in this spirit that the present study has been undertaken.

1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The present study raises the following questions:

1. How far we have been able to achieve the objectives and realize the goals of
social welfare State as set out in the Constitution through the implementation
of Directive Principles of State Policy?

2. How and why the Directive Principles of State Policy were incorporated in the
Constitution?

[16]
 Introduction

3. How the Directive Principles of State Policy can be reconciled with the
Fundamental Rights and their Constitutional status?

4. To what extent the judiciary has shown its responsiveness towards the
implementation of social welfare concept under the Indian Constitution?

5. Does Part IV of the Constitution need a fresh look?

6. Should some of the Directive Principles of State Policy be made justifiable?

7. How more effective implementation of the Directive Principles of State Policy

is possible?

1.4 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The researcher has followed the doctrinal method of research for the purpose
of present study. Doctrinal research, of course, involves analysis of case law,
arranging, ordering and systematizing legal propositions. As a part of doctrinal study,
all the primary and secondary sources of information have been analyzed and
evaluated. It also includes the report of various commissions and committees
appointed from time to time. Secondary resources include research articles, books and
other relevant publication on the subject. The descriptive and analytical methods of
writing have been adopted. All research is the gathering of evidence or information
for ascertaining an assumption or verifying some hypothesis. Research is a series
which adds in the old, new suggestion and recommendations. Research is therefore,
an enquiry for the verification of a fresh theory or for supplementing prevailing
theories by new knowledge. No research can be purely new, as even original
discoveries are an extension of the search already undertaken, being shaped generally
as expressing agreement or refutation or plain addition. A researcher is thus
unavoidably burdened with the heritage of information already collected in his area of
work. Endless desire to research impels the researcher to find new horizons and in
present research, researcher has endeavored to do the same.

1.5 SCHEME OF THE STUDY

The study is divided into six chapters. The First chapter deals with the theory
of laissez faire that resulted in human misery and evolution of concept of “social
welfare State” which lays emphasis on the role of the State as a vehicle of socio-
economic regeneration and welfare of the people. An attempt has been made to

[17]
 Introduction

examine the Constitutional provisions of Directive Principles of State Policy and

Preamble of the Constitution that contain the concept of socio-economic justice and
the philosophy of welfare State. The role of judiciary has also been described briefly
in diluting the conflict between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State
Policy. A summary of research method and scheme of the study are to be made in
manuscript has been demonstrated.

The Second chapter deals with the origin and development of Fundamental
Rights and Directive Principles. The Constitution of India Bill, 1895, the
Commonwealth of India Bill, 1926, the Nehru Report of 1928 and the famous
Karachi Resolution of 1931 have been examined to show that both these sets of rights
have a common origin. The leaders of our freedom movement drew no distinction
between them. The Constitutional proposals of Sapru Committee of 1945 have further
been examined to show that the Committee having been influenced by the Irish
Constitution of 1937 envisaged those rights as falling in two classes, one justiciable
and the other non-justiciable and left the issue to be finally settled by the Constitution
making body. The second half of this chapter is devoted to the deliberations of the
framers of the Constitution in regard to the incorporation of the provisions relating to
the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution. This half of the chapter
gives a deep insight into the various reasons that led the Constitution makers to
formulate these provisions in the present form. An attempt has been made to show
that the Assembly faced a lot of difficulties in drawing the line between Fundamental
Rights and Directive Principles. This chapter also spells out clearly the approach of
the founding fathers towards these directives and the reasons for making them
unenforceable through Courts. An attempt has also been made to analyze the nature
and significance of the Directive Principles. The Third chapter presents an analytical
study of the Directive Principles. An attempt has been made to present an acceptable
classification of these directives and then to analyze them in their proper prospective
in regard to their impact in providing socio-economic justice to the poor millions of
our country. This chapter is also devoted to a discussion on the relationship between
the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. On the initial stage
the judiciary showed more concern in protecting the property rights against
legislations which were enacted to implement the Directive Principles of State Policy.
To resolve this dichotomy between these two fundamental values of the Constitution,

[18]
 Introduction

an attempt has been made to show that if the ‘institutional arrangements’ for
implementation of Part III and Part IV are kept in view the chances of avoiding
conflicts between the two can be minimized. Various judicial pronouncements right
from the Champakam Dorairajan,88 Minerva Mills89 etc., to Ashok Kumar
Thakur90

J&K National Panthers Party91and Rajasthan v. Union of India,92 have been

orderly examined so as to ascertain how far the judiciary has been able to appreciate
the value relationship between the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. It
has been demonstrated that the responsibility for implementing the enforceable rights
which are called Fundamental Rights rests primarily with the legislature but
ultimately with the Courts. In marginal situations, however, the conflict if any can be
solved by the assignment of priorities to the relative value of the particular ‘right’ or
the ‘principle’ as the case may be. If this approach is kept in view, the supposed
confrontation or dichotomy between these two Parts would remain nothing more than
a myth.

The Fourth chapter seeks to evaluate the implementation of Directive

Principles of State Policy under the Indian Constitution. This chapter has been
divided into two main parts. The first part is devoted to a discussion on the post-
independence land reforms policies and legislation and its implementation and the
second one is devoted to a general discussion on evaluation of various socio-
economic policies contained in Part IV of the Constitution. It is revealed that the Five
Years Plans initiated soon after the inauguration of the Constitution have followed the
path laid down in Directive Principles of State policies which in unmistakable words
are the chief instruments of securing socio-economic justice to the poor millions of
India. It has been shown that the policy of land reforms which was initiated right at
the beginning of the planning process has to a great extent succeeded in abolishing
the so called big landlordism and in re-distributing this primary source of livelihood
(Land). The chapter also highlights that during the past six decades substantial
progress has been made in improving the living standard of the people by providing

88
89
AIR 1951 SC 226.
90
AIR 1980 SC 1789.
(2008) 6 SCC 1.
91
92
AIR 2011 SC 3
(2012) 6 SCC 1.

[19]
 Introduction

them new opportunities and by reduction of inequalities in income, wealth and

opportunities. Special emphasis has continued to be laid on giving benefits to the
relatively less privileged class of society. Moreover, a sincere effort has been made to
reveal the present status of directives relating to Panchayati Raj, free legal aid,
Uniform Civil Code, protection of wild life and environment, modernization of
agriculture and animal husbandry and independent judiciary etc.

The Fifth chapter examines the role of Judiciary towards the implementation
of Directive Principles of State Policy to achieve the socio-economic justice and
philosophy of welfare State. It has also been revealed that after 1978, the seminal
decision Maneka Gandhi case,93 which has been the pillar of reform both in civil and
political liberties and socio-economic justice, the judiciary in some of its latest
pronouncements as Steel Authority of India Ltd.,94Arindam Chattopadhyay,95 T.N
Godavarman Thirumulpad,96

Arif Usman Kapadia,97etc. has shown a greater degree of sensitivity for

establishing the welfare State and in providing socio-economic justice by
implementing some Directive Principles of State Policy through Article 21.

The last i.e., Sixth chapter of the study gives a summary of the discussion and
incorporates a few suggestions.

1.6 REVIEW OF LITERATURE

In order to understand the above raised questions properly, it will be proper to

review the existing literature relating to the topic of the study. In the context of the
present study, it is important to take cognizance of some studies, related to research.
Keeping in view the philosophy behind the Directive Principles of State Policy and
Preamble of Constitution and to analyze as to what extent Directive Principles of
State Policy have been implemented by the State through different laws and other
policies in the country and how far away is India to become a social welfare State,
many books, research articles have been surveyed. The reviews of some books etc.
are stated below.

93
94
(1978)1 SCC 248.
95
AIR 2011 SC 897
96
AIR 2013 SC 1535
97
(2014) 1 SCR 923.
Writ Petition no. 777 of 2015

[20]
 Introduction

Granville Austin, The Indian Constitution: Cornerstone of a nation (1966 &

1999) - The book has blended each and every concept of Indian Constitution. It finds
the origin of the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy in the
freedom movement. It emphasis the concept of socio-economic justice that has been
translated into Part III and Part IV of the Constitution and equally stress that the
Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are like two wheels of a chariot, one no
less important than the other. They are like a twin formula for achieving the social
revolution. The book enlightens the importance of DPSP as these principles aim at
bringing about a non-violent social revolution. The Directive Principles were
incorporated in our Constitution with the hope and expectation that someday the tree
of true liberty would bloom in India.

M.P.Jain, Indian Constitutional Law (2014) – Through the chapter on DPSP,

author enjoins the directives with Preamble of the Constitution. The ideals stated in
the Preamble are reinforced through the Directive Principles of State Policy which
spell out in greater detail the goal of economic democracy, the socio-economic
content of political freedom, the concept of welfare State.

Tara Chand, History of the Freedom Movement in India (2005) – The book
covers all the Constitutional development during the freedom movement and witness
the whole development of Fundamental Rights and socio-economic rights from the
formation of the Indian National Congress, the Commonwealth of India Bill, 1925,
Swaraj Constitution, 1927, the Nehru Committee Report, 1928, to the Three Round
Table Conferences, 1930 etc.

B. Shiva Rao, The Framing of India’s Constitution: A Selected Documents

(Vols. I-IV 1967-1968) – This project of B. Shiva Rao, has comprehensively dealt
with each and every aspect relating to Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
before and after the setting up of the Constituent Assembly, as division of rights by
Sapru Committee into justiciable and non-justiciable rights. It mentions also B.N.
Rau’s Notes and Draft on Fundamental Rights and Directive principles.

Constituent Assembly Debates, Vols. I- IX of these Constitutional debates

also relevant to be referred here as these debates discuss all the proceedings of
Constituent Assembly as Deliberations of the Advisory Committee and of the
Drafting Committee on Directive Principles of State Policy, Reading of the Draft

[21]
 Introduction

Constitution in the Constituent Assembly, and Adoption of Directive Principles as

well as amendments and all hurdles and difficulties had to be faced by the
Constitutional Advisory Committee and Drafting Committee in making division
between rights which ought to be enforceable in Court of law and which
unenforceable. Thus, Constitutional Assembly Debates ample cover all the
proceedings of Constituent Assembly.

D.D.Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India (2009) – Keeping in view

the classification of Directive principles in Constitutional Scheme, the book is very
relevant and present the very scientific classification of Directive Principles for the
purpose of present study.

Upendra Baxi, “Little Done Vast-Undone: Some reflections on Reading

Granville Austin’s Indian Constitution” (1967) - Learned Professor classified the
directives in two categories: viz., fundamental directives and transitional directives.
Professor Baxi lays more stress on Article 38 and 39. In his view, Article 38 is basic
to the desired Constitutional goal while Article 39 specifies certain modalities for its
attainment. But the learned Professor seems to have gone far away when he observes
that the directives ranging from prohibition of cow slaughter to obligation to provide
“just and human conditions of maternity relief” and from prohibition of liquor to
protection of national monuments fall in the category of less fundamental or
transitional directives. This new invented category has been criticized by many
authors.

Paras Diwan, “Directive Principles and Fundamental Rights towards the

Constitutionally proclaimed goal of justice” (1980) – The present article evolved an
increasingly pervasive classification of Directive principles. Prof. Diwan has
complete approach to Part IV of the Constitution of India. He made an exhaustive and
universally accepted classification of the Directive Principles in its proper
prospective. He dynamically classified the directives and refrained from making any
rigid classification and studied them in an atmosphere of openness. Many more
Article and books of renowned scholars and jurists have been discussed to study the
classification of directives as G.S. Sharma, “Concept of Leadership Implicit in the
Directive Principles of State Policy under the Indian Constitution” (1965), P.B.
Gajendragadhker, The Constitution of India: Its Philosophy and Basic Postulates

[22]
 Introduction

(1969). Ranbir Singh and A.Lakshminath, Constitutional Law (2006) etc.

A.David Ambrose, “Directive Principles of State Policy and Distribution of

Material Resources with Special Reference to Natural Resources – Recent Trends”
(2013) – The Article very lucidly present the summary of about all the Court cases on
relationship of Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy. The
author has briefly dealt with also new strategy of judiciary to read Part IV into Part
III. Many of the un-enumerated rights are read into the list of Fundamental Rights by
interpreting Part III in the light of Part IV as both are seen complementary to each
other. In the Unikrishanan case, J. Jeeven Reddy said that the Fundamental Rights
and Directive Principles are supplementary and complementary to each other, and not
exclusionary of each other, and that the Fundamental Rights are but a means to
achieve the goals indicated in Directive Principles. Since then, it has now become a
judicial strategy to read Fundamental rights along with Directive Principles with a
view to define the scope and ambit of the former, 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.

Justice Kurian Joseph, “Judiciary and Social Welfare in India” (2013) – The
author highlights the concept of social welfare. As the Constitution of India provides
for Fundamental Rights in its Part III and the Directive Principles of State Policy in
Part IV and provided for the basis for social welfare measures. Roughly they
represent the two streams in the evolution of human rights, which divide them into
so-called negative and positive or civil and political and social and economic rights
respectively.

M. P. Singh, “The Statistics and the Dynamics of the Fundamental Rights and
the Directive Principles-A Human Rights Perspective” (2003) – the Article relates to
philosophy of the Constitution behind the Fundamental Rights and DPSPs. The core
of the commitment to the social revolution lies in Part III and Part IV, in the
Fundamental Rights and in the Directive Principles of State Policy. As ‘Justiciability’
is the basis of division between them. The former are justiciable, which the latter are
not. As reference to the Preamble and Constituent Assembly Debates would show, it
would be invidious and indeed dangerous to give primacy or overriding effect to

[23]
 Introduction

Fundamental Rights over the Directive Principles. In fact, Indian Constitution is

interpreted by the Supreme Court minimizes the gap between Fundamental Rights
and social welfare rights. Unfortunately, during the initial period of the working of
the Constitution, the trend of judicial pronouncements showed an undue emphasis on
the aspect of justiciability. However in later it was held that “harmony and Balance is
an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution. The Constitution gives
an idea of the society which is sought to be built and also defines the space and the
framework of action to realize the vision.

After reviewing the above existing literature, the researcher has attempted to
discuss the whole Constitutional Scheme relating to Directive Principles to analyze
the real philosophy behind them which Constitution makers had conceive in their
mind while incorporating them in Constitution and their relationship with
Fundamental Rights. Endless effort of researcher is to evaluate the implementation of
DPSP through Legislative and Executive efforts as well as the role of Judiciary with
regard to these directives in the implementation of socio-economic justice.

[24]