Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) - Indian Polity Notes

Articles 36-51 under Part-IV of the Indian Constitution deal with Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP). They are borrowed from the Constitution of Ireland, which had copied it from the Spanish Constitution. This article will solely discuss the Directive Principles of State Policy, its importance in the Indian Constitution and the history of its conflict with Fundamental Rights. This topic is important for UPSC Mains GS-II and also for political science optional papers and aspirants can also download the DPSP notes.

Aspirants can find information on the structure and other important details related to the IAS Exam, in the linked article.

Table of Contents:

What are the Directive Principles of State Policy?

The Sapru Committee in 1945 suggested two categories of individual rights. One being justiciable and the other being non-justiciable rights. The justiciable rights, as we know, are the Fundamental rights, whereas the non-justiciable ones are the Directive Principles of State Policy.

DPSP of Indian Constitution are ideals which are meant to be kept in mind by the state when it formulates policies and enacts laws. There are various definitions of Directive Principles of State which are given below:

• They are an ‘instrument of instructions’ which are enumerated in the Government of India Act, 1935.
• They seek to establish economic and social democracy in the country.
• DPSPs are ideals which are not legally enforceable by the courts for their violation.

Questions from this section of Indian Polity have been asked in UPSC Prelims and Mains before.

Important Exam-related links:

Indian Constitution has not originally classified DPSPs but based on their content and direction, they are usually classified into three types-

• Socialistic Principles,
• Gandhian Principles and,
• Liberal-Intellectual Principles.

The details of the three types of DPSPs are given below:

Directive Principles of State Policy’s notes about its classification is important for UPSC 2024 and aspirants should learn these with articles mentioned.

42nd Amendment Act, 1976 added four new Directive Principles to the list:

Facts about Directive Principles of State Policy:

1. A new DPSP under Article 38 was added by the 44th Amendment Act of 1978, which requires the State to minimise inequalities in income, status, facilities and opportunities.
2. The 86th Amendment Act of 2002 changed the subject matter of Article 45 and made elementary education a fundamental right under Article 21A. The amended directive requires the State to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they reach the age of 14 years.
3. A new DPSP under Article 43B was added by the 97th Amendment Act of 2011 relating to cooperative societies. It requires the state to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, democratic control and professional management of cooperative societies.
4. The Indian Constitution under Article 37 makes it clear that ‘DPSPs are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the state to apply these principles in making laws.’

As a point of debate, the following reasons are stated for the criticism of Directive Principles of State Policy:

1. It has no legal force
2. It is illogically arranged
3. It is conservative in nature
4. It may produce constitutional conflict between centre and state

With the help of four court cases given below, candidates can understand the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy:

Champakam Dorairajan Case (1951)

Supreme Court ruled that in any case of conflict between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs of Indian Constitution, the provisions of the former would prevail. DPSPs were regarded as a subsidiary of Fundamental Rights. SC also ruled that Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights through a constitutional amendment act to implement DPSPs.

Result: Parliament made the First Amendment Act (1951), the Fourth Amendment Act (1955) and the Seventeenth Amendment Act (1964) to implement some of the Directives.

Golaknath Case (1967)

Supreme Court ruled that Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights to implement Directive Principles of State Policy.

Result: Parliament enacted the 24th Amendment Act 1971 & 25th Amendment Act 1971 declaring that it has the power to abridge or take away any of the Fundamental Rights by enacting Constitutional Amendment Acts. 25th Amendment Act inserted a new Article 31C containing two provisions:

• No law which seeks to implement the socialistic Directive Principles specified in Article 39 (b)22 and (c)23 shall be void on the ground of contravention of the Fundamental Rights conferred by Article 14 (equality before law and equal protection of laws), Article 19 (protection of six rights in respect of speech, assembly, movement, etc) or Article 31 (right to property).
• No law containing a declaration for giving effect to such policy shall be questioned in any court on the ground that it does not give effect to such a policy.

Kesavananda Bharti Case (1973)

Supreme Court ruled out the second provision of Article 31C added by the 25th Amendment Act during Golaknath Case of 1967. It termed the provision ‘unconstitutional.’ However, it held the first provision of Article 31C constitutional and valid.

Result: Through the 42nd Amendment Act, Parliament extended the scope of the first provision of Article 31C. It accorded the position of legal primacy and supremacy to the Directive Principles over the Fundamental Rights conferred by Articles 14, 19 and 31.

Minerva Mills Case (1980)

Supreme Court held the extension of Article 31C made by the 42nd Amendment Act unconstitutional and invalid. It made DPSP subordinate to Fundamental Rights. Supreme Court also held that ‘the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles.’

Supreme Court’s rulings following the case were:

• Fundamental Rights and DPSPs constitute the core of the commitment to social revolution.
• The harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution.
• The goals set out by the Directive Principles have to be achieved without the abrogation of the means provided by the Fundamental Rights.

Conclusion: Today, Fundamental Rights enjoy supremacy over the Directive Principles. Yet, Directive Principles can be implemented. The Parliament can amend the Fundamental Rights to implement the Directive Principles, so long as the amendment does not damage or destroy the basic structure of the Constitution.

The table below mentions a few specific points about DPSPs that aspirants can get help from, for the UPSC exam:

Multiple Choice Question

Consider the following Statements

1. Through the 42nd Amendment Act, Parliament extended the scope of the first provision of Article 31C. It accorded the position of legal primacy and supremacy to the Directive Principles over the Fundamental Rights conferred by Articles 14, 19 and 31.
2. Fundamental Rights can be amended to implement Directive Principles until it does not harm the basic structure of the Constitution.
3. Part 3 of the Constitution of India contains the Fundamental Rights guaranteed to the citizens of India. Articles 12-35 of the Constitution of India deal with Fundamental Rights.
4. Political Democracy is established in India with the help of Fundamental Rights given in the Constitution of India whereas Economic and Social Democracy is established with the help of Directive Principles of State Policy.

Choose the correct answer from the below-given options

A) Only statements 3 and 4 are true.

B) All the above-given statements are true.

C) Only statements 2, 3 and 4 are true.

D) Only statements 1, 3 and 4 are true.

Answer: B

Candidates can find the general pattern of the UPSC Exams by visiting the UPSC CSE Syllabus post. 

Relevant Links