Question: Elaborate the relationship between fundamental rights and
directive principles of state policy.
Or,
Critically examine the primary status of the fundamental
rights over the directive principles of state policy. Refer the relevant case
laws.
Answer
Introduction
The Indian
Constitution is the longest written constitution of the world. It is a living
organ. Till now, it has been amended for the 104 times.
The concept
of supremacy over each other, contradiction and relationship between part 3 and
part 4 of the constitution is discussed several times in various judicial
pronouncement, we’ll examine them.
Fundamental Rights in Constitution
of India
The
fundamental rights are the rights which are essential for every human being for
their growth and development as being the member of the society. These are
inherent in nature. These rights are assured by part 3 of Indian Constitution:
articles 12-32.
Our
Constitution mainly provides 6 heads of fundamental rights:
I.
Right
to equality: articles 14-18,
II.
Right
to freedom of speech: articles 19-22,
III.
Right
against exploitation: articles 23-24,
IV.
Right
to religious freedom: articles 25-28,
V.
Cultural
and educational rights, specially for the minorities: articles 29-30, and
VI.
Right
to constitutional remedy, in case of breach of any of the fundamental rights:
article 32.
Directive principle of state policy:
DPSP
These are
the instruction which are given to the state, by our constitution makers to
achieve the objectives mentioned in our preamble. The expression “Justice:
social, economic, political” is sought to be achieved through DPSPs. It should
be noted that unlike the fundamental rights, these are unenforceable in nature.
The
provisions related to DPSP are given under articles 36-51 of our constitution.
There is no formal classification is provided, when it comes to DPSP.
Some of
them are as follows:
I.
Free
education,
II.
Free
legal aid,
III.
Speedy
trial,
IV.
Equal
wages for equal work,
V.
Right
to livelihood,
VI.
Universal
civil code etc.
Relationship Between DPSP and
Fundamental Rights:
Directive
principles and fundamental rights cannot be isolated with each other because
there is interrelation between the two. The time and again, judiciary, by its
creativeness, interpreted them so beautifully, that now it become a settle
principle. Following some important cases are listed:
I.
In
the case titled State of Madras Vs Champakam Dorairajan: The Supreme Court was
held that Directive Principles of State Policy cannot override the provisions
contained in Part III of the Constitution of India but have to conform to and
run as subsidiary to Fundamental Rights.
II.
In
the case of Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, The SC again dealt with this
question. This time also, The SC had taken very rigid approach. It held that
part 3 of our Constitution, cannot be diluted, diminished or taken away.
III.
Re
Kerala education bill:
In this
case, the Supreme Court observed that though the directive principles cannot
override the fundamental rights, and in determining the scope and ambit of
fundamental rights the court may not entirely ignore the directive principles,
but should adopt the principles of ‘harmonious construction’ so that there is
no conflict between them and should attempt to give effect to both as much as
possible by which harmony can be maintained between them.
IV.
In
Kesvananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, the court held in its observation
that “They are supplementary and complementary to each other. DPSP prescribed
the goal to be attained and fundamental rights lay down the means by which the
goals is to be achieved.”
V.
In
the Minerva mils case, these 2: fundamental rights and DPSPs are declared as part
of the basic structure of our Constitution.
VI.
In
the case of Unnikrishnan v. state of A.P, the directive principle contained in
Article 45 has been raised to the status of a fundamental rights. It has been
held that children from the age of 6 to 14 years have fundamental right to free
and compulsory education.
VII.
in
M.H. Hoskot v. State of Maharashtra, ‘legal aid’ and ‘speedy trial’ become
fundamental rights under Article 21 available to all prisoners.
VIII.
In
Randhir Singh v. Union of India, ‘equal pay for equal work’ has been held to be
a fundamental right.
IX.
Recently,
in the case of Charu Khurana V. Union of India of 2015, the Supreme Court of
India again highlighted the importance of their existence (Part III and Part
IV) by observing that “Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles are the
two wheels of the chariot establishing the egalitarian social order.
Conclusion
The
Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are the two faces of a coin that
serve a single purpose i.e. the interest of the citizen. The judiciary has
played a dominant role in widening the scope of both of them.
0 Comments