INTRODUCTION
This article has been written by Vishwas Agarwal, a final-year law student at the West Bengal National University of Juridical Sciences, Kolkata.
The sections of the Constitution that are dedicated to “Fundamental Duties, Fundamental Rights, and Directive Principles of State Policy may be found in Part III, Part IV, and Part IV-A of the document, respectively. These are regarded to be important parts of the Constitution, and the Constituent Assembly of India drafted them between 1947 and 1949.” Their development spans the years 1947–1949.
The Constitution of India bestows certain rights onto Indian people for their protection, welfare, and other purposes, and these rights are referred to as the Fundamental Rights. These regulations apply to everyone, regardless of factors such as caste, gender, sex, ethnicity, religion, place of birth, and so on. These rights are sometimes referred to as the citizens’ fundamental human rights. Article 226 and Article 32, respectively, give the High Courts and the Supreme Court the authority to give effect to fundamental rights; nevertheless, this authority is qualified by certain limitations. They center their attention on the interests of the individual.
The Constitution includes a set of rules known as the Directive Principles that the government must follow when formulating new legislation. These clauses are not the same as Fundamental Rights, which are protected by law and can be enforced by the courts. These principles serve as essential guides for the government of the state, and they are used while the laws are being drafted and passed by the state. To put it another way, the DPSP is a set of instructions that the state is to follow in order to successfully achieve economic and social democracy. The Directive Principles prioritize the health and safety of the community as their first concern.
The Fundamental Duties are the ethical duties that are placed upon each and every citizen of India, and they help to foster a sense of patriotism while also contributing to the consolidation of India’s national identity. These duties were established by the Constitution of India. Because it involves both people and the nation as a whole, it cannot be enforced by the courts in the same way that the Directive Principles cannot. After the 86th Amendment was passed in 2002, a new duty was added to the list of the 10 Fundamental Duties, which stated that “every parent or guardian must provide appropriate opportunities of education to his child between the ages of 6 to 16 years.” Originally, there were 10 Fundamental Duties on the list. At this time, there are 11 duties considered fundamental.
RELATIONSHIP
When there is a contradiction with the “Fundamental Rights, the Directive Principles have been utilised to preserve the constitutionality of legislation. 1971’s 25th Amendment amended Article 31-C to endow Directive Principles with supremacy in the form of Article 31-C. This article was added to give effect to the Directive Principles of Article 39-B and Article 39-C over the Fundamental Rights granted by Articles 14, 19, and 31.”
In the case of Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, the Supreme Court ruled “those fundamental rights cannot be weakened, decreased, or taken away. In response, the Amendment Act was passed and Article 31-C was added to Part III of the Constitution. If a statute is drafted to implement DPSP and it breaches Articles 14, 19, and 21, it should not be declared null and invalid only on this basis.”
The application of this article was to be extended to all DPSPs by the 42nd Amendment of 1970, but the Supreme Court invalidated the expansion in the Minerva Mill case on the grounds that it contradicted the Constitution’s essential structure. Together, the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles have also served as the basis for legislation pertaining to the welfare of people.
According to the most recent developments in the landmark Kesavananda Bharati case the Apex Court stated that any section may be changed by Parliament so long as the underlying framework is not changed. Given its incompatibility with the Constitution, clause 2 of Article 31-C has been ruled null and invalid. However, validity of clause 1 has been established. With the passing of 42nd amendment act, the Parliament has broadened the application of Article 31-C. In light of the decision, the highest court has come to believe that the Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are mutually reinforcing in their pursuit of a social welfare state. As a result, the Court brought Article 31-C back to how it was before the 25th Amendment was added to the Constitution in 1971. Therefore, the rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 19 should take a back seat to the Directive Principles of Articles 39-B and 39-C. “The Supreme Court of India stated in State of Kerala v. N. M. Thomas that every attempt should be made to resolve the issue between the Fundamental Rights and DPSP.”
The Supreme Court has upheld the legality of laws that are intended to fulfil Fundamental Duties under Part IV of the Constitution. All citizens are required to comply with these Obligations, which may be enforced by the State through legislation. The Supreme Court has also given the State guidelines for enforcing the law and empowering its citizens to do their part.
In Bombay Municipal Corporation v. Olga Tellis, The Supreme Court has argued that DPSP are important to the nation’s government. Thus, the meaning and conceptions of Fundamental Rights should be accorded equal weight. In Dalmia Cement v. Union of India, the court issued a The Supreme Court stated that Fundamental Rights and DPSP are supplemental and complimentary to one another, and according to the Constitution’s Preamble, Fundamental Rights and DPSP constitute the conscience of the Constitution.
Guidelines were issued in Ashok Kumar Thakur v. Union of India the Supreme Court stated that “there is no distinction between these two sets of rights. Fundamental Rights encompass Civil and Political Rights, whereas DPSP is concerned with Social and Economic Rights. Although DPSPs are not enforceable in court, this does not make them subservient.”
“CONCLUSION
The Fundamental Duties, Fundamental Rights, and Directive Principles are the two sides of a coin that are used to accomplish a same goal, and that goal is to protect the interests of the citizen. The clauses that describe Fundamental Rights, Fundamental Duties, and Directive Principles may be found in Part III, Part IV-A, and Part IV of the constitution, respectively.” Fundamental Duties and Fundamental Rights go to the heart of what it means to be a citizen in a society, whereas Directive Principles provide the state with a set of guiding principles to follow when formulating and enacting legislation.
While courts have the authority to enforce fundamental rights and duties, the directive principles do not. Therefore, the choice about the enforcement of directive principles rests in the hands of the party that has been wronged, and the jurisdiction of the court will determine whether or not it will decide to adjudicate this matter.
The attitude of the judiciary has experienced a number of shifts, and now the courts are quite active in protecting the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution. As a result, they interpret the provisions of Part IV, which are known as DPSP. In the beginning, the court took a very strict and legal stance when it came to interpreting Parts III and IV of the Constitution. This can be seen in the case State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan, in which it was decided that in the event of a conflict between Part III and Part IV, the Fundamental Rights would take precedence.
With their most recent ruling, the Supreme Court and High Courts have set a precedent for judicial innovation by establishing a common framework for Articles III and IV of the Constitution. This renders the Directive Principles as legitimate and enforceable as the Constitution’s Part III’s Fundamental Rights. They complete one another in a way that is both additional and complimentary.
Aishwarya Says:
Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.
IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.
The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.
If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com
Join our Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening