Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, establishes a framework for a welfare state, balancing individual liberties enshrined in Fundamental Rights (Part III) with socio-economic justice outlined in Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV). Initially, FRs held primacy, with DPSPs considered non-justiciable. However, over the decades, there has been a noticeable shift towards giving greater weightage to DPSPs in judicial interpretation and policy formulation. This increasing focus reflects a growing recognition of the need to address societal inequalities and promote inclusive growth, moving beyond a purely rights-based approach to governance.
Historical Context: Initial Position (1950-1970s)
The framers of the Constitution envisioned DPSPs as guiding principles for the state, aiming to establish a just and equitable society. However, Article 37 explicitly stated that these principles were “not enforceable by any court.” The initial judicial stance, exemplified in cases like State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951), prioritized FRs, striking down laws implementing DPSPs if they violated FRs. This led to a perceived imbalance, hindering the realization of socio-economic goals.
The Shift in Judicial Interpretation (1970s-1990s)
The 1970s marked a turning point. The 25th Amendment (1971) empowered the state to impose reasonable restrictions on FRs to implement DPSPs related to economic justice. This amendment was a direct response to the Bank Nationalisation case (1970), where the Supreme Court initially struck down the nationalization of banks as a violation of the right to property. Subsequently, the court adopted a ‘harmonious construction’ approach, seeking to reconcile FRs and DPSPs. Landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), while upholding the basic structure doctrine, also acknowledged the importance of DPSPs in shaping the constitutional vision.
Further Emphasis on DPSPs (2000s – Present)
The trend of prioritizing DPSPs continued in the 21st century. The Supreme Court has increasingly recognized the interconnectedness of FRs and DPSPs, viewing them as complementary rather than conflicting. Cases like Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985), concerning the right to livelihood, and Vishnu Bhagwat v. State of Maharashtra (1997), relating to reservation policies, demonstrate a willingness to uphold state actions promoting social and economic justice, even if they involve some limitations on FRs. The court has also emphasized the state’s duty to reduce inequalities in income and status, as enshrined in Article 39(b) and (c).
Reasons for the Increasing Focus
- Socio-Economic Realities: Growing awareness of widespread poverty, inequality, and social injustice necessitated a more proactive role for the state in promoting welfare.
- Judicial Activism: A more activist judiciary, willing to interpret the Constitution in light of contemporary social needs, played a crucial role.
- Legislative Amendments: Amendments like the 25th Amendment provided constitutional sanction for prioritizing DPSPs in certain circumstances.
- Evolving Jurisprudence: The development of the ‘harmonious construction’ and ‘balancing of interests’ approaches facilitated a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between FRs and DPSPs.
Impact on Governance and Policy-Making
The increased focus on DPSPs has significantly impacted governance. Policies aimed at social welfare, such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) 2005, the National Food Security Act 2013, and various reservation policies, are often justified on the grounds of fulfilling the constitutional mandate enshrined in DPSPs. This has led to a more interventionist role for the state in economic and social spheres, aiming to achieve equitable development and social justice.
| Directive Principle | Relevant Policy/Act |
|---|---|
| Article 38: Promote the welfare of the people | MGNREGA, National Social Assistance Programme |
| Article 39: Equal justice and free legal aid | National Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 |
| Article 41: Right to work, education and public assistance | Right to Education Act, 2009 |
Conclusion
The increasing emphasis on DPSPs reflects a pragmatic shift in Indian constitutionalism, recognizing the limitations of a purely rights-based approach in addressing complex socio-economic challenges. While FRs remain fundamental, the judiciary’s evolving interpretation and legislative amendments have created space for prioritizing DPSPs in the pursuit of a more just and equitable society. This trend, however, requires careful balancing to ensure that the pursuit of social welfare does not unduly infringe upon fundamental liberties. The future will likely see continued interplay between FRs and DPSPs, shaping the contours of Indian governance.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.