Directive Principles of State Policy ((DPSPs): Features, Classification & Utility

The Directive Principles of State Policy is a set of constitutional directives incorporated in Part IV (Articles 36 to 51) of the Indian Constitution. These are based on the Irish Constitution to some extent. The Directive Principles seek to achieve social, economic, and political justice and ensure the well-being of the citizens.

These principles help the state in formulating policies and laws to ensure equality of opportunity, means of livelihood, legal aid, public health, education, environmental protection, and promotion of international peace. They are not justifiable, which implies that they cannot be enforced by any court of law.

The Directive Principles of State Policy in the Indian Constitution encompass several key features which are as follows:

• DPSPs in the Constitution: The Directive Principles of State Policy have been included in Part IV (Articles 36-51) of the Indian Constitution.
• Non-Justiciable: They are not enforceable through the court of law and citizens cannot claim their enforcement as a fundamental right.
• Fundamental to Governance: According to Article 37, these directives are fundamental to the governance of India.
• Social Welfare State: These aim at establishing a social and economic democracy through social justice and welfare of the people.
• Guiding Principles for the Government: The DPSPs provide guiding principles to the Union and State governments while making laws and policies.
• Idea from the Irish Constitution: The idea behind the DPSPs was taken from the Constitution of Ireland.
• Socio-Economic Justice: They aim at removing inequities and providing adequate means of livelihood to all sections of society.
• Wide Range of Subjects: Some of the subjects include health, education, environmental protection, labour welfare, village panchayats and international peace.

• The Constitution does not contain any classification of Directive Principles articles 36 to 51.
  • However, Directive Principles articles 36 to 51 can be broadly classified into three categories based on their content and orientation-
• Socialistic Principles,
• Gandhian Principles, and
• Liberal-Intellectual Principles.

These principles aim to establish a more equitable and just society by promoting social and economic welfare and reducing disparities among citizens. They direct the State:

These principles are aimed at promoting Gandhian values of social justice, decentralization, self-sufficiency, and moral governance. They direct the State:

The principles represent the ideology of liberalism. They direct the State:

Several additional Directive Principles have been incorporated into the original list through various amendments. These new principles are listed below:

The framers of the Constitution made the nature of Directive Principles of the State Policy non-justiciable and legally non-enforceable because of the following reasons:

• Insufficient Financial Resources- The nation lacked adequate financial resources to fully implement these principles at the time of the drafting of the Constitution.
• Diversity and Backwardness- The presence of immense diversity and socio-economic backwardness across the country posed significant challenges to their effective implementation.
• Burdensome Responsibilities of the Newly Independent State- The newly established independent Indian State had numerous pressing priorities, and enforcing these principles could potentially overwhelm its capacities.

Although Directive Principles do not grant legal rights or establish legal remedies, they hold significance and utility in the following ways-

• Promotion of Welfare State: DPSPs help the State in establishing a welfare society characterized by social and economic justice.
• Reduction of Inequalities: These include provisions which help in promoting reduction in inequalities of income, status, opportunity and resource access.
• Law Making: DPSPs help governments formulate laws and welfare schemes and development policies.
• Promotion of Social Justice: Equal justice, free legal aid, labour welfare and protection of weaker sections are some of the provisions which promote inclusive governance.
• Promotion of Economic Justice: DPSPs promote proper distribution of resources and avoid concentration of wealth.
• Promotion of Decentralization: Article 40 promotes organization of village panchayats.
• Protection of Environment: Article 48A promotes environmental protection and conservation of forests and wildlife.
• International Peace Promotion: Article 51 promotes respect for international law and peace among nations.
• Constitutional Basis of Governance: DPSPs being non-justiciable, form the part of the constitution.

• Champakam Dorairajan vs. the State of Madras (1951)- In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that in the event of any conflict between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles, the Fundamental Rights would prevail.
  • It declared that the Directive Principles act as a subsidiary of the Fundamental Rights.
  • It also held that Fundamental Rights could be amended by the Parliament only by enacting Constitutional Amendment Acts.
• Golaknath vs. the State of Punjab (1967)- In this case, the Supreme held that Fundamental Rights could not be amended by the Parliament even for the implementation of Directive Principles of State Policy.
  • However, it was contradictory to its own judgment in the ‘Shankari Parsad case’.
• Kesavananda Bharati vs. the State of Kerala (1973)- In this case, the Supreme Court overruled its Golak Nath verdict (1967).
  • It declared that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot alter the “Basic Structure Doctrine” of the Constitution.
  • After this judgment, the Right to Property (Article 31) was deleted from the list of Fundamental Rights.
• Minerva Mills vs. the Union of India (1980)- In this case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but cannot change the “Basic Structure” of the Constitution.

Therefore, the present position is that the Fundamental Rights enjoy supremacy over the Directive Principles. Yet, this does not mean that the Directive Principles cannot 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.

In addition to the Directives outlined in Part IV, several other Directive Principles are contained in the other parts of the Constitution. They are:

The above Directives are also non-justiciable in nature. However, they are given equal importance and attention by the judiciary because all parts of the Constitution must be read together.

• Land Reforms- All the states have enacted land reform laws to transform agrarian societies and enhance the living conditions of rural populations. These measures include-
  • Abolition of intermediaries such as zamindars, jagirdars, inamdars, etc.
  • Implementation of tenancy reforms such as security of tenure, fair rents, etc.
  • Imposition of landholding ceilings, etc.
• Labor Reforms- The following legislation has been enacted to safeguard the rights and welfare of the labour force-
  • The Minimum Wages Act (1948), now integrated into the Code on Wages (2020),
  • The Contract Labour Regulation and Abolition Act (1970),
  • The Bonded Labour System Abolition Act (1976), etc.
• Panchayati Raj System- The government has fulfilled the constitutional obligation stated in Article 40 (to organize village panchayats) through the 73rd Constitutional Amendment Act of 1992.
• Cottage Industries- The government has established several Boards such as the Khadi and Village Industries Board, Khadi and Village Industries Commission, etc., to promote cottage industries as per Article 43.
• Education- The government passed the Rights to Education Act 2009 and implemented provisions related to free and compulsory education as provided in Article 45 through the 86th Constitutional Amendment of 2002.
• Rural Area Development- The government has launched various programs such as the Integrated Rural Development Programme (1978), Samagra Shiksha Abhiyan (2018), and the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (2006) to raise the standard of living in rural areas.
• Environment Reforms-The Wildlife (Protection) Act of 1972 and the Forest (Conservation) Act of 1980 were enacted to ensure the preservation of wildlife and forests.
  • Additionally, the Water and Air Pollution Control Acts have facilitated the establishment of the Central Pollution Control Board.
• Heritage Preservation: The Ancient and Historical Monument and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act (1958) has been enacted to protect monuments, places, and objects of national importance giving effect to Article 49 of the Indian Constitution.

• Non-Justiciability- DPSPs are non-justiciable in character as they lack enforceability, leading to their ineffectiveness in ensuring social and economic justice.
• Illogically Arranged- DPSPs are neither properly classified nor logically arranged, as these principles have mixed up unimportant issues with the most vital economic and social questions
• Conservative- The DPSPs do not embrace socialism entirely. Critics argue that the Directives were deemed suitable for India in the mid-20th century but questioned their relevance for the 21st century, suggesting they may become outdated over time.
• Conflict with Fundamental Rights- Some DPSPs often conflict with Fundamental Rights, leading to ambiguity and facing challenges in balancing competing interests.
• Lack of Clarity- The vague and ambiguous language used in DPSPs can lead to interpretation issues, making them difficult to implement effectively.
• Political Expediency- There is criticism that governments often prioritize short-term political gains over the long-term objectives outlined in DPSPs, undermining their significance.
• Inadequate Implementation- Many argue that successive governments have failed to adequately implement DPSPs, leading to persistent socio-economic inequalities and underdevelopment.
• Lack of Accountability- Due to their non-binding nature, critics argue that there is a lack of accountability in ensuring compliance with DPSPs, allowing governments to neglect their obligations.
• Ignoring Social Realities- Some argue that DPSPs fail to address the complexities of India’s diverse socio-economic realities, resulting in policies that may not effectively address the needs of all citizens.