Relationship Beetween Directive Priciple of State Policy and Fundamental Rights

5060 Words Jan 26th, 2011 21 Pages

Fundamental Rights and Directive Principle are integral components of the same organic constitutional system and no conflict between them could have been intended by founding fathers. But the view of Supreme Court on the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles have not been uniform throughout. There are three possible views on the relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles. The first view is that former are the superior to the latter and so the latter must give way to the former in case of repugnancy or irreconcilable conflict between the two. The second view is that Fundamental Rights and directive principle are
…show more content…
The chapter on Fundamental Rights is sacrosanct and not liable to be abridged by any legislature or executive act or order except to the extent provided in the appropriate article in the part IV. The Directive Principles of state policy have to conform and run as subsidiary to the chapter on the Fundamental Rights”
In my submission, the conclusion drawn by the Supreme Court on the status of Directive Principles vis-a vis the Fundamental Rights seems to be erroneous on the following guards: a) The constitution contains many important mandates, which may not be enforceable by the court of law that does not mean that those provisions must run subsidiary to the chapter on Fundamental Rights. b) The view taken by the Supreme Court has ignored the fact that farmers of the constitution made the Directive Principles enforceable only to prevent the state from being compelled to implement them immediately as at the time of independence or at the time of commencement of the constitution, the nation was at a nascent stage and it did not have the sufficient resources to implement at once all the directive principles. But this was done not to reduce the importance of directive principles, nor to allot them inferior
Open Document