Significance
Why the Directive Principles matter: a test for every government, an aid to reading Fundamental Rights, a source of laws, and how far courts enforce them
Scope: The significance of the Directive Principles of State Policy and how far courts enforce them. The meaning of Part IV and Article 37 are in the note on Directive Principles of State Policy, and their groups are in the note on Classification.
In one minute
This note is about the significance of the Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV. No court enforces them directly, yet they matter in four ways. They set the goals of every government, guide the reading of Fundamental Rights, lead to new laws, and support the validity of some laws.
Exams ask for the significance of the Directive Principles together with their enforceability in court. Give the four uses, then the limit set by Article 37.
Exam focus
- Frequency: Rarely asked
- Usually asked as: Long answer (10 to 15 marks)
Legal provision
- Article 37: the provisions of Part IV are not enforceable by any court. The principles are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country. It is the duty of the State to apply them in making laws.
- Article 21A: the State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years, in such manner as the State may, by law, determine. The 86th Amendment inserted it, in force from 1 April 2010.
- Article 39A: the State shall secure that the legal system promotes justice on a basis of equal opportunity. It shall provide free legal aid so that no citizen is denied justice because of economic or other disabilities. The 42nd Amendment inserted it (3 January 1977).
- Part IX (Articles 243 to 243O): the Panchayats. The 73rd Amendment inserted this Part (24 April 1993). Article 40 had asked the State to organise village panchayats.
Meaning and definition
The Directive Principles of State Policy are significant because they state what kind of society the Constitution wants. Their value lies in guiding the State, not in giving a person a right to sue. The Supreme Court has said they carry equal weight with Part III in the scheme of the Constitution, even though the method of enforcing them differs.
The significance can be grouped under four heads. The first is that they are the standing goals of governance. The second is that courts use them to read the rights in Part III. The third is that they lead to ordinary laws that courts can enforce. The fourth is that they help to justify some laws.
Detailed explanation
Step 1: the conscience of the Constitution
In Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980), the Court quoted Granville Austin to say that Parts III and IV are "like two wheels of a chariot, one no less important than the other". It added that if one wheel is snapped, the other will lose its efficacy. Part III gives a person liberty. Part IV sets the social and economic goals that make liberty real.
Example. A voter in a State election asks why her village has no school and no clinic. The Directive Principles give her a standard to judge the government by, even though she cannot sue on them.
Step 2: a duty on the law-maker
Article 37 makes it the duty of the State to apply the principles in making laws. A Bill that works against a principle can be questioned in the House and by the public. This is the political check the Constitution relies on.
Step 3: an aid to reading Fundamental Rights
Courts read the Directive Principles into Part III. In State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas (1975), Krishna Iyer J. wrote that the Court must wisely read the collective Directive Principles into the individual Fundamental Rights, neither Part being superior to the other. The case upheld a rule that exempted Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes for a period from passing departmental tests, with Article 46 in view.
In L.I.C. of India v. Consumer Education & Research Centre (1995), Ramaswamy J. held that the right to livelihood and social security form part of socio-economic justice. He held that authorities, private persons and industries are bound by the directives in Part IV, Part III and the Preamble.
Step 4: a source of ordinary laws
Many welfare laws follow a Directive Principle. Article 39A led to the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, which set up free legal aid. Parliament enacted it in 1987, and it came into force on 9 November 1995. The 86th Amendment replaced Article 45 and inserted Article 21A, which now makes education a Fundamental Right for children of six to fourteen.
Example. A farm labourer is charged with an offence and cannot pay a lawyer. A legal services authority provides one free of cost. This help began with the goal in Article 39A.
Step 5: how far courts enforce them
A court cannot enforce a Directive Principle by itself. It can enforce a statute made under it. It can also read the principle into a Fundamental Right, as in the cases above. Equal pay for equal work under Article 39(d) is an example. In Randhir Singh v. Union of India (1982), the Court gave it force by reading it with the guarantee of equality.
Don't confuse: direct and indirect enforcement
| Point | Direct enforcement | Indirect enforcement |
|---|---|---|
| Basis of the petition | Only a Part IV provision | A Fundamental Right or a statute, read with Part IV |
| Result | Barred by Article 37 | The court may grant relief |
Direct. A group asks the court to order the State to make free legal aid available, citing only Article 39A. The court cannot grant that order on this ground alone.
Indirect. An accused who cannot afford a lawyer claims a fair trial under Article 21 and relies on Article 39A to give that right content. The court can act on the Article 21 claim.
Common mistakes
- Writing that the Directive Principles have no significance because courts cannot enforce them.
- Writing that courts never use them. Courts read them into Part III and enforce statutes made under them.
- Giving only one use. Name all four: goals, aid to reading rights, source of laws, support for laws.
- Saying the Directive Principles give a person a right to sue.
Apply it
Problem
A State passes a law giving free legal aid to all persons below a set income. A lawyer challenges it as a waste of public money. Can the State defend it by pointing to Part IV?
Issue. Does a Directive Principle support the validity of a law?
Rule. Article 37 makes it the duty of the State to apply the Directive Principles in making laws. Article 39A asks the State to provide free legal aid.
Application. The law carries out Article 39A. The State is acting on its duty under Article 37.
Conclusion. The State can rely on Article 39A to show the law serves a constitutional goal. The challenge fails unless the lawyer shows that the law breaks a Fundamental Right.
Leading case laws
- Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980)
Facts. A challenge to the 42nd Amendment, which placed the Directive Principles above Articles 14 and 19.
Principle. Parts III and IV are like two wheels of a chariot, one no less important than the other.
Why it matters. It states the weight of Part IV without making it enforceable.
- State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas (1975)
Facts. A rule exempted Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe employees for a period from passing departmental tests. A clerk who had passed the tests challenged it.
Principle. The Court upheld the rule by a 5:2 majority. Krishna Iyer J. read Part IV into Part III.
Why it matters. It shows a Directive Principle used to read a Fundamental Right.
- L.I.C. of India v. Consumer Education & Research Centre (1995)
Facts. LIC sold a cheap policy only to people in organised employment.
Principle. Social security is a facet of socio-economic justice and a means to livelihood. Part IV binds authorities, private persons and industries.
Why it matters. It applies Part IV to a public corporation's terms.
How to write this answer in the exam
5-mark answer
- State Article 37 in one line.
- Give the four uses.
- Add the wheels-of-a-chariot quotation from Minerva Mills.
10-mark answer (significance and enforceability)
- Meaning of the Directive Principles and Article 37.
- Use 1: goals of governance, with Minerva Mills.
- Use 2: reading Part III, with N.M. Thomas and L.I.C.
- Use 3: source of laws, such as Article 39A and Article 21A.
- Enforceability: direct bar, indirect route.
- Conclusion.
Key points to remember
- Four uses: goals, aid to reading rights, source of laws, support for laws.
- No direct enforcement by any court (Article 37).
- Minerva Mills: Parts III and IV are like two wheels of a chariot.
- Article 39A led to the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
- Article 21A and the replacement of Article 45 came with the 86th Amendment.
Quick self-test
1. Name the four ways the Directive Principles matter.
They set the goals of governance, help read Fundamental Rights, lead to laws and help justify laws.
2. Can a court enforce a Directive Principle on its own?
No. Article 37 bars it. A court can enforce a statute made under it.
3. Which case compared Parts III and IV to two wheels of a chariot?
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980).