Critically examine whether Fundamental Duties, though non-justiciable, can shape university governance and academic freedom.

Article 51A(h), inserted in Part IV-A by the 42nd Amendment, 1976, requires every citizen to develop "scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform" [1]. Fundamental Duties cannot be enforced in court. Even so, they can shape how universities are governed through interpretation, legislation and moral persuasion, although that influence has clear limits.

How Fundamental Duties can shape universities

• Interpretive aid: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan said that threatening students with punishment for asking questions is unconstitutional and a misuse of power [4]. Read alongside Art. 19(1)(a), Art. 51A(h) supports a student's right to question.
• Normative mandate: He argued that scientific temper must "germinate" in the university, which makes inquiry a governance goal and not only a classroom one [3].
• Conversion into law: Karnataka's Bill No. 54 of 2025 cites Art. 51A(h) when framing school curricula, which shows that a legislature can give the duty practical force [5].
• Campus democracy: The demand to restore student union elections at Jamia shows how inquiry needs institutional channels for dissent [3].

Limits

• Non-justiciability: In 2017 the Supreme Court refused to direct the Centre to implement the Justice J.S. Verma Committee recommendations on Fundamental Duties and asked how a court could order this [2].
• Wrong addressee: The duty binds the citizen-student, not the university that disciplines them. Only Art. 19(1)(a) actually restrains an administration.
• Risk of misuse: Duties can be turned against dissent, for example by citing "discipline" or "sovereignty" to justify punishment. If the State decides what counts as "rational", inquiry becomes one more instruction from above.
• Origin concerns: Part IV-A was inserted during the Emergency [1]. Critics read it as stressing citizens' obligations at the very moment their rights were suspended.

Way forward

• Revise disciplinary codes so that only violence or disruption counts as misconduct, not peaceful questioning [4].
• Hold regular student union elections.
• Have the Union government act on the Verma Committee's recommendations through teacher training and inquiry-based syllabi [2].

Fundamental Duties cannot compel universities, but they can steer them through interpretation, legislation and institutional culture. Their influence lasts only when Art. 51A(h) is paired with the enforceable guarantee of Art. 19(1)(a), so that campuses become places for questioning rather than for policing it. This would fulfil the Preamble's promise of liberty of thought and expression.