Directive Principles: origin, nature and purpose

Detail

1. What the Directive Principles are

• Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP): guidelines in Part IV (Arts. 36–51) of the Constitution. They tell the State how to build a just welfare society.
• Courts cannot enforce them. Even so, they are basic to how the country is governed.
• Fundamental Rights (FRs, Part III): rights a citizen can take to court. DPSP are duties of the State that no court can enforce. The two Parts are meant to be read together.

2. Origin: where the idea came from

• Irish model: India took the idea from the Irish Constitution of 1937, Art. 45, "Directive Principles of Social Policy".
• Ireland itself borrowed from the Spanish Constitution of 1931.
• Chain to remember: Spain 1931 → Ireland 1937 → India 1950.

• Class 7 NCERT says DPSP were "inspired by the Irish Constitution".

• Sapru Committee (1945): it proposed splitting rights into two kinds:

• justiciable rights (rights a court can enforce), and

• non-justiciable rights (rights a court cannot enforce).

• B.N. Rau was the Constitutional Adviser to the Constituent Assembly. He gave the same advice. This split later became Part III (FRs) and Part IV (DPSP).

• Drafting history: today's Art. 37 was Draft Article 29 of the Draft Constitution of 1948. The Assembly adopted it without change on 19 November 1948 [2].
• One member moved an amendment to make the directives legally binding. The member argued that without legal force they would stay "merely pious wishes". The amendment failed [2].

3. "Instrument of Instructions"

• Instrument of Instructions: under the Government of India Act 1935, the British Government gave written orders to the Governor-General and the provincial Governors. The orders told them how to use their powers.
• Ambedkar's comparison (Constituent Assembly, 19 November 1948): the directives are "more or less" an Instrument of Instructions [3].
• The old instructions were issued by the British Government to the Governor-General and Governors.
• The directives are instructions to the Legislature and the Executive of free India [3].
• The difference: the British instructions served a colonial ruler. The directives bind the people's own elected government.

4. Purpose: economic democracy and the welfare state

• Political democracy: one person, one vote. The Constitution secures this through adult franchise.
• Economic democracy: Ambedkar's idea that the vote alone is not enough. People also need a fair economic deal: a livelihood, fair wages, and no extreme gaps in wealth.
• Ambedkar said the Constitution aims at economic democracy as well as political democracy [3].

• He said it could be reached in many ways, such as socialism or communism. So the Constitution would not fix one economic path and would leave the choice to future governments [3].

• Welfare state: a State that actively works for people's well-being through jobs, health, education and social security. It does not just keep law and order.

• DPSP give the welfare state its goals. Examples: Art. 38 (a just social order), Art. 39 (fair sharing of resources), Art. 41 (right to work and public help).

5. Nature: non-justiciable but fundamental

• Art. 36: in Part IV, "State" has the same meaning as in Art. 12. It covers:
• the Union government and Parliament;
• state governments and legislatures;

• local authorities and other authorities.

• Art. 37 (key text): "The provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws" [2].

• Non-justiciability of Directive Principles: no citizen can go to court to force the State to carry out a directive.

• Art. 37 gives the job of carrying them out to the State, not the courts [2].

• Why the framers made them non-justiciable (Class 11 NCERT):

• they wanted to give policy direction without tying the hands of future governments;
• the newly independent State lacked the money to meet all these goals at once;
• they trusted the moral force of the directives;

• they expected voters to hold governments to account at elections.

• Class 7 NCERT puts it simply:

• FRs are promises you can take to a judge.
• DPSP are goals that take time to reach as the country makes progress.

Feature	Fundamental Rights (Part III)	Directive Principles (Part IV)
Enforced by courts	Yes (Art. 32, Art. 226)	No (Art. 37)
Nature	Mostly limits on the State (negative)	Duties for the State to act (positive)
Aim	Political democracy	Economic and social democracy
Source idea	US Bill of Rights	Irish Constitution 1937

6. Amendments to Part IV

• 42nd Amendment (1976) added new directives:
• Art. 39A: equal justice and free legal aid [4];
• Art. 43A: workers' participation in the management of industries. This was not part of the 1950 text [5];

• Art. 48A: the State shall try to "protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests and wild life" [8].

• 86th Amendment (2002):

• it replaced Art. 45 [6][7];
• the old Art. 45 asked the State to give free and compulsory education to all children up to age 14;
• the new Art. 45 says: "The State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years" [6];
• the 6–14 education part moved into Part III as a Fundamental Right (Art. 21A). A directive became an enforceable right [6][7];
• the Act is dated 12 December 2002 [7].

7. Classification of Directive Principles

• Classification of Directive Principles: two common ways to group Arts. 38–51.

(a) NCERT grouping (Class 11, Ch 2 box)

Group	Contents
Goals	Welfare of the people; social, economic and political justice; better standard of living; fair sharing of resources; international peace
Non-justiciable rights	Adequate means of livelihood; equal pay for equal work for men and women; protection against economic exploitation; right to work; early childhood care and education for children below six
Policies	Uniform Civil Code (UCC); prohibition of alcohol; cottage industries; ban on cattle slaughter; village panchayats

(b) Conventional grouping (socialistic, Gandhian, liberal-intellectual)

Article	Provision	Group
38	Social order with social, economic and political justice	Socialistic
39	Livelihood; fair sharing of resources; no concentration of wealth; equal pay; protection of children	Socialistic
39A	Equal justice, free legal aid (42nd, 1976)	Socialistic
40	Village panchayats	Gandhian
41	Right to work, education, public help in old age, sickness and unemployment	Socialistic
42	Just and humane work conditions, maternity relief	Socialistic
43	Living wage / cottage industries	Socialistic / Gandhian (split article)
43A	Workers in management (42nd, 1976)	Socialistic
43B	Co-operative societies	Gandhian
44	Uniform Civil Code	Liberal-intellectual
45	Early childhood care and education below six (86th, 2002)	Liberal-intellectual
46	Educational and economic interests of SCs, STs and weaker sections	Gandhian
47	Nutrition, public health; prohibition of intoxicating drinks	Gandhian
48	Cattle (ban on slaughter) / modern farming	Gandhian / Liberal-intellectual (split article)
48A	Environment, forests, wildlife (42nd, 1976)	Liberal-intellectual
49	Monuments of national importance	Liberal-intellectual
50	Separation of judiciary from executive	Liberal-intellectual
51	International peace and security	Liberal-intellectual

• Trap: Arts. 43 and 48 fall in two groups each. Art. 43 covers the living wage (socialistic) and cottage industries (Gandhian). Art. 48 covers cattle (Gandhian) and modern farming (liberal-intellectual).

8. Assessment: critics

• K.T. Shah: "a cheque on a bank payable at the convenience of the bank". The State pays only when it chooses to.
• Naziruddin Ahmad: "New Year's resolutions" that are broken by the second day of January.
• T.T. Krishnamachari: "a veritable dustbin of sentiments".
• K. Santhanam feared two kinds of friction:
• Centre and states: the Centre may direct a state to apply DPSP and could dismiss a state government that refuses;

• President and PM: the President might refuse to sign a bill that goes against the directives.

• Other charges:

• the language is vague ("shall endeavour", "within the limits of its economic capacity");
• the arrangement is illogical: economic, social, Gandhian and international aims are mixed with no clear order;
• critics also call them conservative because they rest on 19th-century ideas.

9. Assessment: defenders

• Instrument of instructions: the directives give each new government a standing agenda [3].
• Guide to courts: judges use DPSP to read laws and to judge whether a limit on a FR is "reasonable".
• Supplement to FRs: FRs give political democracy, and DPSP add social and economic democracy.
• Yardstick for voters: citizens can judge each government's record against Part IV.
• Continuity: the directives keep policy steady even when the ruling party changes.
• Granville Austin called Parts III and IV together the "conscience of the Constitution".
• Proof of use: many directives were later turned into law or into rights:
• Art. 40 → Panchayati Raj;
• Art. 45 → Art. 21A (86th, 2002) [6][7];
• Art. 39A → free legal aid [4].

10. Debate: should the directives be made binding?

• Class 11 NCERT, exercise 6: students are asked to discuss whether "the poor need Directive Principles made legally binding" more than Fundamental Rights.
• For: the poor need food, work and schooling more than abstract freedoms. A promise no court can enforce helps them little.

• Against: courts cannot create money or jobs. Binding duties could clash with the budget and with what elected governments choose to do.

• South African contrast: South Africa's Constitution (1996) lets courts enforce socio-economic rights such as housing, health care, food and water. India instead chose non-justiciable directives.

Prelims Hooks

• DPSP idea: Irish Constitution 1937, Art. 45 ("Directive Principles of Social Policy"), which drew on the Spanish Constitution of 1931.
• Art. 36: "State" has the same meaning as in Art. 12.
• Art. 37: DPSP are not enforceable by any court but are "fundamental in the governance of the country". It was Draft Art. 29, adopted on 19 November 1948 [2].
• "Instrument of Instructions" (Ambedkar) refers to the orders given to the Governor-General and Governors under the Government of India Act 1935 [3].
• 42nd Amendment (1976) inserted Arts. 39A, 43A, 48A [4][5][8].
• 86th Amendment (2002) replaced Art. 45 (early childhood care and education below six) and made 6–14 education the FR in Art. 21A [6][7].
• Match the critic with the quote:
• K.T. Shah: "cheque on a bank payable at the convenience of the bank";
• Naziruddin Ahmad: "New Year's resolutions";

• T.T. Krishnamachari: "dustbin of sentiments".

• "Conscience of the Constitution" (Parts III and IV) comes from Granville Austin.

• Trap: UCC (Art. 44) and separation of judiciary from executive (Art. 50) are liberal-intellectual, not Gandhian. Prohibition (Art. 47) and village panchayats (Art. 40) are Gandhian.
• The Sapru Committee (1945) first suggested splitting rights into justiciable and non-justiciable.

Mains Points

• Non-justiciability was a deliberate choice, not a weakness:
• a poor new State could not promise in court what its budget could not pay for;
• the framers relied on moral force and on voters;

• Art. 37 still puts a duty on the State to apply the directives when it makes laws [2].

• Economic democracy completes political democracy:

• Ambedkar left the economic path open (socialism or another route) [3];

• this let later governments, from the Nehru era to after 1991, pursue welfare goals in their own way.

• Directives slowly become rights:

• Art. 45 became Art. 21A (86th, 2002) [6][7];
• Art. 39A became the basis of free legal aid [4];

• the line between Parts III and IV keeps shifting, as the South African model of enforceable socio-economic rights suggests.

• Criticism and answer:

• Critics: K.T. Shah's "cheque", K. Santhanam's warning of Centre-state and President-PM friction, and charges of vagueness and illogical order.
• Answer: DPSP still guide courts, set an agenda for every government and give voters a yardstick. Granville Austin called them part of the "conscience of the Constitution".