LAW, POVERTY AND DEVELOPMENT

ASSIGNMENT

TOPIC – DPSP AND POVERTY

SUBMITTED BY-

Shubhrajit Saha; and

Anwesha Kundu

BA LLB (H) – 9th sem

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, we would like to thank our subject teacher Dr. Shyamala
D who gave us this wonderful topic to work upon and while doing
this assignment, we have really been able to enhance our knowledge
regarding this subject. We would also like to thank all our friends and
acquaintances without whose help it would not be possible to
complete this assignment within such a short span of time.

INTRODUCTION
The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) has been in force in the constitution of India
since its independence. These principles are enshrined in Part IV of the constitution. The
concept of DPSP did not originate in India and our constitution makers borrowed it from the
Irish constitution1. The Directive Principles of State Policy means that these are “these are
the principles that direct the state when it makes or formulates policies for its people.” In
other words, these principles act as a set of guidelines for the state that are needed to be taken
into consideration while formulating policies but no citizen can compel the state to follow
these principles.

The Directive Principles constitute a very comprehensive social, economic and political
programme for a modern and welfare state. These principles emphasize that the State shall try
to promote welfare of people by providing them basic facilities like shelter, food and
clothing.

Unlike Fundamental Rights, the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) are non- binding
in nature, which means they are not enforceable by the courts for their violation. However,
the Constitution itself declares that ‘these principles are fundamental in the governance of the
country and it shall be the duly of the state to apply these principles in making laws’. Hence,
they impose a moral obligation on the state authorities for their implementation.

FEATURES OF THE ‘DPSP’

1. DPSP, basically, denotes the ideals that the State should keep in mind while
formulating policies and enacting laws.

2. It resembles the ‘Instrument of Instructions’ enumerated in the Government of India

Act of 1935. In the words of Dr. B R Ambedkar, ‘the Directive Principles are like the
instrument of instructions, which were issued to the Governor-General and to the
Governors of the colonies of India by the British Government under the Government
of India Act of 1935. What is called Directive Principles is merely another name for
the instrument of instructions. The only difference is that they are instructions to the
legislature and the executive’.2

1
Article 45 – Directive Principles of Social Policy
2
Constituent assembly debate on Directive Principles of State Policy – available at
http://logos.nationalinterest.in/2014/07/constituent-assembly-debate-on-directive-principles-of-state-policy/
 3. It constitutes a very comprehensive economic, social and political programme for a
modern democratic State, which aimed at realizing the high ideals of justice, liberty,
equality and fraternity as outlined in the Preamble to the Constitution. They embody
the concept of a ‘welfare state’ which was absent during the colonial era.

Classification of Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP)

The Constitution of India does not formally classify the Directive Principles of State Policy
but for better understanding and on the basis of content and direction- they can be classified
into three categories: Socialistic Principles, Gandhian Principles, and Liberal-Intellectual
Principles.

Socialistic Principles

These principles contemplate the ideology of socialism and lay down the framework of a
democratic socialist state. The concept envisages providing social and economic justice, so
that state should achieve the optimum norms of welfare state. They direct the state through-
Article 38, Article 39, Article 39 A, Article 41, Article 42, Article 43, Article 43 A and
Article 47.

Gandhian Principles

These principles reflect the programme of reconstruction enunciated by Gandhi during the
national movement. In order to fulfil the dreams of Gandhi, some of his ideas were included
in DPSP and they direct the state through- Article 40, Article 43, Article 43 B, Article 46,
Article 47 and Article 48.

Liberal-Intellectual Principles

These principles inclined towards the ideology of liberalism and they direct the state through-
Article 44, Article 45, Article 48, Article 48 A, Article 49, Article 50 and Article 51.
PART IV – Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP)

Part IV contains 16 articles, which lay down the guidelines for the State to follow while
formulating any policy or law.

ARTICLE 36 – DEFINITION OF “STATE”

It says that the term “State” has the same meaning as Part III of the Constitution3.

ARTICLE 37 – APPLICATION OF THE PRINCIPLES CONTAINED IN THIS PART

This article talks about the application of this Part. It says that the provisions that are
contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court of law, but the principles laid
therein are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty
of the State to apply these principles while making laws.

ARTICLE 38 – STATE TO SECURE A SOCIAL ORDER FOR THE PROMOTION OF

WELFARE OF THE PEOPLE.

(1) The State shall strive to promote the welfare of the people by securing and protecting as
effectively as it may a social order in which justice, social, economic and political, shall
inform all the institutions of the national life.

(2) The State shall, in particular, strive to minimize the inequalities in income, and endeavor
to eliminate inequalities in status, facilities and opportunities, not only amongst individuals
but also amongst groups of people residing in different areas or engaged in different
vocations.

ARTICLE 39 - CERTAIN PRINCIPLES OF POLICY TO BE FOLLOWED BY THE

STATE
3
Article 12 of the Constitution of India - The term ‘State’ denotes the union and state governments, the
Parliament and state legislatures and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the
control of the Indian government.
The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing –

(a) that the citizen, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of
livelihood;

(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so
distributed as best to subserve the common good;

(c) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth
and means of production to the common detriment;

(d) that there is equal pay for equal work for both men and women;

(e) that the health and strength of workers, men and women, and the tender age of children
are not abused and that citizens are not forced by economic necessity to enter avocations
unsuited to their age or strength;

(f) that children are given opportunities and facilities to develop in a healthy manner and in
conditions of freedom and dignity and that childhood and youth are protected against
exploitation and against moral and material abandonment.

ARTICLE 39A - EQUAL JUSTICE AND FREE LEGAL AID

The State shall secure that the operation of the legal system promotes justice, on a basis of
equal opportunity, and shall, in particular, provide free legal aid, by suitable legislation or
schemes or in any other way, to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied
to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities.

ARTICLE 40 - ORGANISATION OF VILLAGE PANCHAYATS

The State shall take steps to organise village panchayats and endow them with such powers
and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of self-government.

ARTICLE 41: RIGHT TO WORK, TO EDUCATION AND TO PUBLIC ASSISTANCE IN

CERTAIN CASES
The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective
provision for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of
unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want.

ARTICLE 42: PROVISION FOR JUST AND HUMANE CONDITIONS OF WORK AND
MATERNITY RELIEF

The State shall make provision for securing just and humane conditions of work and for
maternity relief.

ARTICLE 43: LIVING WAGE, ETC., FOR WORKERS

The State shall endeavor to secure, by suitable legislation or economic organization or in any
other way, to all workers agricultural, industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage, conditions
of work ensuring a decent standard of life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and
cultural opportunities and, in particular, the State shall endeavor to promote cottage industries
on an individual or co-operative basis in rural areas.

ARTICLE 43A: PARTICIPATION OF WORKERS IN MANAGEMENT OF INDUSTRIES

The State shall take steps, by suitable legislation or in any other way, to secure the
participation of workers in the management of undertakings, establishments or other
organization engaged in any industry.

ARTICLE 43B – PROMOTION OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES

The State shall endeavor to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning,

democratic control and professional management of co-operative societies.

ARTICLE 44 - UNIFORM CIVIL CODE FOR THE CITIZENS

The State shall endeavor to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the
territory of India.

ARTICLE 45: PROVISION FOR FREE AND COMPULSORY EDUCATION FOR

CHILDREN

The State shall endeavor to provide, within a period of ten years from the commencement of
this Constitution, for free and compulsory education for all children until they complete the
age of fourteen years.

ARTICLE 46: PROMOTION OF EDUCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF

SCHEDULED CASTES, SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER WEAKER SECTIONS

The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the
weaker sections of the people, and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.

ARTICLE 47: DUTY OF THE STATE TO RAISE THE LEVEL OF NUTRITION AND
THE STANDARD OF LIVING AND TO IMPROVE PUBLIC HEALTH

The State shall regard the raising of the level of nutrition and the standard of living of its
people and the improvement of public health as among its primary duties and, in particular,
the State shall endeavor to bring about prohibition of the consumption except for medicinal
purpose of intoxicating drinks and of drugs, which are injurious to health.

ARTICLE 48: ORGANIZATION OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY

The State shall endeavor to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and
scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds,
and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.
ARTICLE 48A: PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND
SAFEGUARDING OF FORESTS AND WILDLIFE

The State shall endeavor to protect and improve the environment and to safeguard the forests
and wildlife of the country.

ARTICLE 49: PROTECTION OF MONUMENTS AND PLACES AND OBJECTS OF

NATIONAL IMPORTANCE

It shall be the obligation of the State to protect every monument or place or object of artistic
or historic interest, declared by or under law made by Parliament to be of national
importance, from spoliation, disfigurement, destruction, removal, disposal or export, as the
case may be.

ARTICLE 50: SEPARATION OF JUDICIARY FROM THE EXECUTIVE

The State shall take steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of
the State.

ARTICLE 51: PROMOTION OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY

The State shall endeavor to –

(a) Promote international peace and security;

(b) Maintain just and honorable relations between nations;

(c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized
people with one another; and

(d) Encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.

DPSP UNDER PREAMBLE

The Preamble of the Constitution is called the key to the mind of the drafters of the
Constitution. It lays down the objectives that our Constitution seeks to achieve. Many
scholars believe that DPSPs is the kernel of the Constitution. The Directive Principles of the
State Policy (DPSPs) lay down the guidelines for the state and are reflections of the overall
objectives laid down in the Preamble of Constitution.

The expression Justice- social, economic, political is sought to be achieved through DPSPs.
DPSPs are incorporated to attain the ultimate ideals of preamble i.e. Justice, Liberty,
Equality, and fraternity. Moreover, it also embodies the idea of the welfare state which India
was deprived of under colonial rule.

ENFORCEABILITY OF DPSPs

Many times the question arises that whether an individual can sue the state government or the
central government for not following the directive principles enumerated in Part IV. The
answer to this question is in negative.

The reason for the same lies in Article 37 which states that:

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.

Therefore, by the virtue of this Article no provision of this part can be made enforceable in
the court of law thus these principles cannot be used against the central government or the
state government. This non-justifiability of DPSPs make the state government or the central
government immune from any action against them for not following these directives.

Another question arises that whether the Supreme Court or High Court can issue the writ of
mandamus if the state does not follow the directive principles. The literal meaning of
mandamus is “to command.” It is a writ which is issued to any person or authority who has
been prescribed a duty by the law. This writ compels the authority to do its duty.
The Writ of mandamus is generally issued in two situations. One is when a person files writ
petition or when the Court issues it suo moto i.e. own motion. As per Constitutional
Principles, a Court is not authorized to issue the writ of mandamus to the state when the
Directive Principles are not followed because the Directive Principle is a yardstick in the
hand of people to check the performance of government and not available for the courts. But
the Court can take suo moto4 action when the matter is of utmost public importance and affect
the large interest of the public.

Fundamental Rights are the legal obligation of the state to respect, whereas the DPSPs is the
moral obligation of the state to follow. Article 38 lay down the broad ideals which a state
should strive to achieve. Many of these Directive Principles have become enforceable by
becoming a law. Some of the DPSPs have widened the scope of Fundamental Rights.

RELATIONSHIP WITH FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

A major concern regarding the validity of the DPSPs is their compatibility with the
Fundamental Rights contained in Part III of the Constitution, enforceable even in the High
Courts and the Supreme Court through the manner of writs.

The following are the points of difference between the two:

1. The Fundamental Rights are a limitation on the powers of the government operating on an
individual, whereas, the DPSPs are instructions to the government for achieving certain ends
through their actions.

2. Anything contained in the DPSPs cannot be violated either by the individuals or the State,
as long as there is no law made to that effect, while there are strict remedies against violation
of an individual’s Fundamental Right.

3. A law against the DPSPs cannot be declared as void by the courts, but this is not the case
with Fundamental Rights.

Judicial Pronouncements

4
On its own motion
The question that whether Fundamental Rights precedes DPSPs or latter takes precedence
over former has been the subject of debate for years. There are judicial pronouncements
which settle this dispute of State of Madras vs. Champakan Dorairajan 5, the Apex Court was
of the view that if a law contravenes a Fundamental right, it would be void but the same is not
with the DPSPs. It shows that Fundamental rights are on a higher pedestal than DPSPs.

In I. C. Golaknath & Ors vs. State Of Punjab & Anr. 6, The Court was of the view that
Fundamental rights cannot be curtailed by the law made by the parliament. In furtherance of
the same the Court also said that if a law is made to give effect to Article 39(b) and Article
39(c) which come under the purview of DPSPs and in the process, the law violates Article 14,
Article 19 or Article 31, the the law cannot be declared as unconstitutional and void merely
on the ground of said contravention.

In Keshavnanda Bharati vs the State of Kerala7, The Apex Court placed DPSPs on the higher
pedestal than Fundamental Rights.

Ultimately in the case of Minerva Mills vs. Union of India 8, the question before the court was
whether the directive principles of State policy enshrined in Art IV can have primacy over the
fundamental rights conferred by Part III of the Constitution. The court held that the doctrine
of harmonious construction should be applied because neither of the two has precedence to
each other. Both are complementary therefore they are needed to be balanced.

DPSPs & “THE POOR”

India, since its independence, had to deal with the issue of poverty -the needs and interests of
these millions of Indian citizens had necessarily to be addressed-questions of food, water,
employment, housing, education, health etc. By the time the British left India in August 1947
the Constituent Assembly was already at work. This was necessarily one of the important
issues that they had to grapple with and that might explain the nature and content of the
Indian Constitution. The Constitution, under Part III ("Fundamental Rights") entrenches the
political and civil rights of citizens, which are justiciable. Part IV of the Constitution, in
contrast, includes the Directive Principles of State Policy, that are in the form of instructions

5
AIR 1951 SC 226
6
1967 AIR 1643
7
(1973) IV SCC 225
8
AIR 1980 SC 1789
to the Government. These-according to the Constitution itself-are not justiciable. They
nonetheless have represented the legal basis for the Indian Government's interventions in the
economy in order to bring about a more egalitarian society. In fact, it used to be said that
India followed neither a capitalist nor a socialist model but had a mixed economy.

Part IV of the Indian Constitution is comprised of what is called Directive Principles of State
Policy. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar said that "what are called Directive Principles is merely another
name for Instrument of Instructions. The only difference is that they are instructions to the
Legislature and the Executive.9"" In fact, Art. 37 ("Application of the principles contained in
this Part") states, "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.
(emphasis added is mine). However, the Supreme Court in Air India Statutory Corporation v.
United Labour Union10 elevated them to human rights, describing them as forerunners of the
U.N. Convention on Right to Development as an inalienable human right. The Supreme
Court has further stated in several other decisions that the Directive Principles supplement the
Fundamental Rights and that Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights for implementing
the Directive Principles.

In Chandra Bhavan v. State of Mysore11, the All Mysore 15 Hotels Association filed a writ
petition under Art. 32 of the Indian Constitution stating that their right to equality (Art. 14)
and the right to freedom of trade [Art. 19 (1) (g)] were violated by the notification issued by
the Government of Mysore in 1967, fixing the minimum wage of different classes of
employees in residential hotels and eating houses in the State of Mysore under the Minimum
Wages Act of 1948. The High Court of Mysore had rejected all their contentions and
therefore, this writ petition. The Supreme Court in response stated that Art 43 of the
Constitution, which is in Part IV, DPSP, states "the State shall endeavor to secure by suitable
legislation or economic organization or in any other way, to all workers, agricultural,
industrial or otherwise, work, a living wage, conditions of work ensuring a decent standard of
life and full enjoyment of leisure and social and cultural opportunities." The Court said that
the fixing of minimum wage is just the first step in that direction. It also went to state that
"Freedom of trade does not mean freedom to exploit. The provisions of the Constitution are
not erected as barriers to progress. They provide a plan for orderly progress towards the
9
THE ESSENTIAL WRITINGS OF B.R. AMBEDKAR 490 (Rodrigues V. ed., Oxford Univ. Press 2002).
10
AIR 1997 SC 645
11
AIR 1970 SC 2042
social order contemplated by the preamble to the Constitution." "While rights conferred
under Part III are fundamental, the directives given under Part IV are fundamental in the
governance of the country. We see no conflict on the whole, between the provisions
contained in Part III and Part IV. They are complimentary and supplementary to each other."
"The mandate of the Constitution is to build a welfare society in which justice social,
economical and political shall inform all institutions of our national life.”

In State of Kerala v. N.M Thomas 12, the respondent, N.M. Thomas, contended that the rules
made by the State of Kerala providing an exemption to members of the Scheduled Caste and
Scheduled Tribe communities (SC & ST) from passing the required tests in order to avail of
promotion in the Kerala Public Service Commission was unconstitutional and wanted the
Supreme Court to issue a mandamus compelling the state to forbear from giving effect to the
promotion orders for the thirty four member of the SC and ST communities. He claimed that
Articles 16(1) and 16(2)18 were violated and that exemption from the qualifying exam
necessary for promotion was not conducive to the maintenance of efficiency in
administration. The State of Kerala, on the other hand, contended that the impugned rules and
orders were not only legal but support a rational classification under Article 16(1).

In arriving at the final decision, wherein the court upheld the appeal, the Court observed,
"Today, the political theory which acknowledges the obligation of government under Part IV
of the Constitution to provide jobs, medical care, old age pension, etc., extends to human
rights and imposes an affirmative obligation to promote equality and liberty. The force of the
idea of a state with obligation to help the weaker sections of its members seems to have
increasing influence in Constitutional law.... Today, the sense that government has
affirmative responsibility for elimination of inequalities, social, economic or otherwise, is one
of the dominant forces in Constitutional law." Another judge of the same bench observed, "In
view of the principles adumbrated by this Court it is clear that the directive principles form
the fundamental feature and the social conscience of the Constitution and the Constitution
enjoins upon the State to implement these directive principles. The directives thus provide the
policy, the guidelines and the end of socio-economic freedom and Articles 14 and 16 are the
means to implement the policy to achieve the ends sought to be promoted by the directive
principles. So far as the Courts are concerned where there is no apparent inconsistency
between the directive principles contained in Part IV and the fundamental rights mentioned in
Part III, which in fact supplement each other, there is no difficulty in putting a harmonious
12
AIR 1976 SC 496
construction which advances the object of the Constitution. Once this basic fact is kept in
mind, the interpretation of Articles 14 and 16 and their scope and ambit become as clear as
day." In this case it was Article 46 of the Constitution that guided the basis on which the rules
for promotion of the SC and ST communities had been framed.

Further in Lingappa v. State of Maharashtra 13 the constitutional validity of Sections 3 and 4

of the Maharashtra Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1974 was being challenged
by the appellant. The question was whether Sections 3 and 4 of the impugned Act which
provided for annulment of transfers made by members of Scheduled Tribes and for
restoration of lands to them on certain conditions were ultra-vires the State Legislature as
being beyond the purview of Entry 18 of List II of the Seventh Schedule or were otherwise
violative of Article 14, Article 19 (1) (f) and Article 31 of the Constitution. The Court held
that the impugned Act was only a remedial measure in keeping with the policy of the State to
bring about social and economic justice for the scheduled tribes in light of the attempts by
more developed sections of society to deprive them of their land. They went on to say that
"The legislation is based on the principle of distributive justice." Once again it was the
reading of Article 46 with Articles 14 and 15.

CONCLUSION

It is clear from the three cases, discussed above, that the Supreme Court considers the
Directive Principles as integral to the establishment of a just and fair society in every sense of
those words. That the Directive Principles were seen as the means to address the issues
relating to poverty is also evident from what Dr. Ambedkar said, "Our object in framing this
Constitution is really two fold: (i) to lay down the form of political democracy, and (ii) to lay
down that our ideal is economic democracy and also to prescribe that every Government
whatever, it is in power, shall strive to bring about economic democracy.” 14 Thus, it is
abundantly clear, that the makers and drafters of the Indian Constitution were not content
with creating a society politically free but also aimed at creating one in which all the people
would be free from economic distress and all the citizens would have equal, not only
opportunities, but access to all economic resources. Freedom not only from political

13
AIR 1985 SC 389
14
Proceedings of the Constituent Assembly of India, Friday 19"h November, 1948; available at
http://parliamentofmdia.nic.in/Is/debates/vol7p9.htm.
subordination but also from economic wants. A brief overview of a few of the constitutional
provisions might demonstrate how these objectives were sought to be met.