Indian Constitution

Fundamental Rights (FRs) and Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) lay down the framework for regulating the relationship between the citizen and the state. Fundamental Rights are the most basic rights which the Constitution guarantees to its people by making them justiciable, while DPSPs (which are non-justiciable) act as a guide for law and policy formulation by the government.

The question of reconciling the two arises in the context of several amendments made by the Parliament to override the fundamental rights and the consequent judicial review by the Supreme Court.

• The Supreme Court, in the Champakam Dorairajan case (1951),held that Fundamental Rights would prevail over the DPSPs in case a conflict arises between the two. However, the Fundamental Rights are amendable.
  • The Parliament enacted the First, Fourth and the Seventeenth Constitutional Amendment Acts in order to implement some DPSPs which curtailed the Fundamental Rights.
• These amendments were challenged in the IC Golaknath case (1967). The Supreme Court, partly overruling its decision in Champakam Dorairajan, held that Fundamental Rights are ‘transcendental’ and ‘sacrosanct’. They cannot be amended to implement DPSPs even by way of a constitutional amendment act as it would violate Article 13 (which provides that no law shall be made in contravention of the Fundamental Rights mentioned under Part III of the Constitution).
  • In order to circumvent the IC Golaknath decision, the Parliament enacted that 24th and the 25th Constitutional Amendment Acts.
• The question was finally settled by the thirteen judge bench of the Supreme Court in the Keshwananda Bharti v State of Kerela case (1973). The Court held that both Fundamental Rights and DPSPs reflect the conscience of the Constitution. There is no antithesis between them and one supplements the other.
• This position was reiterated by the Supreme Court in the Ashok Kumar Thakur case (2008) wherein it was held that there is no distinction between Fundamental Rights and DPSPs. While Fundamental Rights are political and civil rights, DPSPs are social and economic rights. None is subordinate to the other.

Therefore, the present position in law is that both, Fundamental Rights and DPSPs, must be harmoniously construed. No question arises about one prevailing over the other.