With reference to the provisions contained in Part IV of the Constitution of India, which of the following statements is/are correct? 1. They shall be enforceable by courts. 2. They shall not be enforceable by any court 3. The principles laid down in this part are to influence the making of laws by the State. Select the correct answer using the code given below:
Contents12
- A1only
- B2 only
- C1 and 3 only
- D2 and 3 only
Show answer
Answer: (D) 2 and 3 only
Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are found in Part IV (Articles 36-51) of the Constitution.
Statement 1 (They shall be enforceable by courts) — NOT CORRECT:
DPSPs are specifically NON-justiciable, meaning no court can force the government to implement them.
You cannot go to court and say "the government hasn't provided me free education as per DPSPs."
Statement 2 (They shall not be enforceable by courts) — CORRECT:
Article 37 clearly states that DPSPs shall NOT be enforceable by any court.
Statement 3 (They are fundamental in governance) — CORRECT:
Although not enforceable, Article 37 also states that the principles laid down in DPSPs are "fundamental in the governance of the country" and it is the duty of the State to apply them when making laws.
Answer: D (2 and 3 only).
Key Takeaway:
DPSPs = non-justiciable (can't be enforced by courts) + fundamental in governance (state should try to follow them).
They're like guidelines, not legally binding orders.
Directive Principles of State Policy are non-justiciable guidelines in Part IV of the Constitution that courts cannot enforce, unlike Fundamental Rights which are justiciable.
The Constitution deliberately made DPSPs non-enforceable to avoid judicial overreach into policy-making while still making them fundamental principles to guide governance and lawmaking.
Directive Principles of State Policy
Indian Polity Part IV Directive Principles
Directive Principles of State Policy: Non-Justiciable Guidelines for Governance
Part IV (Articles 36-51) contains DPSPs - non-justiciable principles
Article 37 states DPSPs are NOT enforceable by any court
DPSPs are fundamental in governance and guide law-making
Unlike Fundamental Rights, DPSPs are positive obligations on the state
DPSPs are constitutional guidelines that direct the state to create conditions for social and economic welfare. Unlike Fundamental Rights which are enforceable, DPSPs serve as a moral compass for governance.
DPSPs vs Fundamental Rights
Aspect | Fundamental Rights (Part III) | DPSPs (Part IV) |
|---|---|---|
Nature | Negative rights (state cannot do) | Positive obligations (state should do) |
Enforceability | Justiciable - courts can enforce | Non-justiciable - courts cannot enforce |
Legal Status | Legally binding on government | Moral and political obligations |
Purpose | Protect individual liberty | Promote collective welfare |
Violation Remedy | Citizens can approach courts | No legal remedy available |
Key Constitutional Provisions
Article 37 explicitly states DPSPs shall NOT be enforceable by any court
Same article declares DPSPs are fundamental in governance of the country
State has the duty to apply these principles in making laws
Articles 36-51 cover economic justice, social welfare, and administrative reforms
DPSPs complement Fundamental Rights to achieve justice, liberty, equality, fraternity
Classification of DPSPs
# Directive Principles
## Economic Justice
- Right to Work
- Living Wage
- Equal Pay
- Wealth Distribution
## Social Welfare
- Free Education
- Public Health
- Maternity Relief
- Old Age Protection
## Administrative
- Uniform Civil Code
- Panchayati Raj
- Judicial Separation
- Public ServiceQuestion Connection
This 2020 UPSC question directly tests Article 37 understanding. Statement 1 was the trap - many students confuse DPSPs with Fundamental Rights and think courts can enforce them.
Trap: Confusing DPSPs with Fundamental Rights - DPSPs are NOT enforceable by courts
Trap: Article 37 has DUAL nature - DPSPs are non-justiciable BUT fundamental in governance
Trap: Thinking 'fundamental in governance' means legally binding - it means morally binding
Trap: Some DPSPs have been implemented through laws (like 86th Amendment for education) - but DPSPs themselves remain non-justiciable
Constitutional Parts & Articles Structure
Indian Polity Part IV Articles 36-51
Constitution's Systematic Organization: Parts & Key Article Ranges
22 Parts organize Constitution topics systematically
Part III (Articles 12-35) contains Fundamental Rights
Part IV (Articles 36-51) contains Directive Principles
Key Constitutional Parts
Part | Articles | Subject Matter | UPSC Importance |
|---|---|---|---|
Part I | 1-4 | Union and Territory | High - names, boundaries |
Part II | 5-11 | Citizenship | Medium - acquisition, termination |
Part III | 12-35 | Fundamental Rights | Very High - justiciable rights |
Part IV | 36-51 | Directive Principles | Very High - non-justiciable |
Part IVA | 51A | Fundamental Duties | High - 11 duties |
Part V | 52-151 | Union Government | Very High - President, Parliament |
Part VI | 152-237 | State Government | High - Governor, Legislature |
Part XI | 245-263 | Union-State Relations | High - distribution of powers |
Article Numbering Pattern
Original Constitution had 395 articles in 22 parts
Current Constitution has 448+ articles due to amendments
Some articles deleted (like Article 31 - Right to Property)
New articles added with letter suffixes (like 51A, 243A-243O)
Part IVA (Fundamental duties) was inserted by 42nd Amendment in 1976
Trap: Confusing Part III (Fundamental Rights) with Part IV (DPSPs)
Trap: Article 31 (Right to Property) no longer exists - deleted by 44th Amendment
Trap: Part IVA is separate from Part IV - it contains Fundamental Duties, not DPSPs
Justiciable vs Non-Justiciable Rights
Indian Polity enforceable by courts not enforceable by any court
Justiciable vs Non-Justiciable Rights: Court Enforcement in Indian Constitution
Justiciable rights can be enforced by courts through legal remedies
Non-justiciable rights cannot be enforced by courts
Fundamental Rights are justiciable, DPSPs are non-justiciable
Courts can issue writs for violation of justiciable rights
Justiciability means the power of courts to enforce constitutional provisions. It determines whether citizens can approach courts when government violates certain rights.
Justiciable vs Non-Justiciable Comparison
Feature | Justiciable Rights | Non-Justiciable Rights |
|---|---|---|
Examples | Fundamental Rights (Part III) | DPSPs (Part IV) |
Court Enforcement | YES - courts can compel compliance | NO - courts cannot force government |
Legal Remedies | Writs, compensation, injunctions | No legal remedies available |
Citizen Approach | Can file PIL, writ petitions | Cannot approach courts |
Government Obligation | Must comply or face legal action | Moral/political obligation only |
Nature | Negative rights (state cannot do) | Positive rights (state should do) |
Constitutional Guarantee | Absolute protection | Aspirational goals |
Constitutional Writs for Justiciable Rights
Article 32 - Right to Constitutional Remedies for Fundamental Rights violations
Article 226 - High Courts can issue writs for any purpose, including statutory rights
Five writs: Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Certiorari, Prohibition, Quo Warranto
PIL (Public Interest Litigation) expanded access to constitutional remedies
Article 136 - Supreme Court's special leave petition for any justiciable matter
Judicial Interpretation Evolution
Courts have sometimes used DPSPs to interpret Fundamental Rights (like in Minerva Mills case), but cannot directly enforce DPSPs. This creates an indirect justiciability.
Trap: Thinking DPSPs are completely useless - they guide legislation and policy making
Trap: Believing Article 21 (Right to Life) includes all DPSP benefits - courts extend it selectively
Trap: Confusing 'fundamental in governance' with 'legally enforceable'
Trap: Some DPSP goals achieved through laws (like RTE Act) - but DPSPs remain non-justiciable