Skip to main content

Q. Which one between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy enjoys the position of priority?

Q. Which one between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles of State Policy enjoys the position of priority?
Ans. In a situation of conflict between the Fundamental Rights (Part Ill) and the Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV); it becomes a debatable points as to which one should get priority over the other. In 1951, the Supreme Court in State of Madras Vs. Champakam Dorai- rajan case, upheld that in case of contradiction between the provisions of Part Ill and that of Part IV, the former (Fundamental Rights) shall prevail. In another Case related to Kerala Education Bill, 1957, the court declared that the Directive Principles of State Policy cannot get priority over the Fundamental Rights, yet the Directive Principles cannot be ignored totally. In this respect a new Article 31(c) was added in 1971 by 25th Constitutional Amendment which gives priority to the Directive Principles of State Policy in specific situations. It provides that no law giving effect to the principles contained in Article 39(b), (c) shall be deemed to be void on the ground that it is inconsistent with, or takes away or abridges away any of the rights conferred by Article 14 or Article 19. It further states that no law containing a declaration that it is for giving effect to such principles shall be called in question in any court on the ground that it does not give effect to such policy (principles). In Keshvanand Bharti case. in 1973, the Supreme Court upheld the first part of Article 31(c) but declared null and void the’ second part underlined above on the ground that it abridges the power of ‘Judicial Review’ of the court which is part of the ‘Basic Structure of the Constitution. It propounded the principle that Parliament cannot change the Basic Structure of the Constitution even by the process of Constitution Amendment. However, in 1976, Parliament by 42nd Amendment Act further  extended the first part of Article 31(c) to include not just Article 39(b)(c) but all the Directive- Principles of State Policy. Thus, all the Directive Principles of State Policy were given priority by this Amendment.
Again, in 1980, the Supreme Court in case of Minerva Mills Ltd. & Co. Vs. Union of India, reiterated its earlier stand and decided to declare null and void the extension of the scope of Article 3 1(c) made by 42nd Constitutional Amendment. After this judgement, the position is that only those laws which give effect to the principles contained in Article 39(b)(c) (not all Directive Principles) shall prevail over the Fundamental Right provided in Article 19 and Article 14. And, also. the courts shall have the power of Judicial Review to inquire into the laws made to give effect to the principles contained in Article 39(b)(c). But with respect to other Directive Principles, the Fundamental Rights still hold the position of priority. Thus, both arc important and require harmonious balance to be maintained.


Popular posts from this blog



13.0 Learning Outcome

13.1 Introduction

13.2 Initiatives towards Constitutional Status to Local Governance

13.2.1 Features of 73rd Constitutional Amendment

13.2.2 Features of 74th Constitutional Amendment

13.2.3 Decentralised Planning in Context of 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment Act

13.3 Initiatives after Economic Reforms

13.4 Functioning of PRIs in Various States after 73rd Amendment

13.5 Functioning of Local Governance after 73rd and 74th Constitutional Amendment: Observations

13.6 Conclusion

13.7 Key Concepts

13.8 References and Further Reading

13.9 Activities


After studying this Unit you should be able to:

• Identify the background of revitalisation of local governance;

• Understand the features of 73rd and 74th constitutional amendment;

• Discuss the initiatives after economic reforms; and

• Outlines the functioning of local governance in various states after the amendment.


The revitalization of Pancha…

General Studies :: Indian Polity #1

Constitutional evolution under British ruleRegulating Act 1773beginning of British parliamentary control over the East India Companysubordination of the presidencies of Bombay and Madras to BengalGovernor of Bengal made Governal-Generalcouncil of Governor-General establishedSupreme Court established in CalcuttaPitt’s India Act 1784commercial and political activities of the Company separatedestablished a board of control over the CompanyCharter Act 1813trade monopoly of the Company abolishedmissionaries allowed to preach in IndiaCharter Act 1833Governor-General of Bengal becomes Governor-General of Indiafirst Governor-General Lord William Bentickends commercial activities of the CompanyCharter Act 1853legislative and executive functions of the Governor-General’s council separatedopen competition for Indian Civil Services establishedIndian Council Act 1861establishes legislative councils at the centre, presidencies and provincesGovernor-General’s executive council to have Indians as non…



1.0 Learning outcome

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Concept of Democratic Decentralisation

1.3 Evolution of Democratic Decentralisation

1.4 Significance of Democratic Decentralisation

1.5 Democratic Decentralisation in India

1.6 Conclusion

1.7 Key concepts

1.8 References and Further Reading

1.9 Activities


After studying this unit, you should be able to:

• Understand the concept of Democratic Decentralization;

• Know the evolution and significance of Democratic Decentralization; and

• Describe the Democratic Decentralization pattern in India.


The dawn of 21st century is marked by decentralized governance both as a strategy and philosophy of brining about reforms and changes in democracies. These changes led to such virtues of transparency, responsiveness and accountability and ensures good governance. Today decentralization and democracy are the most significant themes in the development discourse. In the present contex…