Balance Between Fundamental Right and Directive Principal of State Policy Richa Shukla BASICS OF LAW Fri, Feb 12, 2021, at ,04:12 PM INTRODUCTION-Fundamental rights and directive principle of state policy under the Constitution of India, when read together comprise the human rights of an individual. The fundamental rights are the resultant of Motilal committee report of 1928 which derive which further derived the fundamental rights from bill of rights enshrined in the American Constitution. Fundamental rights are covered under part three of Indian Constitution.Object Behind the Directive principal of state policy Directive principle of state policy lay down the objectives that our Constitution framers wanted to achieve through the Constitution. DPSPs present those guidelines that reflect the objectives laid down in the preamble, to be followed by the State. DPSP conveys how to achieve social Justice, economic justice and Political Justice in order to achieve the ultimate ideals of preamble that is liberty, justice, equality and fraternity. It further embodies the idea of the welfare state for the government. Landmark judgments on provisions of Fundamental Rights and Directive Principle of State Policy with denote balance between Fundamental rights and DPSP- · Between Article 38 and Article 39 of the DPSP and Rule of law and Equality before law of Fundamental right - Ø Air Indian Statutory Corporation v United Labor Union-AIR 1997 SC 645 A three judge bench of Supreme Court explained the concept of social justice with the help of equality before the law. The concept of social justice enables equality to flavor and enliven the practical content of life. Social justice and equality are complementary to each other so that both should maintain their vitality .rule of law, therefore is potent instrument of social justice to bring about equality · Balancing between Article 39 and Article 21 – Employment of Children and Right to life Ø M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1997 SC 699 – In the landmark judgment, the court put emphasis on the constructive role of the state with regard to children. Certain principles of policy are to be followed by the State:The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing(a) That the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means to livelihood;(b) that the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to sub serve 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 abandonmentIf the children below the age of 14 year cannot be employed in any hazardous industry or mines or other works, its directly affected the right to life and education and state is responsible for this. · Provision for early childhood care and education to children below the age of six year with article 21 right to education compulsory and fundamental rights – According to Article 45 of the Constitution, the State shall Endeavour 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.Ø Unni Krishnan v. State of AP (1993) 1 SCC 645The Supreme Court held that the right to education up to age of 14 year is fundamental right within the meaning of article 21 of the Indian constitution, but thereafter the obligation of the state to provide education. The right to education flows directly from the right to life. · Balancing between Equal justice and free legal aid to economically backward section under article 39 and article 14, Article 16 and Article 21 It is the obligation of the state to provide equal justice and free legal aid which is also a fundamental right under article 14 and article 21 .Ø Hussaniara Khatoon vs Home Secretary .state of Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1360 It the state duty to provide lawyer to a poor person and don’t discriminate between the person the person on the base of economical .its provide article 14 equality before law, no one is above the law. Ø State of Maharashtra v Manubhai Pragaji Vashi (1995) 5 SCC 730 The supreme court held that article 21 read with article 39 –A casts duty on the state to afford grants in aid to provide free legal aid and equal justice. · Kerala education bill :Introduction to Doctrine of Harmonious Construction by the Supreme Court-Doctrine of harmonious construction states that the provisions of the Constitution shall be made in such a way that the fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy function conjointly. This is to avoid any conflict that may arise while enforcing DPSP and fundamental rights in the situation. Hence the provisions shall be constructed in a way that they work harmoniously with each other. In lieu of the doctrine, the Supreme Court in the case of Kerala education Bill held that when inherent power is not present, the conflict will not arise. If a conflict arises why the court tries to interpret a particular law, the objective should be to give effect to both fundamental rights and DPSP as far as possible. The efforts shall be made to connect them without making any amendments so as to bring the balance. However, in case the conflict persists, the court shall implement fundamental rights over directive principles of state policy.· Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles are co-equal:Ø Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors 1980 AIR 1789The SC struck down the Art 31C as unconstitutional and observed that the Indian Constitution is found on the bedrock of balance between FR and DPSP. To give absolute primacy to one over the other is to disturb the balance of the constitution by violating its basic structure. FRs are not an end in themselves but they are the means to an end as specified in part IV. Ø Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P (1993) 1 SCC 645The court in Unni Krishnan case reaffirmed that the DPSP and FR are supplementary and complementary to each other. The FR must be construed in the light of DPSP.A change in the judicial attitude can be perceived in Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan, where Mudholkar J., said that even if the fundamental Rights were taken as unchangeable, the much needed dynamism may be achieved by properly interpreting the Fundamental Rights in the light of Directive Principles. According to him, Part IV, is “fundamental in the governance of the country and the provisions of Part III must be interpreted harmoniously with these principles.” Ø Golak Nath v. State of Punjab 1967 AIR 1643Justice Subba Rao in the case of Golak Nath v. State of Punjab applied the similar principle, where the court emphasized that the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles form an ‘integrated scheme’ which was elastic enough to respond to the changing needs of the society. All the Fundamental Rights are not only in consonance with the provisions of Article 37, but also in complete harmony with the intention of the Constitution makers and the Preamble of the Constitution. CONCLUSION:Sir B.N.Rau has after much deliberations has concluded that ‘ to make clear that in a conflict between the rights of the individual and the principles of policy set forth in chapter III, which are intended for the welfare of the State as a whole, the general welfare should prevail. Otherwise it would be meaningless to say that these principles are fundamental and it is he duty of the State to give effect to them.’ In recent days, Judiciary has shown positive and affirmative attitude towards the importance given to the concept of Welfare State by the DPSP. Not only has it put stress over following the principles of DPSP, but also given it the position of co-equal with Fundamental Rights through numerous precedents.