What the Directive Principles are
Fundamental Rights tell the state what it must not do. Directive Principles tell the state what it should try to do.
They sit in Part IV, Articles 36 to 51, and they describe the India the framers wanted built — one with a fair distribution of wealth, a living wage, free legal aid, village panchayats, decent working conditions, protection for the weak.
None of it could be promised outright. In 1950 India was poor, and a constitution that guaranteed every citizen a job or a house would have been guaranteeing something the state could not deliver. Writing those as enforceable rights would have made the Constitution a document of broken promises from day one.
So the framers wrote them as directions instead of guarantees. Goals the state must work towards as its capacity grows, rather than rights a citizen can demand today.
The idea was borrowed from the Constitution of Ireland, which had a chapter of Directive Principles of Social Policy. The Irish had in turn taken it from the Spanish Constitution.
Article 37 says two things at once. The Directive Principles are not enforceable by any court. But they are fundamental in the governance of the country, and it is the duty of the State to apply them in making laws. Not enforceable, yet not optional.
The three kinds of principle
The Constitution itself does not group them. But they fall naturally into three sets, and exams use these labels.
Aimed at economic justice and reducing inequality. Adequate means of livelihood, fair distribution of material resources, no concentration of wealth, equal pay for equal work, living wage, free legal aid, right to work and education, public assistance in old age and sickness.
Drawn from Gandhi's programme for rural India. Village panchayats, cottage industries, cooperative societies, upliftment of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, prohibition of intoxicating drinks, and a ban on cow slaughter.
The ideals of a modern liberal state. A uniform civil code, separation of the judiciary from the executive, protection of monuments, promotion of international peace, and organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry on scientific lines.
Socialist principles chase equality. Gandhian principles look to the village. Liberal principles build the modern state. Every DPSP fits one of the three.
The principles that get asked
Sixteen articles carry the principles. These are the ones that appear in papers.
| Article | What it directs the State to do |
|---|---|
| Article 36 | Defines State — the same meaning as Article 12 in Part III |
| Article 37 | Directive Principles are not enforceable, but are fundamental in governance |
| Article 39(d) | Equal pay for equal work for men and women |
| Article 39A | Free legal aid and equal justice — added by the 42nd Amendment |
| Article 40 | Organise village panchayats as units of self-government |
| Article 41 | Right to work, education, and public assistance in unemployment, old age and sickness |
| Article 43 | Living wage and decent conditions of work |
| Article 43A | Worker participation in the management of industries — 42nd Amendment |
| Article 44 | A uniform civil code for all citizens |
| Article 45 | Early childhood care and education below the age of six |
| Article 47 | Raise nutrition and public health; prohibit intoxicating drinks and drugs |
| Article 48 | Organise agriculture scientifically; prohibit cow slaughter |
| Article 48A | Protect the environment, forests and wildlife — 42nd Amendment |
| Article 50 | Separate the judiciary from the executive |
| Article 51 | Promote international peace and security |
Article 45 was rewritten in 2002. It originally directed the state to provide free education for children up to 14. The 86th Amendment moved that promise into Article 21A as a Fundamental Right, and rewrote Article 45 to cover early childhood care below the age of six instead.
Which Directive Principle became a Fundamental Right, and how?
Free and compulsory education. It was originally in Article 45 as a directive, and the 86th Amendment in 2002 moved it to Article 21A as an enforceable Fundamental Right for children aged 6 to 14.
When Rights and Principles collide
A problem was built into the Constitution from the start. Fundamental Rights are enforceable; Directive Principles are not. So what happens when a law that pursues a Directive Principle violates a Fundamental Right?
Land reform made this real almost immediately. Redistributing land from large holders to the landless serves Article 39 — but it takes property, which was then a Fundamental Right. Courts had to choose.
The answer took thirty years and four landmark cases to settle.
| Case | Year | What the Court held |
|---|---|---|
| Champakam Dorairajan | 1951 | Fundamental Rights prevail. A Directive Principle cannot override them. Parliament responded with the 1st Amendment |
| Golaknath | 1967 | Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights at all, even to implement a Directive Principle |
| Kesavananda Bharati | 1973 | Parliament can amend Fundamental Rights, but cannot destroy the basic structure of the Constitution |
| Minerva Mills | 1980 | Balance is itself part of the basic structure. Neither Rights nor Principles may be given absolute primacy over the other |
Minerva Mills is the settled position. The Court struck down a part of the 42nd Amendment which had said that no law implementing a Directive Principle could be challenged for violating Articles 14 or 19. That, the Court held, would have made Fundamental Rights subordinate — destroying the balance the Constitution depends on.
Champakam: Rights win. Golaknath: Rights are untouchable. Kesavananda: Rights can be amended, but not the basic structure. Minerva Mills: neither side wins — the balance is the point.
Directive Principles that became law
Non-enforceable does not mean ignored. A great deal of Indian legislation exists because of Part IV.
- Article 40 produced the 73rd Amendment (1992), which made panchayati raj constitutional
- Article 39(d) produced the Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
- Article 43 produced the Minimum Wages Act and factory legislation
- Article 45 produced Article 21A and the Right to Education Act, 2009
- Article 47 produced prohibition laws in several states
- Article 48A produced the Environment Protection Act, 1986
- Article 50 produced the separation of the judiciary from the executive in the criminal courts
Article 44 — the uniform civil code — remains unimplemented. India still applies different personal laws on marriage, divorce and inheritance depending on religion. It is the most politically contested Directive Principle and the one most often asked about.
Rights, Principles and Duties compared
| Fundamental Rights | Directive Principles | Fundamental Duties | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Part | Part III | Part IV | Part IV-A |
| Articles | 12–35 | 36–51 | 51A |
| Addressed to | The State — as limits | The State — as goals | The citizen |
| Enforceable? | Yes | No | No |
| Borrowed from | United States | Ireland | USSR |
| Nature | Negative — what the state may not do | Positive — what the state should do | Moral obligations |
Everything on one look
The classification, the key articles and the four cases that settled the conflict.
- Part IV contains the Directive Principles
- Articles 36 to 51 — sixteen articles in all
- 3 categories — socialist, Gandhian, liberal
- Article 37 declares them non-justiciable
- 42nd Amendment (1976) added Articles 39A, 43A and 48A
- Article 44 — the uniform civil code — remains unimplemented
- Champakam Dorairajan (1951) — Fundamental Rights prevail
- Golaknath (1967) — Rights cannot be amended at all
- Kesavananda Bharati (1973) — basic structure doctrine
- Minerva Mills (1980) — the balance between the two is itself basic structure
- Directive Principles were borrowed from Ireland
- Directive Principles are not enforceable in court — Article 37 says so directly
- But Article 37 also calls them fundamental in the governance of the country
- The Directive Principles were borrowed from Ireland, not from the USSR — the USSR gave Fundamental Duties
- Article 44, the uniform civil code, has never been implemented
- Article 45 was rewritten in 2002 — it now covers children below six, not up to fourteen
- Minerva Mills (1980) is the settled position, not Kesavananda, on Rights versus Principles
- The Constitution itself does not classify the principles — the three-way split is a convention
- Article 36 defines the State for Part IV, borrowing the definition from Article 12
- The 42nd Amendment added three new Directive Principles — 39A, 43A and 48A
- Part IV of the Constitution contains the Directive Principles, in Articles 36 to 51
- Article 36 defines the State for Part IV, using the same meaning as Article 12
- Article 37 says the principles are not enforceable by any court
- Article 37 also calls them fundamental in the governance of the country
- The Directive Principles were borrowed from the Constitution of Ireland
- They fall into three groups — socialist, Gandhian, and liberal-intellectual
- Article 39(d) directs the state to secure equal pay for equal work
- Article 40 directs the state to organise village panchayats
- Article 44 directs the state to secure a uniform civil code — still unimplemented
- Article 48 directs the state to prohibit cow slaughter
- Article 50 directs the state to separate the judiciary from the executive
- The 42nd Amendment, 1976 added Articles 39A, 43A and 48A
- Champakam Dorairajan (1951) held that Fundamental Rights prevail over Directive Principles
- Minerva Mills (1980) held that the balance between the two is part of the basic structure