Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumFundamental Rights, Directive Principles, and Fundamental Duties

Which of the following statements accurately describe the legal status and constitutional relationship of Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) and Fundamental Rights under the Constitution of India? Select all the correct statements.

  1. Article 37 explicitly declares that Directive Principles are fundamental in the governance of the country and imposes a duty on the State to apply these principles in making laws.Answer
  2. B
    Directive Principles are directly enforceable by the judiciary, enabling citizens to move the Supreme Court under Article 32 upon their non-implementation.
  3. The Supreme Court held in the Minerva Mills case (1980) that the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of a balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.Answer
  4. D
    The original 1950 Constitution contained a provision stating that all Directive Principles automatically supersede Fundamental Rights in case of conflict.

Answer

The correct statements are that Article 37 explicitly declares Directive Principles as fundamental in the governance of the country, and that the Supreme Court established in the Minerva Mills case (1980) that the Constitution rests on the balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
The statements emphasizing Article 37's mandate on governance and the Minerva Mills doctrine on harmony between Part III and Part IV are accurate legal facts under Indian Constitutional law.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Evaluate the enforceability and explicit constitutional wording of Article 37.
Article 37 clarifies that Part IV provisions are non-justiciable in court but fundamental to national governance, obligating the State to apply them during legislation.
Establishes the intended constitutional role of DPSPs.
2
Examine judicial remedies under Article 32 regarding Part IV provisions.
Writ jurisdiction under Article 32 applies exclusively to the enforcement of Fundamental Rights (Part III), not Directive Principles (Part IV).
Distinguishes justiciable rights from non-justiciable directives.
3
Analyze judicial precedent set in Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980).
The Supreme Court held that neither Part III nor Part IV is absolute over the other; the Constitution is built on the harmony and balance between both.
Confirms the modern constitutional interpretation of the FR-DPSP relationship.

Key Concept

Relationship between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles of State Policy
Rate this question

Topics

Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles, and Fundamental Duties

More questions from this topic