Day 2 – Q 5.The Supreme Court has played an important role in reinventing the Directive Principles of State Policy. Examine.
5. The Supreme Court has played an important role in reinventing the Directive Principles of State Policy. Examine.
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने राज्य नीति के निर्देशक सिद्धांतों को पुनर्निर्मित करने में एक महत्वपूर्ण भूमिका निभाई है। जांच करें।
- Explain a line or two about what are DPSP
- In body –give examples of how SC has helped in reinventing role of DPSP
- Conclude the answer on positive note on how the reinvention has been positive
Note: The answer is not asking history of how harmony was established between DPSP and FR –so don’t concentrate entire answer on this point
Directive principles of state policy are enumerated in part 4 of Indian constitution. DPSP along with FR contain the philosophy of the constitution and is the soul of the constitution.
The SC through its various judgements spread across years have helped in realising these directives
- In Hindustan Machine tools case: SC said that the casual workers who were rendering services similar to regular employees of government company for a decade on daily wages should be absorbed –Advocating Art 38,39e,43
- In MC Mehta Vs Tamil Nadu: The SC issued directions to state to see that an adult member of family whose child is in employment in a factory, mine or hazardous employment gets employment –Thereby advocating for realisation of article 39e,39f,41 and 47
- In Unni Krishnan vs State of Andhra Pradesh: The SC held that right of education is implied by Art 21 when read in conjunction with Art 41 –There by paving path to Article 21A
- State of Gujarat vs. Mirzapur Moti: Ban on slaughter of cow was not illegal as the cow progeny was needed in interest of national economy –Art48
- Centre for Environment law, WWF India vs Union of India- SC emphasized State as a custodian of natural resources has duty to maintain them not merely for public interest but for interest of flora and fauna –Emphasis on Art 48 A
- Taj Trapezium Case: SC emphasised on protecting Taj Mahal from pollution and emphasised on its protection –This is in accordance of article 49
- Supreme Court Advocates on record: SC emphasized on the opinion of CJI having a Primacy-Stressing on importance of Article 50
Thus Supreme court has played a very important role in reinventing DPSP and working for the benefit of common man.
Note: These are just few examples of cases, there are other cases which can be added, also model answer has few unique points, please go through them.
Best answer: Aspirant123
Directive Principles of State policy (DPSPs) are the non-enforceable part of Indian Constitution, which are meant to improve overall governance in the country. Since Independence, there has been a quest to implement these principles by all pillars of government. Out of which, role of Supreme Court in re-inventing the DPSPs is commendable.
Role of Supreme Court in re-inventing DPSPs:
- Setting harmonious relation between FRs and DPSPs: in Minerva Mills vs UoI, SC held that there is a need of balance between FRs and DPSP, neither of two can be disregarding in quest of implementing other.
- Enforcing environmental safety: SC has played an important role in enforcing the environmental safety rules. For Example: banning crackers, setting up EPCA for controlling pollution, setting up of CAMPA.
- Protection of monuments: SC, time and again has enforced the protection of monuments and safety of the place of national importance. For Example: taking cognisance of TAJ degradation and summoning governments.
- Prohibiting illegal cow slaughtering across India, which in a way is enforcement of Article 48 of the Constitution.
- Promotion of rights of people from weaker section: in Pavement Dwellers case, Sc held that alternate rehabilitations is mandatory for the slum dwellers in case of eviction of dwellings.
So, Supreme Court has played an important role in enforcing the DPSPs, which are otherwise neglected by the other two pillars of the government. However, in some case, SC has also not followed the spirit of the DPSPs.
- Violation of principle of separation of power: under Article 50 of the Constitution, principle of SOP is mentioned. however, it has not been respected by SC in several instances. For example: Setting up parallel executive wing of CPCB in form of EPCA etc.
Thus, DPSPs have been playing important role in Indian democratic republic. After 70 years of Independence, we are striving to fulfil the dreams of our forefathers in form of implementation of DPSPs. Thus, it becomes important that all pillars of government i.e. Executive, Legislative and judiciary should act in tandem.
The Directive principles of state policy(DPSPs), the non-justiciable part of the constitution are guidelines for the government to maintain its welfare nature. The government in its acts, schemes and policies implement the spirit of DPSPs. The Supreme court through verdicts and directions has also re-invented the utility of DPSPs.
Role of the supreme court:
- Evolution in the stand of supreme court from the Golaknath case (1967) to the Minerva Mills case (1980), where it set a harmony between FRs and DPSPs. This ensures that DPSPs can be implemented by amending FRs but should not change the basic structure.
- In Unni Krishnan case (1993), supreme court held that right to education is part of article 21 and must be interpreted in light of DPSPs contained in Articles 41,45 and 46. consequently 86th amendment Act was passed.
- Enforcing article 48 of DPSP to protect the environment by setting up EPCA to control pollution, banning crackers during festive season and string up compulsory afforestation fund (CAMPA).
- IN THE AADHAR CASE, the Supreme Court maintained that Aadhaar can be used for minimising inequalities in income as directed by article 38.
- In Rajoo Ramakant vs state of MP case, Supreme Court held that free legal aid to poor’s is provided as mentioned in Article 39A.
- Protection of monuments of national importance as given in Article49: recently supreme court has taken the issue of Taj Mahal protection and has summoned state government to protect the very monument.
- In occupational health vs UOI case (2014) and mcd vs female workers case the supreme court held that health of workers humane conditions be maintained as mandated by article39 and 42.
In this way, supreme court from time to time has explored the possibility of implementing DPSPs as part of its decision and verdict.