Polity dpsp 4.2
Published on: Mar 4, 2016
Transcripts - Polity dpsp 4.2
Presented by Dr. Roman Saini
Directive Principles of State
• IAS, Doctor and trying to be a good teacher
• If you want to know more, you can read online.
• Spread the word of this education revolution.
• Any query or doubt, please comment below the video on youtube or
on Facebook page: www.facebook.com/romansaini.ofﬁcial
24th CAA, 1971
• Passed to reverse Golaknath case decision. Parliament wants to give
effect to preamble and DPSP, but SC took it all away.
• Declared that the Parliament has the power to abridge or take away
any of the FRs by enacting CAAs
• Article 13 is not applicable (NA) to any amendment made under Art
• Prez shall give his assent to CAA after being passed from both houses.
• Article 368 includes both amendment of the process and procedure
25th CAA, 1971
• The parliament in order to overcome the obstruction in enactment of social
legislation passed the 25th CAA, 1971
• Decreased the scope of the right to property to a large extent as it permitted
the acquisition of private property by the government for public use, on
the payment of compensation (determined by Parliament, not courts)
• Introduced article 31-C: if the state enacted any law giving effect to two art
under 39 (b) and (c) and in the process if the law violate the FR given under
Art 14,19 or 31, the law shall not be declared as unconstitutional (N&V)
merely on this ground.
• Any declaration made by state that the law is to give effect to Art 39 (b) and
(c) cannot be challenged in court of law.
• V.G. Ramachandran described the 24th and 25th Amendments as:
• not merely 'tinkering' with the Constitution.
• But it is a veritable slaughter of the Constitution.
• 25th Amendment "smacks of totalitarianism and hurry to achieve
socialism instantly overnight”.
• Thus for ﬁrst time, 2 directives given under act 39 (b) and (c) were
given precedence over 3 FR given under act 14,19 and 31.
24 April, 1973
v. State of Kerala,1973
• There are certain principles within the framework of Indian Constitution
which are inviolable and hence cannot be amended by the Parliament.
These principles are commonly termed as Basic Structure
• Parliament has "wide" powers, it did not have the power to destroy or
emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the
• Section 2(a) and 2(b), and the ﬁrst part of section 3 of the 25th
Amendment were upheld by the SC as valid.
• However, the second part of section 3, which prevented judicial review
of any law that gives effect to DPSP, was declared unconstitutional
• Landmark decision of SC (wafer thin margin: 7-6) that outlined the Basic
Structure doctrine of the Constitution.
• On basis of 25th CA act the Bank Nationalisation Act and Privy Purses
(abolition) Act were held to be constitutionally valid by SC when they
• This judgement has gained widespread acceptance and legitimacy due
to subsequent cases and judgments
• Kesavananda Bharathi is the case which saved Indian democracy;
thanks to Shri Kesavananda Bharati, eminent jurist Nanabhoy Palkhivala
and the seven judges who were in the majority. -TheHindu, in April 2013,
on the occasion of the 40th Anniversary
Basic structure doctrine
• Preamble objectives:
• Secularism, Rule of law,
• Sovereign, Democratic, Republican structure,
• Unity and integrity of the Nation,
• Freedom and dignity of the individual
• Constitution: Supremacy, Articles 32 and 226, ”essence" of other FRs Part III,
Part IV DPSP (concept of social and economic justice, to build a Welfare State),
Balance between Part III and IV
• Judicial Review, limitations upon the amending power conferred
by Article 368
• Independence of the Judiciary
• The principle of equality, mainly the quintessence of equal justice;
• Effective access to justice
• Powers of the Supreme Court under Articles 32, 136, 141, 142
• Miscellaneous :
• The principle of Separation of Powers
• The Parliamentary system of government
• The principle of free and fair elections
• Legislation seeking to nullify the awards made in exercise of the
judicial power of the State by Arbitration Tribunals constituted
under an Act
• 42nd CA Act, 1976 amended Article 31-C:
• enacted during emergency (25 June 1975 – 21 March 1977) aka
• If the state enacted any law giving effect to all or any of DPSP and
if in the process, the law violated FR given U/A 14, 19 and 31, the
law shall not be declared as unconstitutional and void merely on
• Thus the 42nd CA act attempted to give precedence for all the
DPSP over 3 FR given under act 14, 19 and 31.
• The 44th
CA act 1978, has removed Art 31 (Right to Property) from list of FR.
• The SC in Minnerva Mills v/s UOI, 1980 case held the changes introduced
CA act (section 4 and 55) in Art 31-C as unconstitutional and void on
the ground that it disturbed balance b/w part III and IV of constitution and
that the balance b/w them is part of basic structure of constitution.
• No absolute power of Part III and Part IV over each other
• Goals set out by the DPSP have to be achieved without the abrogation of the
means provided by the Fundamental Rights
• Power of parliament to amend constitution is limited and it cannot
amend constitution to make this power unlimited
14, 19 can be
Sanctions behind DPSP
• Constitution itself
• Public opinion
• Utility of Directive principles
• Constitutional amendments
• Laws made by the government
• Executive orders
Spread the word and help those who cannot afford coaching