Answer-Article 21 (Part III), Right to life and personal liberty, has been read with Directive Principles m...

The relationship between Fundamental Rights Part III and Directive Principles of State Policy Part IV has evolved through judicial interpretation. Initially, in State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan 1951, the Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights prevail over DPSPs. However, later jurisprudence adopted a harmonious construction approach. In Kesavananda Bharati and Minerva Mills v. Union of India 1980, the Court held that both Parts are complementary and together form the core of the Constitutions philosophy. DPSPs may be used to interpret and expand the scope of Fundamental Rightsespecially Article 21as seen in Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation. However, DPSPs cannot override or abrogate enforceable rights, as that would destroy constitutional balance, which itself is part of the basic structure.

Question

Article 21 (Part II

I , Right to life and personal liberty, has been read with Directive Principles many times. Which of the following best states the constitutional harmony principle?

A Directive Principles are subordinate and can never be invoked to expand Fundamental Rights.

B Directive Principles may be read to widen the scope of Fundamental Rights, provided the reading does not destroy the right’s core.

C Directive Principles are enforceable justiciable rights under Part III.

D Directive Principles supersede Fundamental Rights when there is conflict.

E Fundamental Rights can be suspended during normal times to implement Directive Principles.

Practice Next