Directive Principles vs Fundamental Rights: Differences Every Aspirant Must Know
Part III and Part IV compared: justiciability, sources, Champakam Dorairajan, Golaknath, Kesavananda Bharati and Minerva Mills, with a comparison table and practice MCQs.
UPSC and SSC keep returning to one contrast: Fundamental Rights in Part III can be enforced in court, while Directive Principles of State Policy in Part IV cannot. The exam rarely stops at that sentence. It asks which case first gave rights priority, which case said Parliament could amend even Part III, and which case restored a balance under the basic structure.
Read this note next to the Fundamental Rights guide. The article numbers there make the cases here easier to place.
Where each part comes from
Fundamental Rights were inspired largely by the United States Bill of Rights. They limit the State. Directive Principles were inspired largely by the Irish Constitution. They instruct the State on social and economic goals: livelihood, equal pay, village panchayats, uniform civil code, and protection of the environment, among others. Article 37 says the Directives are fundamental in the governance of the country, but they shall not be enforceable by any court.
| Point | Fundamental Rights | Directive Principles |
|---|---|---|
| Part | III, Articles 12–35 | IV, Articles 36–51 |
| Nature | Mostly negative restraints on the State, with some positive duties | Positive instructions to the State |
| Justiciable? | Yes, Articles 32 and 226 | No, Article 37 |
| Main source | US Bill of Rights | Irish Constitution |
| Aim | Political and civil liberty | Social and economic democracy |
| Whose right? | The individual against the State | The community, through State policy |
Four cases that set the balance
Champakam Dorairajan (1951) is the starting point. The Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights prevail if they conflict with a Directive. Parliament answered with the First Amendment, which added Articles 31A and 31B and the Ninth Schedule, and also amended Article 15 to allow special provisions.
Golaknath (1967) held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights. The 24th Amendment (1971) restored Parliament’s amending power under Article 368 and said such an amendment is not “law” under Article 13. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) accepted that Article 368 includes the power to amend Fundamental Rights, but not the basic structure of the Constitution. Minerva Mills (1980) then said a balance between Part III and Part IV is itself part of that basic structure. Neither part may wipe out the other.
Practice MCQs
1. Directive Principles are contained in which Part? (a) III (b) IV (c) IVA (d) V
Answer: (b). Part IV, Articles 36–51. Part IVA is Fundamental Duties.
2. Which article says Directive Principles are not enforceable by any court? (a) 32 (b) 36 (c) 37 (d) 51
Answer: (c). Article 37.
3. Which case first held that Fundamental Rights prevail over Directive Principles? (a) Golaknath (b) Champakam Dorairajan (c) Kesavananda (d) Minerva Mills
Answer: (b). State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951).
4. The basic structure doctrine was laid down in: (a) A. K. Gopalan (b) Golaknath (c) Kesavananda Bharati (d) Maneka Gandhi
Answer: (c). Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).
5. Minerva Mills is mainly remembered for holding that: (a) property is a Fundamental Right (b) harmony between Parts III and IV is part of the basic structure (c) Article 21 covers privacy only (d) the Ninth Schedule is immune forever
Answer: (b). The Court struck down clauses that gave Directives absolute primacy over rights.
6. Fundamental Duties were added by which amendment? (a) 42nd (b) 44th (c) 86th (d) 73rd
Answer: (a). The 42nd Amendment inserted Part IVA, Article 51A. The 86th Amendment later added the duty of a parent or guardian regarding education.
7. Which of these is a Directive and not a Fundamental Right? (a) Article 21 (b) Article 17 (c) Article 39A, equal justice and free legal aid (d) Article 32
Answer: (c). Article 39A is in Part IV.
8. After Kesavananda, Parliament may amend Fundamental Rights so long as it does not: (a) use Article 368 (b) damage the basic structure (c) consult the States (d) touch Article 14
Answer: (b). The limit is the basic structure, not a total ban on amending Part III.
Practice a quiz
The free practice set on the homepage needs no account. Use it after you read, while the facts are still fresh.
Start free practiceThese notes are for educational purposes. IQ Earners is not affiliated with UPSC, SSC, IBPS or SBI. Check the constitutional text and the latest official notifications before you rely on a detail. Found an error? Write via Contact.