RAJIV GANDHI NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF LAW PATIALA, PUNJAB
PROJECT REPORT ON
CASES & COMMENTORY ON
CONFLICT BETWEEN FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AND D.P.S.P.
SUBMITTED IN partial fulfilment of B.A. LL.B.(Hons.) first semester
Submitted to: Submitted by: Mrs.Sweta Dhaliwal Harkirat Singh Kang(308)
Satvik shekhar (318)
Kawal jyot singh(328)
Appellants:Unni Krishnan, J.P. and others etc.
Respondent: State of Andhra Pradesh and others etc.
L.M. Sharma, C.J., S. Ratnavel Pandian, S. Mohan, B.P. Jeevan Reddy and S.P. Bharucha, JJ. AIR1993SC2178, JT1993(1)SC474, 1992(2)SCALE703, (1993)1SCC645, 1SCR594.
Constitution - professional degree - Sections 4 and 15 of Andhra Pradesh Educational Institution (Regulation of Admission) Order 1974 - whether professional degree covered under fundamental right to education - petitioner contended that every citizen has right to education for medical, engineering or other professional degree - petitioner contended that when primary education covered under fundamental right then professional degree also covered same - petitioner filed petition on precedent of Court - Court observed that precedent of Court passed Order within jurisdiction of Constitution of India - no Articles of Constitution of India provide fundamental rights as claimed by petitioner - petition dismissed.
The question which arose in the case of whether a citizen has a Fundamental Right to education for a medical, engineering or other professional degree. The question whether the right to primary education, as mentioned in Article 45 of the Constitution of India, is a Fundamental Right under Article 21 did not arise in Mohini Jain's case and no finding or observation on that question was called for. It was contended before us that since a positive finding on that question was recorded in Mohini Join's case it becomes necessary to consider its correctness on merits. We do not think so. Learned arguments were addressed in support of and against the aforesaid view which have been noticed in the judgments of our learned Brothers. It was contended by learned Counsel appearing for some of the parties before us that Article 37  in Part IV of the Constitution expressly states that the provisions contained in Part IV shall not be enforceable by any court and that, therefore, assuming the right under Articles 45 to be included within the ambit of Article 21, it would still not be enforceable. Emphasis was also laid upon the language used in Article 45 which requires the State to "endeavor to provide" for the free and compulsory education of children. A comparison of the language of Article 45 with
that of Article 49 was made and it was suggested that whereas in Article 49 an "obligation" was placed upon the State, what was required by Article 45 was "endeavor" by the State. We are of the view that these arguments as also the arguments of counsel on the other side and the observations in the decisions relied upon by them would need a thorough consideration, if necessary by a larger Bench, in a case where the question squarely arises. Article 39(a) of the Constitution, which is a Directive Principle of State Policy, provides that the State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing that the citizens, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of livelihood. Article 41, which is another Directive Principle, provides, inter alia, that the State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective provision for securing the right to work in cases of unemployment and of undeserved want. Article 37...
...Articles from General Knowledge Today
ConflictbetweenFundamentalRights and Directive Principles of State Policy
2013-03-10 17:03:43 GKToday
The important question is where there is a conflictbetween the fundamentalrights and directive principles, which should prevail? The FundamentalRights are the rights of the individual citizens guaranteed by the Constitution. The directive principles lay down various tenets of a welfare state. The conflict arises when the State needs to implement a directive principle and it infringes/ abridges the fundamentalrights of the citizens. The chapters on the fundamentalrights & DPSP were added in order of part III and part IV of the constitution. The Fundamentalrights are justifiable and guaranteed by the constitution. The Directive principles were directives to the state and government machinery. But they are not enforceable, by the law. Champakam Dorairajan Case This conflictbetweenFundamentalRights and DPSP came to the Supreme Court for the first time in Champakam Dorairajan Case (1952). Smt Champakam Dorairajan was a woman from the State of Madras. In 1951, she was not admitted to a medical college because of a Communal...
...The FundamentalRights are defined as the basic human rights of all citizens. These rights, defined in Part III of the Constitution, apply irrespective of race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed or sex. They are enforceable by the courts, subject to specific restrictions.
The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines for the framing of laws by the government. These provisions, set out in Part IV of the Constitution, are not enforceable by the courts, but the principles on which they are based are fundamental guidelines for governance that the State is expected to apply in framing and passing laws.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES AND FUNDAMENTALRIGHTSFundamentalRights and Directive Principle are integral components of the same organic constitutional system and no conflictbetween them could have been intended by founding fathers. But the view of Supreme Court on the relationship betweenFundamentalRights and Directive Principles have not been uniform throughout. There are three possible views on the relationship betweenFundamentalRights and Directive Principles. The first view is that former are the superior to the latter and so the latter must give way to the former in case of...
...importance of rights and demanded that the British rulers should respect rights of the people. The Constitution listed the rights that would be specially protected and called them ‘fundamentalrights’.These rights are defined in part III of Indian constitution
The word fundamental suggests that these rights are so important that the Constitution has separately listed them and made special provisions for their protection. The FundamentalRights are so important that the Constitution itself ensures that they are not violated by the government
FundamentalRights are different from other rights available to us. While ordinary legal rights are protected and enforced by ordinary law, FundamentalRights are protected and guaranteed by the constitution of the country. Ordinary rights may be changed by the legislature by ordinary process of law making, but a fundamentalright may only be changed by amending the Constitution itself. Besides this, no organ of the government can act in a manner that violates them. Judiciary has the
powers and responsibility to protect the fundamentalrights from violations by actions of the government. Executive as well as legislative actions can be...
...FundamentalRights are those rights and freedoms of the people of India, which enjoy constitutional recognition and guarantee. The Supreme Court of India and State High Courts have the power to enforce FundamentalRights. Supreme court is the guardian protector of fundamentalrights.
A very detailed Bill of Rights It is a very detailed and comprehensive Bill ofRights. It contains 24 Articles from 12 to 35. These describe in detail the fundamentalrights of the people of India.
People enjoy only the rights given in the Constitution. The Constitution of India does not give any recognition to natural or un-granted rights People of India enjoy only those fundamentalrights.
Special Rights for the Minorities. The India bill of Rights guarantees some special rights to the minorities. Cultural and educational rights have been granted to them. It abolishes untouched and makes it’s a crime. It has also granted special protections to women, children and the weaker sections of society.
Lack of Social and Economic Rights: It grants only civil rights and freedoms. Rights like Right to Work, Right to Leisure, and Right to Social...
...The fundamental fights are guaranteed to protect the basic human rights of all citizens of India and are put into effect by the courts, subject to some limitations. One of such fundamentalrights is the Right to Equality. Right to Equality refers to the equality in the eyes of law, discarding any unfairness on grounds of caste, race, religion, place of birth sex. It also includes equality of prospects in matters of employment, abolition of untouchability and abolition of titles. Articles 14, 15, 16, 17 and 18 of the Constitution of India highlight the Right to Equality in detail. This fundamentalright is the major foundation of all other rights and privileges granted to Indian citizens. It is one of the chief guarantees of the Constitution of India. Thus, it is imperative that every citizen of India has easy access to the courts to exercise his/her Right to Equality.
Various articles under the Right to Equality are explained as follows:
Equality Before Law
Equality before law is well defined under the Article 14 of the Constitution which ensures that every citizen shall be likewise protected by the laws of the country. It means that the State will not distinguish any of the Indian citizens on the basis of their gender, caste, creed, religion or even the place of birth. The state cannot refuse...
FundamentalRights are an important part in the Constitution of India. It guarantees civil liberties for Indians to lead their lives in peace and harmony. These includes, equality before law, freedom of speech and expression, and peaceful assembly, freedom to practice religion, and the right to constitutional remedies for the protection of civil rights by means of writs such as habeas corpus, quo-warranto, mandamus, certiorari, and prohibition. Violation of these rights is directly challengeable under the ambit of the Indian constitution by art. 32 and art. 226 . The FundamentalRights are defined as basic human freedoms which every Indian citizen has the right to enjoy for a proper and harmonious development of personality. These rights universally apply to all citizens, irrespective of race, place of birth, religion, caste, creed, colour or gender. Aliens (persons who are not citizens) are also considered in matters like equality before law. They are enforceable by the courts, subject to certain restrictions. The Rights have their origins in many sources, including England's Bill of Rights, the United States Bill of Rights and France's Declaration of the Rights of Man
Instructions for teacher
1. The teacher should explain the meaning of fundamental...
...Running Head: FUNDAMENTALRIGHTS 1
FundamentalRights: What Defines Them
Rocheen Dawn Pearson
“We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”
Preamble – Constitution of the United States
Fundamental orders (rights) date back to biblical days, recorded by Moses in the first chapter of Deuteronomy (Skousen, 2009). In essence, religious order and belifs are the foundation of our Constitution. The Constitution was drafted by a wide variety of men who, although from different backgrounds and areas of the country, shared beliefs concerning religious principles, political guidelines, economic rudiments, and long-ranged social goals. Because individual liberty lies at the core of the American constitutional system, more rights are protected under law in the United States than in other societies (Hall, 2005).
The first ten amendments to the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, were intended to delineate the fundamentalrights of the people of the United States. The Ninth...
...a) FundamentalRights are meant for the citizen while Directive Principles of State Policy are meant for the State. In other words FundamentalRights are individualistic and meant for individual citizens while Directive Principles of State Policy are socialistic in nature and want to establish equality and justice in the society.
b) FundamentalRights are enforceable in the courts. Individual can move to the court seeking legal assistance if FundamentalRights are usurped by force. On the other hand Directive Principles of State Policy are not enforceable and no one can go to the courts to compel the State for their proper implementation.
c) Further, courts are bound to declare as void(with few exceptions) any law that is inconsistent with any of the FundamentalRights On the other hand for Directive Principles the courts can not declare as void any law which in conflict with any of the Directive Principles.
d) FundamentalRights are automatically enforced. While Directive Principles, on the other hand, need legislation or policy intervention for their proper implementation so long as there is no law carrying out the policy laid down in the Directive Principles.
e) FundamentalRights seek to establish political democracy while directive principles seek to...