The Directive Principles are classified into three types:
We may understand the link between fundamental rights and Directive Principles of State Policy by looking into the two court judgments listed below.
In the event of a disagreement between fundamental rights and Directive Principles, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of the former would take precedence. Directive Principles were recognised as a subset of fundamental rights. The Supreme Court also declared that Parliament may change fundamental rights via a constitutional amendment act in order to enact Directive Principles.
As a result, the First Amendment Act (1951), the Fourth Amendment Act (1955), and the Seventeenth Amendment Act (1964) were enacted by Parliament to implement parts of the Directives.
The Supreme Court ruled that the 42nd Amendment Act’s expansion of Article 31C was illegal and unlawful. It subordinated Directive Principles to fundamental rights. In addition, the Supreme Court said that ‘the Indian constitution is established on the cornerstone of the balance between fundamental rights and Directive Principles’.
Following the case, the Supreme Court issued the following decisions:
The divisions of Directive Principles of State Policy are divided into three main categories—socialist, Gandhian, liberal-intellectual. Hence, it can be stated that the fundamental rights now have precedence over Directive Principles. However, Directive Principles may be put into action. The Parliament may alter the fundamental rights in order to achieve the Directive Principles, as long as the modification does not harm or destroy the constitution’s core framework.