Skip to content

CS Professional · Labour Laws and Practice · Constitution and Labour Laws

A State government privatised a loss-making public sector unit and the workers argued that the right to work and a living wage must be read into Part III of the Constitution. A company secretary advising on the matter is asked how the Supreme Court has treated Directive Principles such as living wage (Article 43) in relation to Fundamental Rights. Which statement is correct?

Directive Principles are not directly enforceable in courts, but the Supreme Court uses them as aids to interpret Fundamental Rights like Article 21 and to judge the reasonableness of restrictions, seeking harmony between the two rather than treating either as automatically supreme.

  1. ADirective Principles are directly enforceable in court like Fundamental Rights, so a living wage can be claimed as a Fundamental Right
  2. BDirective Principles are not enforceable by courts themselves, but courts use them to interpret Fundamental Rights such as Article 21 and to test the reasonableness of restrictionsCorrect
  3. CDirective Principles override Fundamental Rights whenever they conflict, in every case
  4. DDirective Principles have no relevance to judicial interpretation of labour legislation

Explanation

Article 37 says Directive Principles are not enforceable by courts, yet the Supreme Court has repeatedly read them with Fundamental Rights (for example, Article 21 and the right to live with dignity) and treats them as guiding principles for interpreting labour laws. Option A is wrong because they remain non-justiciable on their own. The idea of blanket supremacy over Fundamental Rights is also incorrect, since the Court seeks harmony between the two.

Did you get it right without looking?

One question tells you little. A timed set on Constitution and Labour Laws shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.

Practise Constitution and Labour LawsFree diagnostic mock

More Constitution and Labour Laws questions