Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

29. Chandrachud, C.J., in Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, , highlighted the significance of the perception that Parts III and IV together constitute the core commitment to social revolution and they, together, are the conscience of the Constitution. "Granville Austin's observation brings out the true position that Parts III and IV are like two wheels of a chariot, one no less important than the other. You snap one and the other will lose its efficacy. They are like a twin formula for achieving the social revolution, which is the ideal which the visionary founders of the Constitution set before themselves. In other words, the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between Parts III and IV........ This harmony and balance between fundamental rights and directive principles is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution........It is in this sense that Parts III and IV together constitute the core of our Constitution and combine to form its conscience. Anything that destroys the balance between the two parts will ipso facto destroy an essential element of the basic structure of our Constitution.......It is not possible to fit fundamental rights and directive principles in two distinct and strictly defined categories, but it may be stated broadly that fundamental rights represent civil and political rights while directive principles embody social and economic rights. Both are clearly part of the broad spectrum of human rights....... The only distinguishing feature, to my mind, between fundamental rights and directive principles is that whereas the former are enforceable in a Court of law, the latter, are not. And the reason for this is obvious."