DPSP and Fundamental Duties: RAS Prelims MCQs
99 RAS Prelims MCQs on the Directive Principles of State Policy and the Fundamental Duties cover the nature of the Directives, individual Articles, the amendments that added to them and the duties in Part IVA. Questions ask for the Article number, the subject and the amendment, and the explanations show how Directives differ from Fundamental Rights.
Practice questions based on the RPSC RAS Prelims syllabus. They follow the exam pattern but are not past-paper questions.
Showing 41–50 of 99 questions
Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R):
Assertion (A): The Supreme Court in the Minerva Mills case struck down the extension of Article 31C made by the 42nd Amendment Act.
Reason (R): The extension destroyed the harmony and balance between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles, which is an essential feature of the basic structure of the Constitution. In the context of the above statements, which one of the following is correct?
Explanation
In the Minerva Mills case, the Supreme Court struck down the expansion of Article thirty-one-C because it gave absolute primacy to Directive Principles over fundamental rights. The court held that such an imbalance would destroy the harmony between the two, which is an essential feature of the basic structure. The Constitution relies on a delicate balance between these two sets of provisions.Explanation
The Minerva Mills case of nineteen eighty is a landmark judgment that emphasized the importance of the relationship between rights and directives. The Supreme Court declared that the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between fundamental rights and Directive Principles. To give absolute primacy to one over the other would disturb the core constitutional harmony and basic structure.Explanation
The current legal position is that fundamental rights generally enjoy supremacy over Directive Principles. However, a law implementing the socialistic directives of Article thirty-nine (b) or (c) is constitutionally protected even if it violates Articles fourteen or nineteen. This specific exception, upheld by the Supreme Court, ensures that vital socio-economic reforms can be enacted without being hindered by certain individual rights.| Supreme Court Case | Key Outcome/Ruling |
|---|---|
| A. Champakam Dorairajan Case | i. Basic structure doctrine established |
| B. Golaknath Case | ii. DPSPs are subsidiary to Fundamental Rights |
| C. Kesavananda Bharati Case | iii. Balance between FRs and DPSPs is part of the basic structure |
| D. Minerva Mills Case | iv. Fundamental Rights cannot be amended to implement DPSPs |
Explanation
The Champakam Dorairajan case made directives subsidiary to rights, while the Golaknath case made rights unamendable for directives. The Kesavananda Bharati case introduced the basic structure doctrine, and the Minerva Mills case established that the balance between rights and directives is itself a basic feature. These cases represent the judicial journey towards reconciling individual liberties with the collective goals of the state.Explanation
The Fundamental Duties were not part of the original Constitution but were added during the internal emergency in nineteen seventy-six. The Swaran Singh Committee was appointed by the government to make recommendations about these duties. Based on its suggestions, the forty-second amendment act introduced a new part and article to remind citizens that they have obligations alongside their constitutional rights.Explanation
The forty-second amendment act created a new Part four-A in the Constitution of India, which consists of only one article, fifty-one-A. This article originally listed ten fundamental duties for citizens, later increased to eleven. This addition was meant to provide a clear set of ethical and civic expectations for the people, complementing the Directive Principles and the existing fundamental rights.I. Imposition of penalty or punishment for non-compliance with duties.
II. Duty to pay taxes should be a Fundamental Duty.
III. No law imposing a penalty for non-compliance of duties shall be questioned in any court.
Which of the above recommendation(s) was/ were NOT incorporated into the Constitution of India?
Explanation
While the Swaran Singh Committee recommended several duties, the government did not accept all of them. Specifically, the recommendations to impose penalties for non-compliance, to make the duty to pay taxes a fundamental duty, and to protect such penalty laws from judicial scrutiny were excluded. Consequently, the duties added to the Constitution were framed as non-justiciable ethical exhortations for citizens.Explanation
When the forty-second amendment act of nineteen seventy-six was enacted, it introduced a total of ten fundamental duties into Article fifty-one-A. These duties covered various aspects of civic life, such as respecting the Constitution and protecting the environment. It was only much later, in two thousand two, that an eleventh duty was added to this list through another constitutional amendment act.I. To uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India
II. To abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions
III. To defend the country and render national service
IV. To cherish and follow the noble ideals that inspired the national struggle
Select the correct answer using the codes below:
Explanation
The fundamental duties are listed in a specific alphabetical order under Article fifty-one-A. The first duty is to abide by the Constitution, followed by cherishing the ideals of the national struggle. Protecting the sovereignty and integrity of India comes third, and the fourth duty is to defend the country and render national service. This sequence reflects the priorities of the state.Answer key for these questions
| Q | Correct answer |
|---|---|
| 41 | (c) It extended Article 31C to all principles in Part IV |
| 42 | (a) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A. |
| 43 | (d) Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles |
| 44 | (b) Rights prevail, but Article 39(b) and (c) can override Article 14 and 19 |
| 45 | (c) A-ii, B-iv, C-i, D-iii |
| 46 | (d) Swaran Singh Committee |
| 47 | (a) Part IVA, Article 51A |
| 48 | (d) I, II and III |
| 49 | (b) 10 |
| 50 | (a) II, IV, I, III |
Key facts from DPSP and Fundamental Duties
- The Directive Principles are non-justiciable but fundamental in the governance of the country; they are in Part IV, and Fundamental Duties are in Part IVA.
- The Constitution does not classify the Directives, though they are grouped as socialist, Gandhian and liberal-intellectual.
- Article 38 asks the State to secure a social order based on social, economic and political justice.
- Article 39 deals with the equitable distribution of resources, and Article 39A, added by the 42nd Amendment, provides for equal justice and free legal aid.
- Article 41 covers the right to work, education and public assistance in unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement.
- Article 42 provides for just and humane conditions of work and maternity relief.
Frequently asked questions
How many RAS Prelims practice MCQs are there on DPSP and Fundamental Duties?
This page has 99 practice MCQs on DPSP and Fundamental Duties (Indian Polity and Governance). Each has the correct answer, and most have an explanation.
Are the Directive Principles enforceable in court?
No. They are non-justiciable, which means a court cannot enforce them, but they are fundamental in the governance of the country. The State is expected to apply them in making laws and policies.
Which Amendment added Article 39A?
The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976. Article 39A directs the State to promote equal justice and to provide free legal aid so that opportunities for justice are not denied by economic or other disabilities.
In which Parts are the DPSP and the Fundamental Duties?
The Directive Principles are in Part IV (Articles 36 to 51) and the Fundamental Duties in Part IVA (Article 51A). The duties were added by the 42nd Amendment on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee.