6.24. Article 31C- Saving of laws giving effect to directive principles

Article 31C was inserted by the 25th Amendment Act in 1971 and protects laws implementing Directive Principles under 39(b), 39(c) from invalidation on the ground of violation of Article 14, 19 and 31.

Article 31-C had two parts. The first part protected a law giving effect to the policy of the state towards securing the principles specified in Articles 39 (b) and (c) from being challenged on the ground of infringement of the Fundamental Rights under Article 14, 19 and 31. The second part of Article 31 C originally sought to oust the jurisdiction of the courts to find out whether the law in question gave effect to the principles of Articles 39 (b) and 39 (c).

The second part was struck down in the Kesavananda Bharati case 1973, as it took away the powers of judicial review, which was held to be a basic feature of the constitution by the Supreme Court.

The scope of this Article was further extended through 42nd Amendment Act, in which the immunity was provided in favor of all the DPSPs against any of the fundamental rights. It provided that no law which gives effect to any of the directive principles (not just 39(b) and 39(C)) can be invalidated on the ground of violation of the Article 14 and 19.

However, the Apex Court in the Minerva Mill case, 1980 struck down the above provision and thereby restored the balance between fundamental rights and directive principles.