Fundamental Rights are stated in Part IV, Article 51A of the Indian Constitution. Having these fundamental duties enshrined in the Constitution of India brings it in consonance with the provision of Article 29(1).
Introduction
Fundamental Duties are stated in Part IVA under Article 51A of the Indian Constitution. Having these fundamental duties enshrined in the Constitution of India brings it in consonance with the provision of Article 29(1) stipulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These fundamental duties give the Indian constitution a socialist character, something that is visible in only some model constitutions around the world. India has borrowed the fundamental duties from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR).
The provisions of fundamental duties didn’t come in force with the adoption of Indian Constitution in 1950, rather it was introduced and inducted via 42nd Amendment in1976, on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee.
Originally upon induction, it consisted only of 10 fundamental duties, introduced to serve as a reminder for every citizen to share the responsibility of the nation’s development and reveal the essence of democratic values. The eleventh duty was added much later in 2002, via 86th Constitutional Amendment.[1]
Article 51A, Constitution of India
“51A. Fundamental duties.—It shall be the duty of every citizen of India—
(a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem;
(b) to cherish and follow the noble ideals which inspired our national struggle for freedom;
(c) to uphold and protect the sovereignty, unity and integrity of India;
(d) to defend the country and render national service when called upon to do so;
(e) to promote harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of India transcending religious, linguistic and regional or sectional diversities; to renounce practices derogatory to the dignity of women;
(f) to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture;
(g) to protect and improve the natural environment including forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife, and to have compassion for living creatures;
(h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;
(i) to safeguard public property and to abjure violence;
(j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement;
(k) who is a parent or guardian to provide opportunities for education to his child or, as the case may be, ward between the age of six and fourteen years.“
Types of Duties
Since ancient legal systems itself the concepts of rights and duties have been evolving together. This largely makes them complementary to each other. Being correlative in scope, the duties are categorized in the light of fundamental rights:
- Absolute Duties: These are the duties that can exist even without any fundamental right completing them. These are duties owed to persons by persons indefinitely, ruling out the option of dependency, as is stated by Austin[2] and C.K. Allen.[3]
- Relative Duties: These are the duties that are accompanied by a complementary right, such as the right to clean the environment, accompanied by duty to maintain an upkeep of the natural surroundings.
Enforceability of the fundamental duties
The Swaran Singh Committee originally recommended for the fundamental duties to have a binding value and be judicially enforceable. But the Parliament of India, looking at the (then) socio-economic status of the nation, refused to give it a binding authority. Nevertheless, with the brooding scope of judicial activism and advancement of environmental jurisprudence in association with the fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy, the Indian judiciary has started giving Article 51A legal significance.
The Supreme Court highlighted the importance of the existence of fundamental rights in the case of Chandra Bhavan Boarding v. State of Mysore[4] by laying down that “it is a fallacy to think that in our Constitution, there are only rights and no duties. The provisions in Part IV enable the legislature to build a welfare society and that object may be achieved to the extent the Directive principles are implemented by the legislation.”
In the case of Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh,[5] it was declared as a principle that ‘fundamental rights and directive principles of state policy can’t be read in isolation with the fundamental duties. Fundamental duties are correlative to fundamental rights and must be read cohesively.’
In the case of All India Institute of Medical Science Students’ Union v. All India Institute of Medical Science,[6] The court read fundamental duties along with fundamental rights, thus striking down the surmounted institutional reservation of 33% other than the 50% reservation discipline pre-existing, as violative of Article 14 of the Indian Constitution.
In the case of Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh,[7] The court interfered and issued a permanent injunction against the mining of Mussoorie Hills, owing to the fundamental duty under Article 51A(g) of the Indian Constitution. The Court held that detached from all economic goals, it was fundamental to keep the sustainability aspect in perspective, that focuses on social stability and protection, a duty placed on the shoulders of the government and the citizens.
In the case of M.C. Mehta (2) v. Union of India,[8] The court made mandatory for compulsory impairment of environment education to children in schools, at least for an hour in a week. It directed the central government to distribute books free of cost to facilitate the same and raise awareness about preservation of the environment.
Conclusion
Salmond says, “a right is an interest recognized and protected by a rule of right. It is any interest, respect for which is a duty, and this disregard of which is wrong.”[9]
Duguit opines that ‘no one has any other right than always to do his duty.’[10] for him, law is nothing but “embodiment of duties which an individual is supposed to perform as a part and parcel of the social organization for furtherance of social solidarity.”[11]
The essentiality of performance of duties for the perseverance of righteousness and justice in the society is the epicentre of the entire Bhagwad Geeta.[12]
The ambit of fundamental duties is increasing as the judiciary is aligning it with the sustainable development goals. We can, therefore, conclude that even if in black and white they have been declared to be non-enforceable in nature, practically, they are very much being enforced.
[1] Report of the Department of Justice, available at: Source Link. (Visited on: June 11, 2020).
[2] The Province of Jurisprudence Determined bu John Austin.
[3] Law in Making by C.K. Allen.
[4] 1970 AIR 2042.
[5] 1993 AIR 217.
[6] AIR 2001 SC 3262.
[7] AIR 1987 SC 359.
[8] AIR 1999 SC 1501.
[9] P.J. Fitzgerald, Salmond on Jurisprudence, 1966.
[10] Leon Duguit, Law & State (1917) 31 Har. Law Review
[11] Ibid.
[12] Verse 47 & 48, Bhagwad Geeta
