In State of Kerala vs. Protect the rights of a citizen and work at a macro level. The court further said that where two interpretation of the law is possible, and one interpretation validates the law while other interpretation makes the law unconstitutional and void, then the first interpretation which validates the law should be adopted.
Union of India,the Supreme Court said that no difference can be made between the 2 sets of rights.
Now in the case of Pathumma vs. Conclusion It can be concluded by saying that the basic feature of the constitution is to maintain harmony between fundamental rights and DPSP.
For better understanding about the conflict between DPSP and Fundamental Rights lets study some of the important case laws and then we can decide what happens when a conflict arises between both of them. Now, what is the Doctrine of Harmonious Construction?
That there is a fine balance in the original Constitution as between the DPSP and the Fundamental Rights, which should be adhered to by the Courts by a harmonious reading of the two categories of provisions, instead of giving any general preference to the DPSP.
DPSPs are not enforceable by law, but just directives to the state.
These are non justifiable i.