PYQ Vault · Paper 1 · Planning & Economic Development

Comment on the relevance of the Directive Principles of State Policy in an era of liberalization and globalization.

How the answer moves

The flow snapshot — the routes in, the body, the counter-view and the routes out.

Flow snapshot — how the answer moves
Intro routes

Route 1 DPSP = Part IV, Arts 36–51 → Austin’s “conscience of the constitution” → liberalisation makes them more necessary, not redundant

Route 2 DPSP = welfare / social-justice directions to the state → post-1991 market shift puts their place in question → they gain relevance instead

Body flow

state after 1991: protector → regulator/facilitator → market fundamentalism + rising inequality + welfare retreat → DPSP hold welfare character against roll-back → supplement FRs with socio-economic guarantees (work, food, education, health, environment) → Arts 39(b)/39(c) resist wealth concentration → Cox’s internationalisation of the state → welfare under external pressure → equity matters more → proof in MGNREGA, NFSA, RTE + Air India Statutory Corporation v. United Labour Union (DPSP read as human rights)

Counter-view

market-fundamentalist call to “roll back the state” + welfare retrenchment → are DPSP outdated? → no: state’s retreat and widening inequality make the welfare compass more needed, not less

Conclusion routes

Route 1 DPSP ensure growth does not override social justice

Route 2 globalisation raises the stakes → DPSP keep a retreating, market-driven state tied to equity

Model answer

Handwritten, in the form it would be written in the examination hall.

Handwritten model answer — UPSC PSIR 2019, Planning & Economic Development