Directive principles are not enforceable by the courts. The sanction behind them, is political. As Dr. Ambedkar observed in the Constituent Assembly, "If any government ignores them, they will certainly have to answer for them before the electorate at the election time.
" DPSP is part of the Constitution. Article 37 unequivocally enjoins that 'It shall be the duty of the state to apply these principle in making laws'. Hence it should be competent for the Union to issue directions against particular states to introduce compulsory education for children Article 45, to prevent Slaughter of Cows (Art. 48), prohibition of alcoholic drinks Art (47).
In case of refusal to comply with such directions issued by the Union, it may apply Art 365 against such recalcitrant state. Sir lvor Jennings characterized DPSP "Ouiys Aspiration" and also questioned the utility of importing it into India of the 19th Century, English Philosophy of 'Fabian Socialism without the socialism' Granville Austin considers these directives to be "aimed at furthering the goals of the social revolution.
" Besides the Directives contained in part IV, there are certain other Directives addressed to the state in other parts of the Constitution. Art 350 A enjoins every state and every local authority within the state to provide adequate facilities for instructions in the mother-tongue at the primary stage of education.
Art 351 enjoins to promote the spread of the Hindi language. These instructions are not part of DPSP but carry the same value.
Who said "Directive Principles are merely furthering the goal of Social Revolution"?