Explanation- Constitutional philosophy of social justice

It is in this context this Court’s observations in Dharwad Distt. PWD Literate Daily Wage Employees Assn. v. State of Karnataka (1990) 2 SCC 396 seem to be rather apposite. This Court upon consideration of Randhir Singh v. Union of India (Daily Rated Casual Labour Employed under P and T Dept. through Bhartiya Dak Tar Mazdoor Manch v. Union of India) (1988) 1 SCC 122 as also Surinder Singh v. Engineer-in-chief (1986) 1 SCC 639 and D. S. Nakara v. Union of India (1983) 1 SCC 305 observed in paragraphs 14 and 15 as below:

“14. We would like to point out that the philosophy of this Court as evolved in the cases we have referred to above is not that of the court but is ingrained in the Constitution as one of the basic aspects and if there was any doubt on this there is no room for that after the Preamble has been amended and the Forty-second Amendment has declared the Republic to be a socialistic one. The judgments, therefore, do nothing more than highlight one aspect of the constitutional philosophy and make an attempt to give the philosophy a reality of flesh and blood.

15. Jawaharlal Nehru, the first Prime Minister of this Republic while dreaming of elevating the lot of the common man of this country once stated:

“Our final aim can only be a classless society with equal economic justice and opportunity to all, a society organised on a planned basis for the raising of mankind to higher material and cultural levels. Everything that comes in the way will have to be removed gently, if possible; forcibly if necessary, and there seems to be little doubt that coercion will often be necessary.”

These were his prophetic words about three decades back. More than a quarter of century has run out since he left us but there has yet been no percolation in adequate dose of the benefits the constitutional philosophy stands for to the lower strata of society. Tolstoy wrote:

“The abolition of slavery has gone on for a long time. Rome abolished slavery. America abolished it and we did but only the words were abolished, not the thing.” Perhaps what Tolstoy wrote about abolition of slavery in a large sense applies to what we have done to the constitutional ethos. It has still remained on paper and is contained in the book. The benefits have not yet reached the common man. What Swami Vivekananda wrote in a different context may perhaps help a quicker implementation of the goal to bring about the overdue changes for transforming India in a positive way and in fulfilling the dreams of the Constitution fathers. These were the words of the Swami:

“It is imperative that all this various yogas should be carried out in practice. Mere theories about them will not do any good. First we have to hear about them; then we have to think about them. We have to reason the thoughts out, impress them on our minds and meditate on them; realise them, until at last they become our whole life. No longer will religion remain a bundle of ideas or theories or an intellectual assent; it will enter into our very self. By means of an intellectual assent, we may today subscribe to many foolish things, and change our minds altogether tomorrow. But true religion never changes. Religion is realisation; not talk, nor doctrine, nor theories, however beautiful they may be. It is being and becoming, not hearing or acknowledging. It is the whole soul’s becoming changed into what it believes. That is religion.”

9. As a matter of fact the constitutional philosophy should be allowed to become a part of every man’s life in this country and then only the Constitution can reach everyone and the ideals of the Constitution framers would be achieved since the people would be nearer the goal set by the Constitution – an ideal situation but a far cry presently.

%d bloggers like this: