Q. “The Right to Work in India has evolved from a Directive Principle into a statutory entitlement, but its constitutional status remains contested.” Discuss with reference to Articles 21 and 41. (15 marks, 250 words)
Directions: Intro-----Article 41 & 21 + From directive principle to statutory entitlement------Conclusion.
Introduction:
Briefly describe the right to work.
Main Body
Constitutional foundation — Article 41
- Article 41 (DPSP) – State to make effective provision for the right to work, education and public assistance in cases of unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement.
- However, it is non-justiciable; its implementation is subject to the limits of the State’s economic capacity.
- The Constitution does not create an unconditional, enforceable right to employment for every citizen.
Expansion through Article 21
- Article 21 – Right to life and personal liberty – expanded through various judicial interpretations.
- Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) – The SC recognised the close relationship between the right to livelihood and the right to life, observing that deprivation of livelihood can affect the ability to live.
- Article 21 provides an indirect constitutional foundation for protecting livelihood.
From directive principle to statutory entitlement — Example: MGNREGA
- MGNREGA, 2005 represents a major shift – making employment a demand-driven statutory entitlement.
- Failure to provide employment attracted an unemployment allowance.
- Creating a social-security mechanism during rural distress.
- Strengthening livelihood security and rural purchasing power.
- Giving practical effect to Article 41.
- Panchayats and social audits are provided.
- Thus, MGNREGA did not make the Right to Work a Fundamental Right; rather, Parliament has given statutory force as a component of Article 41.
Conclusion:
Give a balanced conclusion and suggest some measures.
Evolution of the Right to Work in India illustrates the dynamic interaction between FR, DPSP and legislation.
