Skip to main content

Fundamental Duties Under Article 51-a

 Fundamental Duties Under Article 51-a

Our country, India, boasts the world's longest written constitution. Every person's rights are respected in this process. The three organs of the state, on the other hand, will not be able to make this country self-sufficient unless they receive adequate support from the inhabitants. As a result, citizens are required to fulfil some essential responsibilities. We shall explore the Fundamental Duties that people of our country are supposed to perform in this essay. Citizens have a moral duty to maintain a sense of patriotism and solidarity among all citizens of the nation.

This was an instance of the year 2007 when I was still a child and knowing nothing about the Fundamental Duties. However, today I can clearly say that it was a breach of fundamental duty. Fundamental Duties are applied only to the citizens of the country, not to any organ of the state.

It is critical to recognise that no democratic system can thrive unless individuals are willing to actively engage by carrying out the obligations that are required of them.

Our Constitution has given us different privileges in exchange for which we must undertake certain obligations. Article 51(A) discusses these Fundamental Duties and lists 11 responsibilities that people are obliged to do (there were 10 earlier and 11th was added later by the 86th amendment).

We need to follow our Constitution and should respect our national flag and national anthem.

Should follow the ideals of the freedom struggle.

Protect the sovereignty and integrity of our nation.

Protect our nation and provide national services when required.

Should have the spirit of a common brotherhood.

Preserve the culture of our country.

Protect the environment of our country.

Generate scientific rationale for every thought.

To protect public property.

Strive for excellence.

It is the duty of every parent to send their children between 6-14 years to school.    

From these fundamental duties, one can easily understand the need for the fundamental duty in our constitution. It is required to protect the sovereignty of our nation. To maintain the unity and integrity of our nation. Rights and duties go hand in hand and cannot be separated at any cost. Fundamental duties and fundamental rights are two sides of a coin which we know that it can’t be separated. Also, it is found as the need of the hour to introduce fundamental duties in our constitution.

Our constitution included it once our government understood that a civil society (described earlier in this article) could not be created only by the state. Our country's citizens must play a critical role in accomplishing our constitution's primary goal. They can do so by implementing Article 51A of our Constitution, which outlines their responsibilities to the country.

The Fundamental Duty, given in Article 51 A(g) of the Indian Constitution clearly mentions the duty of the citizen to protect the environment. According to this article, it is the duty of every citizen to protect and preserve the natural environment (natural environment includes forest, rivers, lakes, and wildlife). A healthy environment is an essential element of the welfare of any society.


In the case of M.C. Mehta v. Union of India Article 51(g) was enforced by the Supreme Court. In this case, 274.50 million liters of sewage water was being discharged into the river Ganga on a daily basis. This case is about the city of Kanpur, which is the biggest city on the bank of river Ganga. Here water pollution was to a great extent that’s why the petitioner filed a petition in the Supreme Court. Here Apex Court of the country found that Municipal bodies and industries in Kanpur were the main reason for polluting the river. Therefore judgment was taken against Kanpur Nagar Mahapalika. In this case, Nagar Mahapalika and Municipal Boards were held liable because it is their responsibility to maintain and protect the environment in the areas of Kanpur.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Section 58B of The Advocates Act - Special provision relating to certain disciplinary proceedings

 Section 58B The Advocates Act Description (1) As from the 1st day of September, 1963, every proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate of a High Court shall, save as provided in the first proviso to sub-section (2), be disposed of by the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if the existing advocate had been enrolled as an advocate on its roll. (2) If immediately before the said date, there is any proceeding in respect of any disciplinary matter in relation to an existing advocate pending before any High Court under the Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 (38 of 1926), such proceeding shall stand transferred to the State Bar Council in relation to that High Court, as if it were a proceeding pending before the corresponding Bar Council under clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 56: Provided that where in respect of any such proceeding the High Court has received the finding of a Tribunal constituted under section 11 of the Indian B
Post a Comment
Read more

Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of ClaimantCase Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant. TOLLEY Vs, J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement. Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be asked to resign from his respective club. Furthermore, there was evidence that the possible adverse effects of the caricature on the claimant’s reputation were brought to the defendants’ attention. The trial judge found that the caricature could have a defamatory meaning. The jury then found in favor of the claimant. Held The House of Lords held that in the circumstances of this case – as explained by the facts – the caricature was capable of constituting defamation. In other words, the publication could have the meaning alleged by the claimant. The Lords also ordered a new trial limited to the assessment of damages. NEWSTEAD V LANDON EXPRESS NEWSPAPER LTD, (1939) Facts: A newspaper published a defamatory article about Harold Newstead. However, another person with this name brought an action in libel. He claimed that the article had been misunderstood as leading to him. The defendant newspaper recognised that they published the article. Also, they denied that they had the intention of being defamatory of him. Consequently, the claimant argued that the newspaper was under a duty. The duty was to give a clear and complete description of the correct person. Moreover, the claimant argued that the defendants were in breach of the duty. Issues: The issue in Newstead v London Express Newspaper, was if the reasonable persons would have understood the words complained of to refer to the plaintiff. Held: The Court of Appeal stated that in accordance with the current law on libel, liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer; but on the fact of the defamation. Accordingly, a reasonable man, in this case a newspaper publisher, must be aware of the possibility of individuals with the same name and must assume that the words published will be read by a reasonable man with reasonable care.

  Case Laws related to Defamation in favour of Claimant.  TOLLEY  Vs,  J.S FRY & SONS LTD – (1931) Facts The defendants were owners of chocolate manufacturing company. They advertised their products with a caricature of the claimant, who was a prominent amateur golfer, showing him with the defendants’ chocolate in his pocket while playing golf. The advertisement compared the excellence of the chocolate to the excellence of the claimant’s drive. The claimant did not consent to or knew about the advertisement.   Issue The claimant alleged that the advertisement suggested that he agreed to his portrait being used for commercial purposes and for financial gain. He further claimed that the use of his image made him look like someone who prostituted his reputation for advertising purposes and was thus unworthy of his status. At trial, several golfers gave evidence to the effect that if an amateur sold himself for advertisement, he no longer maintained his amateur status and might be aske
1 comment
Read more

Rules as to delivery of goods

                             Rules as to delivery of goods Section 2(2) of Sale of Goods Act defines ‘delivery’ as a ‘voluntary transfer of possession from one person to another.’ Thus, if the transfer of goods is not voluntary and is taken by theft, by fraud, or by force, then there is no ‘delivery. Moreover, the ‘delivery’ should have the effect of putting the goods in possession of the buyer. The essence of the delivery is a voluntary transfer of possession of goods from one person to another. There is no delivery of goods where they are obtained at pistol point or theft. 1. Mode of Delivery: According to Section 33, delivery of goods sold may be made by doing anything which the parties agree shall be treated as delivery or which has the effect of putting the goods in the possession of the buyer or of any person authorized to hold them on his behalf. Delivery of goods may be actual, symbolic or constructive. 2. Expenses of Delivery: According to Section 36(5), unless otherwise agree
Post a Comment
Read more