- Assertion (A) states that Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) are not independently enforceable in a Court of Law. This is explicitly stated in Article 37 of the Constitution, which says the provisions contained in Part IV (Directive Principles) "shall not be enforceable by any court". Thus, Assertion (A) is true. - Reason (R) states that DPSPs act as guide posts for legislation. Article 37 also states that "the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws". This means DPSPs are indeed intended to guide the State in making laws and framing policies. Thus, Reason (R) is true. - However, the fact that DPSPs guide legislation (R) does not explain why they are not enforceable in court (A). The non-enforceability is a characteristic distinct from their role as guidelines. Their non-justiciable nature is based on the idea that they are aspirations and ideals for the state to achieve over time, depending on resource availability and policy priorities, rather than immediate, legally binding rights against the state. Reason (R) describes the purpose and utility of DPSPs, while Assertion (A) describes their legal enforceability status. One does not explain the other.