The Right to Property in India has undergone significant changes since the adoption of the Constitution in 1950. Initially, it was recognized as a fundamental right but was later reclassified as a legal right under Article 300-A due to various socio-economic reforms.
Evolution of the Right to Property
Initial Recognition as a Fundamental Right
- The Right to Property was originally enshrined in Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 of the Constitution, allowing citizens to acquire, hold, and dispose of property.
- However, amendments were made over the years to address agrarian reforms and social inequalities. The First Amendment (1951) allowed the government to impose restrictions on property rights for public interest.
44th Amendment and Current Status
- The most significant change occurred with the 44th Amendment Act (1978), which repealed the fundamental right to property. Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 were omitted, and Article 300-A was introduced, stating that "no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." This change emphasized that while property rights are protected, they are not absolute and can be regulated by law.
Supreme Court Judgments on Right to Property
The Supreme Court of India has played a crucial role in interpreting and protecting the Right to Property under Article 300-A. Several landmark judgments have established important principles regarding this right.
Key Supreme Court Cases
1. Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980):
- The Court upheld the amendment abolishing the fundamental right to property but emphasized that it remains a constitutional right under Article 300-A.
2. Jilubhai Nanbhai Khachar v. State of Gujarat (1995):
- This case reinforced that even though property is no longer a fundamental right, it is still protected under Article 300-A as a constitutional right. SC held that the Right to Property is not a part of the Basic Structure Doctrine of the Constitution.
3. Kolkata Municipal Corporation and Ors. Vs. Bimal Kumar Shah and Ors.Decided On: 16.05.2024, Citation: MANU/SC/0450/2024.
https://www.lawweb.in/2024/06/supreme-court-right-to-property-7-sub.html
- In this case, the Supreme Court highlighted seven procedural rights that must be respected before property can be acquired by the state. These include:
- Right to notice
- Right to be heard
- Right to a reasoned decision
- Duty to demonstrate public purpose
- Right to fair compensation
- Duty for efficient acquisition processes
- Conclusion of proceedings leading to actual possession.
In this case, the Court ruled that compulsory acquisition without following proper procedures is unconstitutional, reinforcing that adherence to legal processes is integral to exercising the power of eminent domain.
Conclusion
The Right to Property in India has transitioned from being a fundamental right to a legal right under Article 300-A. While it is protected under constitutional law, its status as a legal rather than fundamental right means it is subject to regulation by law. The Supreme Court has established critical precedents ensuring that citizens are not deprived of their property without due process, thereby safeguarding their rights against arbitrary state action.
Print Page
No comments:
Post a Comment