THE CONTEXT: Property rights have been a contentious issue in India’s constitutional history, witnessing a fierce tussle between the judiciary and the legislature. Initially envisaged as a fundamental right, they have undergone significant transformations, reflecting the evolving socio-political landscape of post-colonial India. The journey of property rights highlights critical judicial interpretations and legislative amendments that have shaped their status.
THE ISSUES:
- Initial Vision and Fundamental Right: Property rights were fundamental under Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 of the Indian Constitution. This meant that any deprivation of property required just compensation and was subject to judicial review.
- Bela Banerjee Case: The Supreme Court in the Bela Banerjee case interpreted “compensation” under Article 31(2) as a just equivalent of what the owner was deprived of. This interpretation led to the Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act of 1955, which restricted the courts from questioning the adequacy of compensation.
- Twenty-Fifth Amendment: The Constitution (Twenty-Fifth Amendment) Act, 1971, replaced the word “compensation” with “amount,” thereby limiting judicial review over the adequacy of compensation. The Supreme Court upheld this amendment in the Kesavananda Bharati case but allowed judicial review of the principles for determining compensation.
- Forty-Fourth Amendment: The Constitution (Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, removed the right to property from the list of fundamental rights and reclassified it as a constitutional right under Article 300A. This amendment aimed to facilitate land reforms and reduce judicial interference in property acquisition cases.
- Supreme Court’s Stance: The Supreme Court has consistently held that laws depriving property must be just, fair, and reasonable. In cases like M.C. Mehta and K. Ravichandra, the Court emphasized that Article 300A’s protection is akin to the protections under Articles 21 and 265, ensuring that property rights cannot be arbitrarily infringed.
- Kolkata Municipal Corporation Case: In a recent landmark decision, the Supreme Court outlined seven facets of property rights under Article 300A: the right to notice, the right to be heard, the right to a reasoned decision, the duty to acquire only for public purposes, the right to fair compensation, the right to an efficient and expeditious process, and the right of conclusion. The absence of these features would render the law susceptible to challenge.
THE WAY FORWARD:
- Strengthening Judicial Review and Compensation Mechanisms: The Law Commission emphasizes fair compensation and procedural fairness in property acquisition. Implement clear guidelines for determining compensation, ensuring it reflects the property’s market value. Strengthen judicial review mechanisms to ensure that compensation principles are adhered to, and that property acquisition is for a public purpose.
- Establishing a Permanent Land Commission Recommendations: The Sarkaria Commission suggested establishing a permanent inter-state council to address land and property issues. Create a permanent Land Commission to oversee land acquisition processes, ensure compliance with legal standards, and address disputes efficiently.
- Enhancing Transparency and Public Participation: The National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) Advocated for greater transparency and public participation in governance. Mandate public hearings and consultations before any land acquisition, ensuring that affected parties have a voice. Implement robust information disclosure mechanisms to inform the public about land acquisition plans and compensation details.
- Implementing Comprehensive Rehabilitation and Resettlement Policies: K. Ravichandra Case Highlighted the importance of fair compensation and procedural safeguards. Law Commission Recommended comprehensive rehabilitation and resettlement policies for displaced persons. Develop and enforce comprehensive rehabilitation and resettlement policies that ensure displaced persons are adequately compensated and resettled. Provide alternative land or housing, employment opportunities, and other support to ensure displaced persons can rebuild their lives.
- Modernizing Land Records and Registration Systems: Article 265 ensures that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. The Vidya Devi Case Reaffirmed the need for fair compensation and procedural fairness. The National Statistical Commission stressed the importance of accurate and timely socio-economic data. Modernize land records and registration systems to ensure accuracy, transparency, and ease of access. Implement digital land records management systems to reduce disputes and enhance the efficiency of land transactions.
THE CONCLUSION:
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kolkata Municipal Corporation reaffirms the importance of fair compensation and procedural safeguards in property acquisition, echoing the principles established in the Bela Banerjee case. This development underscores the enduring significance of property rights, vindicating the prophetic insights of legal scholars and marking a full-circle moment in India’s constitutional journey.
UPSC PAST YEAR QUESTIONS:
Q.1 The Constitution of India is a living instrument with capabilities of enormous dynamism. It is a constitution made for a progressive society. Illustrate with reference to the expanding horizons of the right to life and personal liberty. 2023
Q.2 The right of movement and residence throughout the territory of India are freely available to Indian citizens, but these rights are not absolute. Comment 2022
Q.3 Examine the scope of Fundamental Rights considering the latest judgment of the Supreme Court on the Right to Privacy. 2017
Q.4 From inventing the ‘basic structure’ doctrine, the judiciary has played a highly proactive role in ensuring that India develops into a thriving democracy. Considering the statement, evaluate the role played by judicial activism in achieving the ideals of democracy. 2014
Q.5 The Supreme Court of India keeps a check on arbitrary power of the Parliament in amending the Constitution. Discuss critically. 2013
MAINS PRACTICE QUESTION:
Q.1 Discuss the evolution of the right to property in India from a fundamental right to a constitutional one. How has the judiciary interpreted the right to property post the 44th Amendment Act of 1978? Illustrate your answer with relevant case laws.
SOURCE:
Spread the Word