False
Download Learnerz IAS app from the Play Store now! Download

$show=search/label/May%202022

 


Right to property UPSC NOTE

 Evolution and controversies

  • The right to property — initially envisaged as a fundamental right and later as a constitutional right — has witnessed an interesting history in the post-colonial era

  • The genesis of this power struggle dates back to the case of Bela Banerjee which involved the interpretation of Articles 19(1)(f) and 31(2) of the Constitution (prior to amendment). 

  • The Supreme Court of India held that the word compensation in Article 31(2) postulated “a just equivalent of what the owner has been deprived of”

  • To undo this interpretation, the Constitution (Fourth) Amendment was passed in 1955 amending, inter alia, Article 31(2) to expressly state that the courts could not delve into the question of inadequacy of compensation.

  • To retaliate, the courts then devised an ingenious plan: they held that although the final compensation was non-justiciable, the principles fixed by the legislature to arrive at such determination would be open to scrutiny.

  • Parliament, for its part, realised that the word “compensation” in Article 31(2) was the source of all mischief. 

  • Vide the Constitution (Twenty-Fifth) Amendment Act, 1971 the word “compensation” was substituted by the word “amount” which kept the interpretation of the courts at bay. 

  • Thus, acquisition of property could now be effected through the medium of eminent domain (the state) by paying the landowner an “amount” (as distinguished) from “compensation”. 

  • The adequacy of such “amount” was consequently not open to judicial review.

  • Though the validity of the Constitution (Twenty-Fifth) Amendment Act, 1971 was upheld in Kesavananda Bharati, the Supreme Court watered down the intended effect of the amended Article 31(2) by an interpretive process .

  • The majority in Kesavananda Bharati took the view that though the adequacy of the amount paid was not justiciable, the courts could still examine whether the principles fixed for determining such compensation were relevant which in effect, reinstated what Justice Shah had said in the bank nationalisation case

  • After this decision, Parliament was convinced that the right to property remained a proverbial thorn in the goal of achieving a socialist state.

  • After the defeat of the Congress in the general election of 1977, the Janata Party, which came to power, passed the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978

  • The right to property under Article 19(1)(f) was deleted from Part III and rehabilitated in the form of a constitutional right under Article 300-A

  • Article 31, which had witnessed much controversy in the matter of the determination of compensation was also deleted

  • In the years that have followed the deletion of Articles 19(1)(f) and 31, the Supreme Court has held that the right to property is not only a constitutional right but also a human right

  • In the case of M.C. Mehta, the Supreme Court held that to be a valid law, it must be just, fair and reasonable

  • In other words, though the right to property was not a fundamental right, a law which deprived a person of his property must answer to the requirements of Articles 14,19 and 21

  • In B.K. Ravichandra, the Court went a step further and observed that the phrasing of Article 300A had a striking resemblance to Articles 21 and 265 and hence its guarantee could not be read down.


Recent developments

  • The recent decision of the Supreme Court in Kolkata Municipal Corporation has fleshed out seven different facets which are protected under Article 300-A

  • These are: The right to notice; the right to be heard; the right to a reasoned decision; the duty to acquire only for public purpose; the right of restitution or fair compensation; the right to an efficient and expeditious process; the right of conclusion.

  • The Court has concluded that the absence of even one of these features would render the law susceptible to challenge

  • The right to restitution or fair compensation judicially affirms the position prevailing when the unamended Article 31 was in force, and the interpretation expounded in the Bela Banerjee case on the aspect of payment of compensation

  • A person deprived of land by the state in the exercise of its power of eminent domain is entitled to be paid compensation which is just and reasonable

  • The Court, in Kolkata Municipal Corporation, has reiterated that deprivation or extinguishment of that right is permissible only upon restitution, be it in the form of monetary compensation, rehabilitation or similar means

  • Thus, the requirement of paying compensation. i.e., money’s worth of the property acquired, which was the original position in the Bela Banerjee case has now been reinstated.

  • The wheel has come full circle.

COMMENTS

Name

Amritsar,1,April 2024,301,Art & Culture,1,August 2023,251,Courses,7,Daily Current Affairs,48,December 2023,189,Disaster Management,2,Environment and Ecology,148,February 2024,228,Foundation Course,1,GDP,1,GEMS Club,1,GEMS Plus,1,Geography,154,Govt Schemes,2,GS 2,1,GS1,6,GS2,36,GS3,15,GST,1,History,9,Home,3,IAS Booklist,1,Important News,71,Indian Economy,118,Indian History,2,Indian Polity,135,International Organisation,12,International Relations,97,Invasive Plant,1,January 2024,240,July 2023,281,June 2022,6,June 2023,268,June 2024,173,March 2024,238,May 2022,17,May 2024,330,Mentorship,2,November 2023,169,October 2023,203,Places in News,2,Science & Technology,66,Science and Technology,90,September 2023,205,UPSC CSE,111,
ltr
item
Learnerz IAS | Concept oriented UPSC Classes in Malayalam: Right to property UPSC NOTE
Right to property UPSC NOTE
https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdOLiUbJx4D4XGQv10MRA3yTnXBXAj92U_mGd1Y17OH1J5KaF7huB4fkrc5qa1lOEc1nuEryi5Vbuija13n9CyzX6A3pFnqtlDPrpcMX8F07s-I7NhNUvFW8Ts0Z50Rloz76Rc8LP2c5HXnO6brxs6nGLB-?key=ccRAJL011O4fpQrb0VXCmA
https://lh7-us.googleusercontent.com/docsz/AD_4nXdOLiUbJx4D4XGQv10MRA3yTnXBXAj92U_mGd1Y17OH1J5KaF7huB4fkrc5qa1lOEc1nuEryi5Vbuija13n9CyzX6A3pFnqtlDPrpcMX8F07s-I7NhNUvFW8Ts0Z50Rloz76Rc8LP2c5HXnO6brxs6nGLB-=s72-c?key=ccRAJL011O4fpQrb0VXCmA
Learnerz IAS | Concept oriented UPSC Classes in Malayalam
https://www.learnerz.in/2024/06/right-to-property-upsc-note.html
https://www.learnerz.in/
https://www.learnerz.in/
https://www.learnerz.in/2024/06/right-to-property-upsc-note.html
true
4761292069385420868
UTF-8
Loaded All Posts Not found any posts VIEW ALL Readmore Reply Cancel reply Delete By Home PAGES POSTS View All RECOMMENDED FOR YOU LABEL ARCHIVE SEARCH ALL POSTS Not found any post match with your request Back Home Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat January February March April May June July August September October November December Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec just now 1 minute ago $$1$$ minutes ago 1 hour ago $$1$$ hours ago Yesterday $$1$$ days ago $$1$$ weeks ago more than 5 weeks ago Followers Follow THIS PREMIUM CONTENT IS LOCKED STEP 1: Share to a social network STEP 2: Click the link on your social network Copy All Code Select All Code All codes were copied to your clipboard Can not copy the codes / texts, please press [CTRL]+[C] (or CMD+C with Mac) to copy Table of Content