NEW DELHI: In a landmark verdict to protect the interests of landowners against acquisition of their property by govt, Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that all acquisitions would have to pass the test of Article 300A which grants people constitutional right to property and said acquisition can be done only for public purpose, under authority of law and after following a due procedure.
Observing that under the current constitutional scheme, the right to property is protected as a constitutional right and has even been interpreted to be a human right, a bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Aravind Kumar propounded seven basic procedural rights of landowners which must be followed and fulfilled for any valid acquisition.
Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Narasimha said Article 300A confers seven rights to landowners and commensurate duties to state, which are: i) Duty of State to inform the owners that it intends to acquire his property – right to notice; ii) Duty of State to hear objections – right to be heard; iii) Duty of State to inform its decision on acquisition – right to a reasoned decision; iv) Duty of State to demonstrate that acquisition is for public cause – acquisition only for public purpose; v) Duty of State to restitute and rehabilitate – right to fair compensation; vi) Duty of State to conduct the process of acquisition efficiently and within prescribed timelines – right to an efficient conduct; and vii) Final conclusion of the proceedings leading to vesting – the right of conclusion.
“In various decisions interpreting Article 300A, this court has also held that a person can be deprived of his right to property only through the procedure established by law. The State must mandatorily comply with the procedure which has been provided under the statute for an acquisition to be valid under Article 300A. Therefore, a valid acquisition of property is premised on the law providing a procedure for such acquisition and the State complying with this statutory procedure. Procedural justice is therefore a significant mandate of Article 300A. The existence of and adherence to procedural safeguards is crucial for the protection of the right to property as they ensure fairness, transparency, natural justice, and non-arbitrary exercise of power in the process of acquisition,” he said.
The court said a reasonable and just procedure enables the person affected by the decision to transcend his personal interest and accept the larger public purpose that the acquisition seeks to subserve. “The seven steps may be procedures, but they do constitute the real content of the right to property under Article 300A, non-compliance of these procedures will amount to violation of the right. An action of acquiring property without following due procedure would be outside the authority of law,” the court said.
SC quashed the decision of Kolkata Municipal Corporation to acquire private land at Narkeldanga North Road to build a public park. It said the law does not authorise the body to acquire the land and the acquisition was illegal.
Observing that under the current constitutional scheme, the right to property is protected as a constitutional right and has even been interpreted to be a human right, a bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Aravind Kumar propounded seven basic procedural rights of landowners which must be followed and fulfilled for any valid acquisition.
Writing the judgment for the bench, Justice Narasimha said Article 300A confers seven rights to landowners and commensurate duties to state, which are: i) Duty of State to inform the owners that it intends to acquire his property – right to notice; ii) Duty of State to hear objections – right to be heard; iii) Duty of State to inform its decision on acquisition – right to a reasoned decision; iv) Duty of State to demonstrate that acquisition is for public cause – acquisition only for public purpose; v) Duty of State to restitute and rehabilitate – right to fair compensation; vi) Duty of State to conduct the process of acquisition efficiently and within prescribed timelines – right to an efficient conduct; and vii) Final conclusion of the proceedings leading to vesting – the right of conclusion.
“In various decisions interpreting Article 300A, this court has also held that a person can be deprived of his right to property only through the procedure established by law. The State must mandatorily comply with the procedure which has been provided under the statute for an acquisition to be valid under Article 300A. Therefore, a valid acquisition of property is premised on the law providing a procedure for such acquisition and the State complying with this statutory procedure. Procedural justice is therefore a significant mandate of Article 300A. The existence of and adherence to procedural safeguards is crucial for the protection of the right to property as they ensure fairness, transparency, natural justice, and non-arbitrary exercise of power in the process of acquisition,” he said.
The court said a reasonable and just procedure enables the person affected by the decision to transcend his personal interest and accept the larger public purpose that the acquisition seeks to subserve. “The seven steps may be procedures, but they do constitute the real content of the right to property under Article 300A, non-compliance of these procedures will amount to violation of the right. An action of acquiring property without following due procedure would be outside the authority of law,” the court said.
SC quashed the decision of Kolkata Municipal Corporation to acquire private land at Narkeldanga North Road to build a public park. It said the law does not authorise the body to acquire the land and the acquisition was illegal.