The Supreme Court on May 16 held that compulsory acquisition of private property for a “public purpose” without following mandatory procedures followed by a grant of compensation to the owners will not make the accession constitutional.
Key observations of Supreme Court
- The right to property is protected as a constitutional right and has even been interpreted to be a human right.
- The judgment upheld a Calcutta High Court order rejecting an appeal filed by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation defending its acquisition of a private land.
- The judgment noted that though the 44th Constitutional Amendment omitted the right to property as a fundamental right, Article 300A, which was simultaneously inserted into the Constitution, provided that “no person shall be deprived of his property, save by authority of law”.
- A person’s rights, even the history of liberty, have been safeguarded through the prescription and observance of mandatory procedures and processes of law. Procedure is an integral part of the ‘authority of law’ in Article 300A.
Seven basic procedural rights of private citizens
- The court laid down seven basic procedural rights of private citizens which constitute the “real content of the right to property under Article 300A” that the state should respect before depriving them of their private property. They include:
- the right to notice or the duty of the state to inform the person that it intends to acquire his property;
- the right of the citizen to be heard or the duty of the state to hear the objections to the acquisition;
- the right of the citizen to a reasoned decision or the duty of the state to inform the person of its decision to acquire property;
- the duty of the state to demonstrate that the acquisition is exclusively for public purpose;
- the right to fair compensation of the citizen;
- the duty of the state to conduct the process of acquisition efficiently and within prescribed timelines; and
- the conclusion of the proceedings leading to vesting or the right of conclusion.
