SC: Government can’t claim all private property
The Supreme Court ruled that the government cannot claim all private property as community resources. In an 8:1 decision, the bench emphasized that each case must consider factors like the property’s condition and public interest. Chief Justice DY Chandrachud stated that while the state can acquire resources for the community’s benefit, it cannot label all private assets as public property.
This judgment overturns Justice Krishna Iyer’s previous stance, which had allowed the state to acquire all private resources. Chief Justice Chandrachud clarified that Article 31C of the Constitution, upheld in the Kesavananda Bharati case, remains in effect. This article allows the state to make laws curtailing private property rights if it’s essential to uphold public welfare, but not to the extent of blanket acquisition.
The court noted that Section 4 of the 42nd Amendment aimed to modify Article 39B, permitting the state to redistribute certain resources. However, this cannot apply to all private properties indiscriminately. The court highlighted India’s economic evolution from a socialist to a market-oriented approach over the last 30 years. This shift is aimed at addressing challenges as a developing nation and fostering dynamic growth. Today, India is one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, reflecting the need for balanced economic policies that respect private ownership rights.
While the majority of the bench agreed on limiting the state’s claim on private property, Justice BV Nagarathna dissented. She believed in a broader view of community resources, aligning more closely with past socialist economic policies. However, Chief Justice Chandrachud and the majority maintained that India’s focus is on sustainable growth rather than a single economic model.
The nine-judge Constitution Bench included Chief Justice Chandrachud, Justices Hrishikesh Roy, JB Pardiwala, Rajesh Bindal, Augustine George Masih, Sudhanshu Dhulia, Satish Chandra Sharma, and Manoj Mishra. Only Justice Nagarathna dissented, supporting a more expansive view on state acquisition of private property.
