Right to property under article 300A of constitution
The Right to Property was superimposed by the forty fourth change Act, 1978, as a replacement Chapter four partly twelve of the Constitution that incorporates a single Article 300A. The change took away the right to property as a basic right and created it solely a constitutional right to be regulated by normal law. Article 19(1) (f) and Article thirty one were deleted. However, a replacement Article 300-A was inserted.
Article 300-A provides that “no person shall be bereft of his property save by authority of law”. Thus,the only condition to be complied with for the acquisition of personal property beneath Article 300-A could be a law of the general assembly. the aim that property be moved out or whether or not any compensation is paid (both these conditions were necessary beneath repealed Article 31) haven’t found place during this Article.
The impact of the change is that for violation of his right to property beneath Article 300-A, someone won’t be entitled to invoke the legal document jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beneath Article thirty two. He will, however, be entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of High Courts beneath Article 226. In Jilubhai Nanbhai Khachar v. State of Gujarat, the court ruled that in Article 300-A the right to property secured isn’t a basic feature of the Constitution. it’s solely a constitutional right. Article 300-A could be a constitutional right that has been given a standing of a basic right. The word ‘law’ suggests that a with validity enacted law that is simply, truthful and affordable.
Eminent Domain:-
Each Government has an inherent right to require and apply the personal estate happiness to individual voters for public use. This power is thought of as a legal right. It’s an offspring of political necessity. The proper rests upon the notable maxim – salus populi civil time suprema lex – which implies that the welfare of the folks or the general public is that the dominant law and conjointly on the maxim necessita public major civil time quam, which implies “public necessity is bigger than private”. So property could also be required and purchased underneath this power for Governmental workplace, libraries, slum clearance comes, public colleges, faculties and universities, public highways, public parks, railways, phone lines, dams, drainages, sewer and water systems and lots of different comes of public interest, convenience and welfare. The exercise of such power (compulsory acquisition by State) has been recognised within the jurisprudence of all civilised countries as conditioned by public necessity and payment of compensation. However the ability is subject to restrictions provided within the Constitution. In America there are unit limitations on the ability of legal right – (1) there should be a law authorising the taking of property, (2) property should be taken for public purpose and (3) simply compensation ought to be paid. In India, Article 31 obligates the same limitation on this power of legal right however Article 300-A imposes just one limitation on the ability of legal right i.e. authority of law.
Right to compensation in-built in Article 300A :-
In K.T. Plantation Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, during this case the Supreme Court commands that the need of public purpose is invariably the rule once an individual comes from his property. Principle of “eminent domain” requiring compensation isn’t seen incorporated in Article 30A because it is in Article 30 (1A) moreover as in ordinal precondition to Article 31A (1) though it may be inferred in Article 300-A. once deletion of Article 31(2), the question is whether or not there’s a demand of compensation to be paid once an individual is empty his property. The need of public purpose could be a pre- condition however ‘no’ compensation or ‘nil’ compensation or its ‘elusiveness’ must be even by the State on judicially justiciable standards. Measures designed to realise larger social justice could need lesser compensation. Such a limitation by itself won’t build legislation invalid, unconstitutional or confisatory.
Meaning of Property:-
The word ‘property’ utilised in Article 31, the Supreme Court has said “should run a liberal that means and will be extended to any or all those well recognised varieties of interest that have the badge or characteristic of ownership. The expression ‘property’ in Article 300-A is confined not solely to land alone. It includes intangibles like copyrights and alternative belongings and embraces each doable interest recognised by law. It enclosed each corporeal and unembodied rights. It includes cash, contract, interest in property, e.g., interest of associate degree allottee, licensee, mortgage holder or renter of a property. The Mahantship of a Hindu Temple, and shareholders interests within the company area unit recognised interest in property. The correct way to receive pension is property.
Pension and gratuity don’t seem to be bounty to be distributed by the Government to its workers on their retirement however area unit valuable right and property and any delay in settlement and payment therefrom should be visited with the penalty of payment of interest at this market rate. The liability to pay penal interest on these dues commences at the expiration of 2 months from the date of retirement. Within the instant case, the delay in payment of the higher than retirement advantages was because of the non- production of last pay certificate by the provision authority thus the government was vulnerable to pay interest.
In State of Jharkhand v. Jitendra Kumar Srivastava, it had been command by the Supreme Court that the worker UN agency gets a pension is tough attained profit and is within the nature of property that can’t be abstracted while not the group action of lae as per the provisions of Article-300A of the Constitutional. below Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules, the govt. might withhold or withdraw pension or half thereof if once the conclusion of division inquiry or a proceedings a finding was recorded that the worker had committed grave misconduct within the discharge of his duty whereas in his workplace however there was no provision within the Rules for withholding of the pension/ gratuity throughout pendency of division or judicial proceedings. By Associate in Nursing government instruction or circular, even a section of pension/gratuity couldn’t be withheld within the absence of any provision within the statutory rules.
Author: Shaheera Sultana,
NBM Law College, 2nd year
