This article has been written by Mr Vedant Singh Pal, a student studying BBA LL.B.(Hons.) From ICFAI Law School, The ICFAI University, Dehradun. The author is a 2nd-year law student.

INTRODUCTION

The Constitution(Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, signifies the demise of the abecedarian Right to Property. Before 1978, there were substantially two papers to cover private property, Arts. 19( 1)( f) and 31, but they were repealed by indigenous emendations, and therefore private property was left helpless.

U S Constitution in its V correction ordains that- “ No person can be deprived of his life liberty or property without due process of law ”.

Unlike other abecedarian rights, the compass of the property right is continuously lowered by abridging it through indigenous emendations. virtually the property right has desisted to live in India. An important action in indigenous law has arisen in the field of property rights because of the large legislation legislated by the state and the central governments to control property rights. The most important question in these difficulties was the payment of compensation for the property rights acquired. Important indigenous battles have been fought around this question and the constitution has been amended several times to get over some inconvenient judicial rulings colourful emendations were made to Art. 31 and eventually it was repealed. In the 1949 constitution, there were two papers furnishing the property right, i.e. Art. 19( 1)( f) and Art. 31, but both these papers were deleted from the Indian Constitution by the 44th Amendment Act.

Composition 31 with the sub-heading “ Right to Property ” has been neglected by the Constitution Forty-Fourth Amendment Act 1978. Composition 31( 1) has been shifted to composition 300A as a new insertion in Chapter IV in part XII of the constitution. The stirring of Composition 31( 1) and forgetting Article 31 signify that the abecedarian right to property is abolished.

The right to property under the Indian constitution tried to approach the question of how to handle property and pressures relating to it by trying to balance the right to property with the right to compensation for its accession through an absolute abecedarian right to property and also balancing the same with reasonable restrictions and adding a further abecedarian right o compensation in case the parcels are acquired by the state. This was instanced by Composition 19( 1)( f) balanced by Composition 19( 5) and the compensation composition in Composition 31. This was an intriguing development told by the British of the idea of Eminent Domain but overall it struck an intriguing balance whereby it honoured the power of the state to acquire property, but for the first time in the history of India for a thousand times or further, it honoured the existent’s right to property against the state.

After 1978, in the area of the property, there were only four indigenous vittles i.e.A. 31, 31B, 31C and 300A. ThoughA. 31A, 31B and 31C are included in the chapter of abecedarian rights they can not be called abecedarian rights in the real sense, as they don’t confer abecedarian rights but put certain restrictions on right to property. The main object of these vittles was to give impunity to colourful laws abridging property rights.

Indian Constitutional Law by Prof. M P Jain

As stated before, earlier Composition 31 conferred the right to property as an abecedarian right. M P Jain divides this chapter into two corridors. One part is the pre-1978 position and the other is the post-1978 position. The pre-1978 position is the position before the 44th Correction. This chapter includes the Doctrine of Eminent Domain, the relation between Art. 19( 1)( f) and 19( 5) and relation betweenArt. 31, 14 and 19( 1)( f). It also discusses colourful important emendations like the first, fourth, seventeenth, forty-second and forty-fourth. the alternate part is the Right to property present position. It discusses substantially the Saving of certain laws part ofA. 31. This chapter includes substantiallyA.31A, 31B and 31C.

This exploration design will depict the real situation between the earlier composition 31 and the amended composition, the need for the insertion of clauses A, B and C into the amended composition, and the transition of the right to property from an abecedarian right to a statutory right. For a detailed study of the Right to Property after 1978, one has to look at tort. 31A, B and C. along with these three papers, A. 300A also plays a major part in the area of property rights. This composition confers the status of the indigenous right to a person concerning the property.

The doctrine of Eminent Domain and the Right to Property

The doctrine of Eminent Domain is a conception in the American Constitution. It’s the accession of private property by the state for a public purpose with paying a certain quantum of compensation. originally when India got Independence, the council abolished the Zamindari System and legislated colourful laws through which it took the property from colourful landholders and used it for public purposes. numerous times mala- fide intention can be seen achieved through this doctrine.

There are two rudiments of the Doctrine of Eminent Domain

1. Property is taken for public use

2. Compensation is paid for the property taken.

In Indian Constitution, Entry 42 of List III speaks about the ‘acquisition and requisitioning of property ’. In the case of State of Bihar v Kameshwar Singh, the Supreme Court defined prestigious Domain as “ the power of an autonomous to take property for public use without the proprietor’s concurrence upon making just compensation. ”

Composition 31A, 31B and 31C as well as Art. 300A are the indigenous vittles concerning private property.

The emergence of Article 31 A

This Article was added to the Constitution of India by the First Amendment, 1951. Later, the Fourth Amendment substituted various clauses in it.

Article 31 A -Saving of certain laws

Composition 31A-( 1) Notwithstanding anything contained in Composition 13, no law furnishing for-

( a) The accession by the State of any estate or any rights therein or the extinguishment or revision of any similar rights, or

( b) The taking over of the operation of any property by the State for a limited period either in the public interest or to secure the proper operation of the property, or

( c) The admixture of two or further pots either in the public interest or to secure the proper operation of any of the pots, or

( d) The extinguishment or revision of any rights of managing agents, registers and treasurers, managing directors, directors or directors of pots, or any voting rights of shareholders thereof, or

( e) The extinguishment or revision of any rights accruing by any agreement, parcel or licence to search for, or win, any mineral or mineral oil painting, or the unseasonable termination or cancellation of any similar agreement, parcel or licence, shall be supposed to be void on the ground that it’s inconsistent with, or takes down or abridges any of the rights conferred by Composition 14 or Composition 19

handed that where a similar law is a law made by the Legislature of a State, the vittles of this composition shall not apply thereto unless similar law, having been reserved for the consideration of the President, has entered his assent handed further that where any law makes any provision for the accession by the State of any estate and where any land comprised therein is held by a person under his particular civilization, it shall not be legal for the State to acquire any portion of similar land as is within the ceiling limit applicable to him under any law for the time being in force or any structure or structure standing thereon or appurtenant thereto, unless the law relating to the accession of similar land, structure or structure, provides for payment of compensation at a rate which shall not be lower than the request value thereof

CONCLUSION

The constitution was amended in the time 1951 for the first time. This correction led to several variations in the abecedarian rights and started the period of land reform through the indigenous medium. It has been introduced. two new papers videlicet 31A and 31B and the ignominious ninth schedule to make the laws acquiring zamindars inarguable in the Court of law. This was because of the land reform legislations were being challenged before colourful high courts like Patna, Nagpur, Allahabad etc on the ground of inconsistency with the abecedarian rights especially Article 14. But the High Court varied in their opinions. These kinds of actions were causing detention in the process of agricultural reforms which was supposed to be speedy. thus it was allowed to bypass these extravagant actions to give true effect to the land reform process. In this design, the main focus was the indigenous validity of Articles 31A, 31B and 31C. It was explosively argued against the defensive nature of these papers which count all possibilities of a challenge to the laws included under the guard.

The final words of the author in concluding the below discussion would be that if Composition 31C was allowed to stand on its own over the grave of the popular and socialist fabric also the protection of this amended composition will be available to every legislative action under the sun, performing into a society that we can not imagine, this is because composition 31C abrogates the right to equivalency guaranteed by Composition 14, which is the veritable foundation of a democratic form of government and is by itself an introductory point of the Constitution. So it’s concluded that if composition 31C is allowed to stand also that would affect the complete failure of the introductory spirit of the constitution makers and thus be in violation of the introductory structure of the constitution of India.

REFERENCE:

• Kashyap Subhash, The framing of India’s Constitution, A study, 2nd ed. Vol 5 Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
• Jain M P, Indian Constitutional Law, 5th edition, 2008, Lexis Nexis, Buttorworths Wadhwa Nagpur.
• Basu DD, Commentary on the Constitution of India, 8th and 2008, Vol. 3 Lexis Nexis Buttorworths Wadhwa Nagpur.
• Saharay, H K, The Constitution of India, an analytical approach, 3rd ed, Eastern Law House.
• Bhansali, S.R. The Constitution of India, Vol 1, India Publishing House, Jodhpur.
• Seervai, H.M. Constitutional Law of India, A critical Commentary, 4th end. Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.
• Shukla V.N., Constitution of India, 10 edn., 2001, Eastern Book Co.
• Pylee M.Y., Constitutional Amendment in India, 3 ed, 2010, Universal Law Publishing Co.
• Basu D. D., Casebook on Indian Constitutional Law, Kamal Law House, Kolkata.
• Bakshi P.M., The Constitution of India, Universal Law Publishing Co.

Aishwarya Says:

Law students often face problems, which they cannot share with their friends and families. We have started a column on our website Student’s Corner. In this column we are talking to several law students about the challenges that they face. Students who are interested in participating in the same, can fill this Google Form.

IF YOU ARE INTERESTED IN PARTICIPATING IN THE SAME, DO LET ME KNOW.

The copyright of this Article belongs exclusively to Ms. Aishwarya Sandeep. Reproduction of the same, without permission will amount to Copyright Infringement. Appropriate Legal Action under the Indian Laws will be taken.

If you would also like to contribute to my website, then do share your articles or poems to aishwarya@aishwaryasandeep.com

Join our  Whatsapp Group for latest Job Opening