GUWAHATI: In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court on Friday, May 17 set aside the acquisition of land by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation under the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980, highlighting seven essential sub-rights under Article 300A of the Indian Constitution. Article 300A states that "no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law."
Authored by Justice PS Narasimha, the judgement emphasised that these sub-rights are fundamental to the Right to Property under Article 300A. The bench, also comprising Justice Aravind Kumar, noted that non-compliance with these sub-rights constitutes a violation of the right, lacking the authority of law.
Click here to join our WhatsApp channel
The sub-rights include:
• The Right To Notice: The State must inform the person that it intends to acquire their property.
• The Right To Be Heard: The State must hear objections to the acquisition.
• The Right To A Reasoned Decision: The State must inform the person of its decision to acquire.
• The Duty To Acquire Only For Public Purpose: The State must demonstrate that the acquisition is for public purpose.
• The Right Of Restitution Or Fair Compensation: The State must provide restitution and rehabilitation.
• The Right To An Efficient And Expeditious Process: The State must conduct the acquisition process efficiently and within prescribed timelines.
• The Right Of Conclusion: The proceedings must lead to a final conclusion and vesting.
“These seven rights are foundational components of a law in tune with Article 300A, and the absence of one or more of them renders the law susceptible to challenge,” the court stated.
ALSO READ: Assam: Land Acquisition Bill Approved For Fair Compensation And National Interest
The judgement also detailed how these sub-rights have been incorporated into laws such as the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 and the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act of 2013. The court underscored that these principles have become part of administrative law jurisprudence.
The case revolved around land acquired by the Kolkata Municipal Corporation under Section 352 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980. The court clarified that this provision allows the Municipal Commissioner to identify land for public use but does not establish the procedure for acquisition. Instead, Section 535 outlines the necessary process, requiring the Commissioner to apply to the Government for compulsory acquisition.
“The scheme of the Act makes it clear that Section 352 empowers the Municipal Commissioner to identify land for public use, and under Section 537, the Commissioner must apply to the Government for compulsory acquisition,” the Court explained.
The court rejected the corporation's argument that it could acquire land solely under Section 352 and emphasized the necessity of adhering to the sub-rights outlined in Article 300A. The ruling highlighted that the right to acquire property and guarantee of fair compensation are insufficient without following due procedures.
The court concluded that the entire acquisition exercise was illegal and imposed a cost of Rs. 5,00,000 on the corporation, noting the significant difficulties caused to the opposing party.
