New Delhi: The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that it’s unconstitutional to take private properties without following the correct process. This decision, made by justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Aravind Kumar, supports a previous ruling by the Calcutta High Court.
The court also stated that just having the power to take land and providing fair compensation isn’t enough. There must be a set procedure before taking someone’s property. This is part of the ‘authority of law’ under Article 300A. However, Section 352 doesn’t provide any procedure.
The court clarified that taking land without proper procedure is illegal. They also provided seven guidelines for acquiring land.
The court explained,
- It is the duty of the State to inform the person that it intends to acquire the property — the right to notice
- Duty of the State to demonstrate that the acquisition is for public purpose — acquisition only for public purpose
- Duty of the State to inform the person of its decision to acquisition — the right to a reasoned decision
- Duty of the State to hear the objections to the acquisition — the right to be heard
- Duty of the State to restitute and rehabilitate — the right to fair compensation
- Duty of the State to conduct the process of acquisition efficiently and within prescribed timelines of the proceedings — the right to an efficient conduct
- Final conclusion of the proceedings leading to vesting — the right of conclusion
The court explains the seven principles may be procedural, but they are integral to the authority of law enabling compulsory acquisition of private property, and have now become part of our administrative law jurisprudence.
The court ordered Kolkata Municipal Corporation to pay Rs 5 Lakh to the land owner within sixty days.
Earlier, the Calcutta High Court directed the Kolkata Municipal Corporation to start acquisition proceedings for the Property under Section 536 or 537 of the Act within five months. Alternatively, they can restore the name of the last recorded owner as the owner of the Property. The Kolkata Municipal Corporation appealed to the top court, claiming to have taken the property of a person under Section 352 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980.