38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, October 03, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

All privately owned properties not to be treated as material resources of community: SC

By Jhanak Sharma      05 November, 2024 01:58 PM      0 Comments
All privately owned properties not to be treated as material resources of community SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that all privately owned properties can not be termed as material resources of the community.

It, however, said the State can stake claims over resources that are material and are held by the community, for public good.

A nine-judge Constitution bench led by Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud by a majority view held that Justice V Krishna Iyer's previous decision which declared that all privately owned resources can be acquired by the State, was motivated by a particular economic and socialist ideology.

SC Rules: Privately Owned Properties Not Automatically Community Resources under Article 39(b)

"There is a distinction between holding that private property may form part of the wealth of the community's material resources and it is wholly part of the community's wealth," the bench said.

The majority judgment was authored by the CJI Chandrachud, for himself and Justices Hrishikesh Roy, J B Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Rajesh Bindal, Satish Chandra Sharma and Augustine George Masih.

The CJI, reading out excerpts, held that it is incorrect to hold that all private properties would belong to community resources.

He noted the previous ruling by Justice Iyer was rooted in particular economic ideology.

Supreme Court Verdict: State Can’t Treat All Private Property as Public Resources for Redistribution

The CJI said the role of this court was not to lay down economic policy. He noted people have voted for the government, which adopted varied economic policy.

It would undermine the very principle of the Constitution if all resources held by the individuals are considered as material resources of the community.

"Not every resource owned by individual can be considered as material resource of the community," he said.

The court did not with previous judgments, which were based on socialist theme and had held that to develop an egalitarian society, government can direct its policies to redistribute community's material resources, including privately owned properties, to subserve common good.

The majority judgment held Justice Iyer's 1978 ruling that all properties of private individuals can be termed community property, advanced only the socialist economic ideology, which was unsustainable.

However, it said some private property could be termed as community property.

The court noted there has been a shift towards socialist economy in 1960s and 70s, but the focus shifted to market oriented economy since 1990s.

It said the country's trajectory of economy eschewed any particular type of economy but meant to meet emerging challenges of a developing country.

The court pointed out adoption of dynamic economic policy through the last 30-odd years has made India the fastest growing economy in the world.

The majority view held it cannot subscribe to Justice Iyer's philosophy that every asset, including that of private individuals, can be termed community resource.

The other judges in the bench Justices B V Nagarathna and Sudhanshu Dhulia partially differed with the CJI's majority judgment.

The question before the bench was whether privately owned property are covered under the ambit of “material resources of the community”, under Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

Article 39(b) enjoined the State to endeavor “that the ownership and control of material resources of the community, are so distributed as best to subserve the common good”.  

The issue also involves interpretation of Article 39(c) which says “the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment”.

The case emanated from a law in Maharashtra that allows a state undertaking (MHADA – Maharashtra Housing and Development Authority) to acquire certain private properties under Chapter VIII-A of the MHADA Act 1976. The acquisition of the private properties could be for better preservation of the said property/building or for reconstruction/repairs etc.

The petitioners led by Property Owners Association argued that “material resources” of a community does not include private resources and Article 39(b) talks only of public resources or national resources as only these resources can be redistributed by the State to subserve the greatest common good.

The Union government and MHADA, on the other hand, argued against a restrictive interpretation of Article 39(b).

They contended that the principle of ‘common good’ and the ideals of the Constitution, which is to ensure ‘distributive justice’ and achieve socialist egalitarian goals of distribution of resources would stand defeated if privately held properties are kept outside the ambit of Article 39(b). 



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

sc-allows-manufacturing-of-green-crackers-in-delhi-subject-to-no-sale
Trending Judiciary
SC allows manufacturing of green crackers in Delhi, subject to no sale

SC allows certified manufacturers to produce green crackers in Delhi, but bans their sale in NCR till further orders, balancing pollution and livelihoods.

27 September, 2025 01:23 AM
kerala-hc-directs-comprehensive-snakebite-prevention-guidelines-for-schools
Trending Judiciary
Kerala HC Directs Comprehensive Snakebite Prevention Guidelines For Schools [Read Order]

Kerala High Court directs comprehensive snakebite prevention and management guidelines for schools, ensuring safety, awareness, and emergency response.

30 September, 2025 08:46 PM
sc-orders-two-judicial-officers-to-go-for-seven-days-training-for-flawed-bail-order
Trending Judiciary
SC orders two judicial officers to go for seven days training for flawed bail order [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court quashes flawed bail order, directs two Delhi judges to undergo 7-day special training on judicial conduct and bail rulings.

30 September, 2025 09:58 PM
sc-seeks-reply-from-iit-delhi-kharagpur-on-plea-to-transfer-student-due-to-mental-health-condition
Trending Judiciary
SC seeks reply from IIT Delhi, Kharagpur on plea to transfer student due to mental health condition [Read Order]

SC seeks reply from IIT Delhi & Kharagpur on plea for transfer of B Arch student citing mental health needs, AIIMS proximity & Article 21 rights.

30 September, 2025 11:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email