NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday said the right to property is human right in a welfare State, and a constitutional right under Article 300-A of the Constitution and a person cannot be dispossessed of his property without paying compensation promptly.
SC Upholds Right to Property as Human Right: Article 300A Explained
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Vishwanathan rapped the Karnataka government authorities for failing to pay compensation to landowners Bernard Francis Joseph Vaz and others, for 22 years due to their officers' "deep slumber" and "lethargic attitude" for the land acquired for infrastructure corridor project connecting Bengaluru-Mysuru.
In its 57-page judgment, the bench said the Right to Property ceased to be a fundamental right by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978.
Karnataka Slammed by SC for 22-Year Land Compensation Delay
"However, it continues to be a human right in a welfare State, and a constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution,” the court noted.
The court pointed out that Article 300A still protects individuals from being dispossessed of their property without legal authority and held that “a person cannot be deprived of his property without him being paid adequate compensation in accordance with law for the same”.
Exercising its extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, the bench directed for determination of the market value of the land in question as on April 22, 2019.
The bench directed the Special Land Acquisition Officer to pass a fresh award within a period of two months.
"If the compensation to be awarded at the market value as of the year 2003 is permitted, it would amount to permitting a travesty of justice and making the constitutional provisions under Article 300-A a mockery," the bench said.
The court noted the possession of the appellants’ land was taken over by the Karnataka Industrial Area Development Board on November 22, 2005 and subsequently handed over to Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprise and its sister concern Nandi Economic Corridor Enterprises Ltd. However, no award was passed immediately for such acquisitions.
Noting that Article 300-A of the Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law, the bench said, it cannot be gainsaid that the appellants have been deprived of their legitimate dues for almost 22 years ago.
"It can also not be controverted that money is what money buys. The value of money is based on the idea that money can be invested to earn a return, and that the purchasing power of money decreases over time due to inflation," it said.
The bench pointed out what the appellants could have bought with the compensation in 2003 cannot do in 2025.
"It is, therefore, of utmost importance that the determination of the award and disbursal of compensation in case of acquisition of land should be made with promptitude," the bench said.
The court allowed the appeal and set aside the Karnataka High Court's division bench judgment of November 22, 2022, which rejected the plea of the appellants for determining compensation as per the current market value.
The court found the State/KIADB was in deep slumber from 2003 to 2019 and acted for the first time only after the notices were issued in contempt proceedings,
The bench held the division bench had dismissed the plea by the appellants on hyper technical ground.
"The division bench of the High Court should have, especially taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the present case, at least considered the case of the appellants. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the judgment and order of November 22, 2022 by the division bench of the High Court is liable to be quashed and set aside on this short ground alone," the bench said.
