;
loder

Article 31 - Compulsory acquisition of property [REPEALED]

Description

[Rep. by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 , section. 6 (w.e.f. 20.6.1979).][Editorial Comment - Article 31 of the Indian Constitution was repealed and replaced by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act in 1978. The original Article 31 dealt with the right to property, but it was repealed and replaced by Article 300A.

Article 300A states that no person shall be deprived of his or her property except by the authority of law. It provides protection to individuals against arbitrary deprivation of their property by the state. It ensures that if the state acquires private property for public purposes, it must do so in accordance with the law and provide fair compensation to the affected individuals.]

(1)No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.
(2)No property shall be compulsorily acquired or requisitioned save for a public purpose and save by authority of a law which provides for compensation for the property so acquired or requisitioned and either fixes the amount of the compensation or specifies the principles on which, and the manner in which, the compensation is to be determined and given; and no such law shall be called in question in any court on the ground that the compensation provided by that law is not adequate. [In article 31 of the Constitution, for clause (2), the following clauses shall be substituted through Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955](2A) Where a law does not provide for the transfer of the ownership or right to possession of any property to the State or to a corporation owned or controlled by the State, it shall not be deemed to provide for the compulsory acquisition or requisitioning of property, notwithstanding that it deprives any person of his property. [In article 31 of the Constitution, for clause (2-A), the following clauses shall be substituted through Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955][Editorial Comment- The Constitution (Fourth Amendment) Act, 1955, did make changes to Article 31 of the Indian Constitution, which deals with the right to property. The amendment aimed to address issues related to the acquisition of property by the state for public purposes and the determination of compensation for such acquired property.The changes introduced were intended to provide the government with greater flexibility in acquiring land for public welfare, including land reform measures, while ensuring that individuals affected by such acquisitions receive fair compensation. Important Verdicts: State of West Bengal v. Bela banerjee & Saghir Ahmad v. The State of U.P. ](2B) Nothing is sub-clause (f) of clause (1) of article 19 shall affect any such law as, is referred to in clause (2).[Editorial comment-The Constitution (Twenty-Fifth Amendment) Act, 1971, this Amendment sought to overcome the restrictions imposed on the government by the Supreme Court ruling. Article 31, as it stood prior to the Amendment, specially provided that no law providing for the compulsory acquisition or requisitioning of property which either fixes or specifies on which and the manner in which the compensation is to be determined and given, shall be called in question in any court on the ground that the compensation provided by that law is inadequate. Also refer]
(3)No such law as is referred to in clause (2) made by the Legislature of a State shall, have effect unless such law, having been reserved for the consideration of the President, has received his assent.
(4)If any Bill pending at the commencement of this Constitution in the Legislature of a State has, after it has been passed by such Legislature, been reserved for the consideration of the President and has received his assent, then, notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, the law so assented to shall not be called in question in any Court on the ground that it contravenes the provisions of clause (2).[Editorial comment -The Constitution (First Amendment) Act, 1951, made several changes to the Fundamental Rights Part of the Indian constitution. The Indian Parliament observed that the legality of agrarian reform measures enacted by State Legislatures faced prolonged legal disputes despite the provisions in clauses (4) and (6) of Article 31. This protracted litigation hindered the implementation of crucial measures impacting a significant population. Consequently, a new provision, Article 31A, was introduced to safeguard such measures going forward. Additionally, another retrospective provision, Article 31B, was introduced to validate 13 enactments pertaining to the abolition of zamindari. Also refer]
(5)Nothing in clause (2) shall affect-
(a)the provisions of any existing law other than a law to which the provisions of clause (6) apply, or
(b)the provisions of any law which the State may hereafter make-
(i)for the purpose of imposing or levying any tax or penalty, or
(ii)for the promotion of public health or the prevention of danger to life or property, or
(iii)in pursuance of any agreement entered into between the Government of the Dominion of India or the Government of India and the Government of any other country, or otherwise, with respect to property declared by law to be evacuee property.
(6)Any law of the State enacted not more than eighteen months before the commencement of this Constitution may within three months from such commencement be submitted to the President for his certification; and thereupon, if the President by public notification so certifies, it shall not be called in question in any Court on the ground that it contravenes the provisions of clause (2) of this article or has contravened the provisions of sub-section (2) of section 299 of the Government of India Act, 1935."[Editorial comment-The Constitution (Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, repealed Article 19 (1) (f) and also took out Article 31(1) has been taken out of Part III and made a separate Article 300A in Chapter IV of Part XII. This amendment may have taken away the scope of speedy remedy under Article 32 for the violation of Right to Property because it is no more a Fundamental Right. Making it a legal right under the Constitution serves two purposes: Firstly, it gives emphasis to the value of socialism included in the preamble and secondly, in doing so, it conformed to the doctrine of basic structure of the Constitution. Also Refer]

Googling your legal issue online?
The internet is not a lawyer and
neither you.
Talk to a real lawyer about your
legal issue.
FIND MY LAWYER NOW
May ! I help you ?
💬
;