Supreme Court.
On Tuesday the Supreme Court made an important decision in the private property issue, saying that the government cannot acquire all private property. The court made this decision, overturning its own 45-year-old decision, which said the government can acquire any private property.
The nine-member constitutional bench headed by CJI DY Chandrachud took this decision by majority. Seven judges agreed, while Justice BV Nagarathna expressed partial agreement and Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia gave a separate opinion. Thus, the majority decision was 8-1.
Previous decisions inspired by socialist ideology
The Constitutional Court accepted that Justice V Krishna Iyer’s earlier decision was inspired by a special economic and socialist ideology. In this decision it was said that all privately owned properties can be acquired by the government. In this regard, the CJI said that it is wrong to assume that all private properties will be community resources. Justice Iyer’s decision was based on a particular economic ideology.
will weaken the basic principles of the Constitution
CJI Chandrachud said the role of this court is not to decide economic policies, because people have voted the government for that. If all private property is considered community resources, the basic principles of the Constitution will be weakened.
He also said that the economy has changed since 1990 and the focus is now on a market-oriented economic model. The CJI said India has become the fastest growing economy in the world because dynamic economic policies have been adopted.
Disagreement with the socialist issue
The Constitutional Court also made it clear that Justice Iyer’s approach was based on a socialist theme and one cannot agree with him. In 1977, in the case of Karnataka versus Ranganatha Reddy, Justice Iyer described private properties as community resources. In 1982, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court agreed with Justice Iyer’s decision in the Bharat Coking Coal Limited case.
The Supreme Court said that the country’s economic model has changed and the private sector has great importance in it. Giving the government complete rights to acquire private property will discourage investment. The Constitutional Court said that if the drafters of the Constitution had wanted it, they would have written it clearly.
Justice BV Nagarathna, a member of the tribunal, partially agreed with this decision and did not consider the comment on previous decisions to be correct. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia gave a different opinion than the other eight judges.
