look news india
Housing and Area Development Authority Act: Can the government take over the private property of an individual or community in the name of society under Article 39(B) of the Constitution? The Supreme Court has given its verdict on this important question. A 9-judge bench of the Supreme Court said in its historic decision on Tuesday that the government cannot use all private properties unless public interest is involved.
Chief Justice Justice DY Chandrachud gave his decision by majority in the case of a bench of 9 judges. The bench, in its majority judgment, provided that all privately owned resources cannot be acquired by the state, although the state can lay claim to those resources if they are in public interest and owned by the community.
Majority of 7 judges in the decision
The country's top court said the government's decision to take over private property was motivated exclusively by economic and socialist ideology. The Chief Justice, writing a 7-judge majority decision, held that not all private properties can be physical resources, and therefore cannot be acquired by the government.
The decision also relaxed that not all privately owned resources could be taken by the state, the state could lay claim to those resources which were in the public interest and owned by the community. However, Justice BV Nagarathna dissented to some extent from the Chief Justice, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhutia dissented.
The court overturned the 1978 decision
The court rejected the earlier decision of Justice Krishna Iyer by majority. Justice Iyer's previous judgment had held that all privately owned resources could be acquired by the state. It says that the old regime was inspired by a particular archaic and socialist ideology.
Also, the Supreme Court overturned a ruling after 1978 that adopted a socialist theme and held that the state could expropriate all private property forever.
Who is the judge in the bench of 9 judges?
CJI Chandrachud said that some judgments are wrong that all personal resources of an individual are material resources of the community. The role of the Court is not to determine economic policy, but to facilitate the establishment of economic democracy.
A nine-judge Constitution bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud along with Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Sudhanshu Dhutia, Justice JB Pardiwala, Justice BV Nagarathna, Justice Rajesh Bindal, Justice Manoj Mishra, Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Augustine George Masih conducted the hearing. of. The case was heard in detail from April 23 this year. After 5 days of hearing, the Supreme Court kept its decision pending on May 1.