Right To Property In India: A Comparative Study Of Fundamental Rights And Constitutional Rights
R. Deepakkumar, B.A. LL.B.,S. Thangapazham Law College, Vasudevanallur, Tenkasi, Tamil Nadu
M. Ajay Sundar, B.B.A., LL.B. (Hons.), (Ph.D),S. Thangapazham Law College, Vasudevanallur, Tenkasi, Tamil Nadu
ABSTRACT
The Right to Property occupies a distinctive position in the constitutional history of India. At the commencement of the Constitution, property was protected as a Fundamental Right principally through Articles 19(1)(f) and 31. Repeated constitutional amendments and judicial decisions gradually reshaped the relationship between private property and public interest. The decisive change came through the Constitution (Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, which deleted Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 and inserted Article 300A. As a result, the Right to Property ceased to be a Fundamental Right and became a constitutional right outside Part III. This research paper examines that transformation, the objectives and consequences of the Forty-Fourth Amendment, and the present legal status of property under Article 300A. It compares Fundamental Rights with constitutional rights, focusing on source, scope, beneficiaries, enforceability, remedies and judicial protection. Major judicial decisions concerning property and Article 300A are examined, including State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh, R.C. Cooper v. Union of India, Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, Jilubhai Nanbhai Khachar v. State of Gujarat, K.T. Plantation Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka and Vidya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh. The paper concludes that the Forty-Fourth Amendment did not abolish constitutional protection of property; rather, it recalibrated that protection to accommodate social justice, public interest and State development while retaining the rule-of-law guarantee against unlawful deprivation.
Keywords: Right to Property, Fundamental Rights, Constitutional Rights, Article 300A, Land Acquisition, Judicial Review.
