| |
|
SC’s ruling on right to property may land acquisitions in trouble
|
|
Published on :
Monday, April 07, 2008 |
|
A businessman and founder of a non-profit organization, filed a petition, as the judgement of the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharti case in 1973 held that fundamental rights are part of the basic structure of the Constitution, the amendment that abolished the right to property was not valid, reports Malathi Nayak and Rahul Chandran. |
|
|
|
|
Reverse Robin Hood land reform
|
|
Published on :
Wednesday, February 06, 2008 |
|
The real problem behind Singur land Acquistion are the Constitutional amendments infringing on property rights. And the solution lies in reinstating an individual’s fundamental right to private property—which was abolished in 1978—and restraining the government’s power of eminent domain. The power of eminent domain is at the root of the land controversy. Delete Article 31A, 31B and 31C and reinstate Article 31, suggests Shruti Rajagopalan. |
|
|
|
|
Property rights and wrongs
|
|
Published on :
Wednesday, May 23, 2007 |
|
Ironically, Indians had greater protection from private land “takings” under the British. Section 299 of the 1935 Government of India Act clearly stated that no person was to be deprived of his property save for public purposes and with compensation. In today’s India, there is no real right to private property and no protection against government land acquisitions. The rich feudal lords, whose land was stripped in the 1950s, and the poor peasants in Nandigram today suffer the same fate—a complete demolition of their private property rights, writes Shruti Rajagopalan. |
|
|
|
|
Robberbaron Capitalism
|
|
Published on :
Monday, May 07, 2007 |
|
In the case of acquisition of land for Special Economic Zones (SEZs), the issue is one of proper valuation and pricing. The state has no business intervening to acquire land for industry. It is about the state interjecting needlessly to collect rents from industry and not about the spread of SEZs. It is about unfairness and about profiteering, with the state colluding to partake of the profits, observes Anantha Nageswaran.
|
|
|
|
|
Right to property: its evolution and Constitutional development in India
|
|
Published on :
Friday, December 01, 2006 |
|
The precise content of the Right to Property to be adopted in our constitution was one of the most difficult and problematic subjects that the advisory Committee, the sub-committee on Fundamental rights, and the Constituent Assembly had to encounter. This reflects the complexities of the issues that necessarily arise in any attempt to redefine the right to property, and to provide for its enforcement. A K Ganguly records the long journey of Right to Property in India, from the times of british to the PresentIndia. |
|
|
|
|
Evolution of the Right to the Property in India
|
|
Published on :
Friday, December 01, 2006 |
|
At first blush, the concept of property rights is associated with the right to immovable property like land and house: however, a deeper reflection of the right to property is not only a right to acquire, possess and dispose of property. The mode of ownership of property, the production and distribution of goods in society determines not only the economic but also the socio-political structure of the society, , writes A M Ahmedi in the ‘Journal of Constitutional and Parliamentary studies’ Vol. 40, no 3-4, July-Dec, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
The forty fourth amendment and the Right to Property
|
|
Published on :
Saturday, June 23, 1979 |
|
Did the forty-fourth constitutional amendment really delete the Right to Property from the constitution, in pursuance of the electoral promise of the Janata Party to abolish this right. This is, however, far from the case. While it is true that the right to property is no longer a fundamental right having been partly omitted from the provisions of Part III of the constitution by the said amendment, it is not true that after this amendment the constitution recognises no right to property, writes H M Jain in his article in 'Journal of Constitutional and Parliamentary studies.
|
|
|
|
|
How Indians lost their Right to Property: 44th Constitutional Amendment
|
|
Published on :
Tuesday, May 09, 1978 |
|
Right to property was a key feature of the Indian constitution since its inception in 1950. However it was under threat right from the start, and not satisfied with the progressive dilution of the protection of this fundamental right, this Right was finally amended out of the fundamental rights section of the Indian Constitution in 1978. Here are the stated objectives of the 44th Amendment which among other things, aimed at correcting the excesses of Emergency in the mid-1970s, also eliminated property rights from the list of fundamental rights of its citizens. |
|
|
|
|
Right to Property
|
|
Published on :
Saturday, October 01, 1977 |
|
Right to property has provided a fertile ground for constitutional battles. Of all the fundamental rights guaranteed under the constitution of India, the rights contained in Article 19 and 31 have focussed greater attention of the lawmakers and the law interpreters alike,writes B.R. Sharma in Panjab University Law Review, Vol. XXIX no.1& 2, Apr-Oct 1977, Student supplement 1976-77. |
|
|
|
|
Compensation for the taking of property- a historical footnote to Bela Banerjee’s case
|
|
Published on :
Thursday, January 01, 1959 |
|
We have seen the original Article 31 (renumbered from Article 24) in the Indian constitution was a compromise of conflicting points of view. As is likely in such compromises, it was possible for the parties to read into it in good faith nuances reflecting their divergent attitudes, writes H C L Merillat in Journal of Indian Law Institute, 1959. |
|
|
|