UPSC Prelims 2021 Q92: Right to Property and Article 300A — Explained
What is the position of the Right to Property in India?
- Legal right available to citizens only
- Legal right available to any person
- Fundamental Right available to citizens only
- Neither Fundamental Right nor legal right
Answer: (b) Legal right available to any person
Statement-wise explanation
- a: incorrect — Article 300A says 'No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law.' The word used is 'person', not 'citizen'. So the protection also covers foreigners and legal persons such as companies. Calling it a right available to citizens only is wrong.
- b: correct — The 44th Amendment Act, 1978 removed Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 from Part III, with effect from 20 June 1979. It placed a narrower guarantee in Article 300A, which sits in Part XII outside the Fundamental Rights. Property is therefore now a constitutional and legal right, not a fundamental one. Because Article 300A protects any 'person', it covers citizens and non-citizens alike.
- c: incorrect — Property stopped being a Fundamental Right when the 44th Amendment omitted Article 19(1)(f) (the freedom to acquire, hold and dispose of property) and Article 31 (compulsory acquisition). Since then, a person whose property is taken cannot move the Supreme Court directly under Article 32 on that ground alone. They must go to the High Court under Article 226 or file an ordinary suit. The 'citizens only' part is also wrong.
- d: incorrect — The right was not abolished. It was moved out of Part III. Article 300A still bars the State from taking anyone's property without a valid law. The Supreme Court has repeatedly called it a constitutional right, and in Vidya Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2020) it also called it a human right.
How to eliminate
This question can only be solved by knowing one fact: the 44th Amendment (1978) took property out of Part III and put it in Article 300A, and that Article protects any 'person'. Two quick checks then settle it. First, most aspirants know property is no longer a Fundamental Right, so the two options built on that idea can be struck off. That leaves the 'legal right' pair. Second, look at the absolute word 'only'. Article 300A, like Articles 14 and 21, uses 'person'. Rights limited to citizens, such as Articles 15, 16, 19 and 29–30, say 'citizen' in their text. The option that says 'neither' fails on basic knowledge, because Article 300A exists and is regularly litigated. Remember the pairing: Article 300A = Part XII = 'no person'.
Know more
From Fundamental Right to constitutional right
The original Constitution protected property in two places in Part III: Article 19(1)(f), the freedom to acquire, hold and dispose of property, and Article 31, which required authority of law and compensation for acquisition. Land reforms and zamindari abolition led to repeated clashes with the courts. This produced the First, Fourth, 17th and 25th Amendments and Articles 31A, 31B (Ninth Schedule) and 31C.
The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, passed by the Janata government, deleted Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 with effect from 20 June 1979. It inserted Article 300A in Chapter IV of Part XII: "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." Articles 31A, 31B and 31C stayed in Part III as protections for acquisition laws.
| Feature | Before 1978 (Art. 19(1)(f), 31) | After 1978 (Art. 300A) |
|---|---|---|
| Status | Fundamental Right | Constitutional/legal right |
| Location | Part III | Part XII |
| Direct remedy | Art. 32 (Supreme Court) | Art. 226 (High Court) or civil suit |
| Protects | Citizens (19(1)(f)); persons (31) | Any person |
| Limit on the State | Law + compensation clauses | Valid law made by a legislature |
What the courts have added
- Only a law made by a legislature can take property. An executive order cannot.
- In K.T. Plantation (2011) the Supreme Court read a public-purpose requirement into Article 300A, and the law must not be arbitrary.
- In Kolkata Municipal Corporation v. Bimal Kumar Shah (2024) it set out procedural sub-rights: notice, hearing, a reasoned decision, public purpose, fair compensation, an efficient process and a conclusion of the process.
- Article 300A does not expressly require compensation. The Land Acquisition (RFCTLARR) Act, 2013 now governs compensation by statute.
One exception remains in Part III. Article 30(1A) requires that, when the State acquires the property of a minority educational institution, the compensation must not restrict or abrogate the minority's right under Article 30.
NCERT Concepts to Revise
- Right to property: The question asks about this right's present status, so its exact definition under Article 300A is the starting point.
- Constitutional rights outside Part III: Whether property sits inside or outside Part III decides how it should be classified.
- 44th Constitutional Amendment Act 1978: This amendment changed where property rights sit in the Constitution, which is the history behind the question.
- Eminent domain: The State's power to take private land for public use is what Article 300A limits.