By Pratishtha Chaturvedi and Prof. (Dr.) Ram Singh

The Supreme Court ruling in Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra (2024) is a decisive institutional recalibration in the history of property rights in modern India. This article examines the judgment’s implications for the scope of property rights. We focus on the limits the judgment seeks to place on the states power to acquire private and community resources, to give effect to the directive principles in Part IV of the Constitution. We argue that the judgment is a decisive step toward a stronger protection of property rights. The apex court has reinterpreted Article 300A of the Constitution to emphasise that the protection of property rights under the article is on par with a human right. To limit the state’s ability to infringe upon citizens’ rights to property, the apex court has established a set of governing principles. Moreover, it has defined the term material resources of the community under Article 39(b). By incorporating the economic and legal doctrine of proportionality, the Court has raised the institutional guardrails on property rights. Furthermore, the Court has observed that judicial interpretations of the Constitution should not be ideologydriven.

Keywords: Property Owners Association (2024), Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles, Property Rights, Article 39(b), Article 31C, Judicial Review, Article 300A, Kesavananda Bharati and the Minerva Mills

To read full paper click here.