Articles 31A, 31B and 31C relating to Property :
Right to property is no more a fundamental right which was previously guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution by Article 31.
But the right to property has been inserted by Article 300A under Part XII of the Constitution. Article 300A reads – “No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law”.
Saving of Laws Providing for Acquisition of Estates etc.
Then follows Article 31A which is an exception to the right of equality as guaranteed in Article 14 and to the six freedoms as guaranteed in Article 19, if they come into conflict with any law mentioned in Article 31A.
Such laws are those which provide for –
(i) the acquisition by the State of any estate or any rights therein or the extinguishment or modification of any such rights. ‘Estate’ here means the property included within that expression according to the land tenurers applicable in the area where it is situated. And ‘rights’ in relation to an estate means proprietory and other intermediary rights. In short, such laws are those which related to agrarian reforms, or
(ii) the taking over of the management of any property by the State for a limited period in the public interest or in order to secure the proper management of the property, or
(iii) the amalgamation of two or more corporations either in the public interest or in order to secure the proper management of any of the corporations, or
(iv) the extinguishment or modification of any rights of managing agents, secretaries and treasurers, managing directors or managers of corporations, or of any voting rights of shareholders thereof, or
(v) the extinguishment or modification of any rights accruing by virtue of any agreement, lease or licence for the purpose of searching for, or winning any mineral or mineral oil or the premature termination or cancellation of any such agreement, lease or licence.
However, limitations, have been imposed with respect to the laws relating to the acquisition of the estates. They are:
(a) If such a law is made by a State Legislature then it cannot be protected by the provisions of Article 31A unless such law having been reserved for the consideration of the President has received his assent, and
(b) If the law provides for the acquisition of (i) any land within the ceiling limit applicable in that area, (ii) any building or structure standing thereon or apartment thereto, it (law) shall not be valid unless it provides for payment of compensation at a rate which shall not be less than the market value thereof. This provision, however, has been amended by the Constitution (29th Amendment) Act.
Validation of certain Acts and Regulations
Article 31B certain laws against attack on the ground of violation of any fundamental rights. The laws so protected are specified in the Nineth Schedule to the Constitution. These laws also relate mainly to land reforms.
Saving of Laws giving effect to certain Directive Principles
Article 31C added by 25th Amendment of the Constitution lifted to the constitutional limitations on the powers of State, imposed by Article 14 (equality before law) and Article 19 (freedoms) as regards law giving effect to the policy of the State towards securing the principles – specified in clause (b) or clause (c) of Article 39. These principles are –
(i) that the ownership and control of the matenal resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good, and
(ii) that the operation of the economic system does not result in the concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment.
The issue whether the 24th, 25th and 29th Amendments made by Parliament were valid or not was raised in the Supreme Court. In [Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala, (1973) S.C.C. 225], the majority judgement (of a full bench of 13 judges) upheld the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution provided it did not alter its basic framework.
By the 42nd Amendment in Article 31-C for the words the principles specified in clause (a) or clause (c) of Article 34 the words in all or any of the principles laid down in Part IV were substituted. But this substitution was held to be void by the Supreme Court in Minerva Mills v. Union of India, (1980) 2 SCC 591.