Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

77. Article 31(2) of the Constitution has since been repealed by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act 1978. It is to be noted that Article 300A was inserted by the Constitution (44th Amendment) Act, 1978 by practically reinserting Article 31(1) of the Constitution. Therefore, right to property is no longer a fundamental right but a right envisaged and conferred by the Constitution and that also by retaining only Article 31(1) of the Constitution and specifically deleting Article 31(2), as it stood.

32. The logic for it is that if the Constitution of India is taken into consideration, particularly that as the provisions initially, which existed under Article 19(1)(f), where the right to property was contained and contemplated, under the Constitution and it was later, on omitted by the Constitution's 44th Amendment Act, 1978, and it, stood protected by the provisions contained under Article 300 A, which was too was introduced and inserted by Chapter IV of the Constitution by its 44th Amendment Act, 1978, which provided that an owner of the property, which is a fact, not disputed in the present case, that it was vested with the petitioners, in an eventuality, if any interference over his estates, are required to be made, it could be made only, as per the authority of law and that is why the deprivation of a land belonging to the petitioners in order to bring the Act within the ambit of the provisions contained Article 300 A, the State has, had to have its recourse under Section 4, to be read with Section 6 of the Forest Act of 1927. Meaning thereby, the declaration of the land belonging to the petitioners, as recorded in the Khatauni, as a reserve forest, was as per the due process of law provided under Article 300-A of the Constitution.