Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. Accepting the contention of the petitioners, the property was assigned land originally and they purchased the same under agreement of sale and the course open to the Government to cancel pattas by invoking Sections 3 and 4 of A.P.Assigned Lands (Prohibition of Transfers) Act IX of 1977 and resume the land for violation of conditions of patta in respect of proceeding against the petitioners and their vendors, contrary to it, the respondents 3 and 4 attempted to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the property without following due process of law. Therefore, the action of the respondents 3 and 4 in attempting to dispossess the petitioners is contrary to law as held by Apex Court in Rame Goda (dead) by Lrs. Vs. M.Varadappa Naidu (Dead) by L.Rs.1, Puran Singh Vs. State of Punjab2, Ram Rattan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh3, and recently in Munshi Ram V. Delhi Administration4. 7 Recently, the Apex Court, on January 8, 2020, ruled that to forcibly dispossess citizens of their private property, without following the due process of law, would be to violate a human right, as also the constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution. A bench of justice Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi, in its verdict said: "In a democratic polity governed by the rule of law, the state could not have deprived a citizen of their property without the sanction of law." The bench referred to an earlier verdict, to say it has been held that the right to property is now considered to be not only a constitutional or statutory right, but also a human right".