In a pivotal decision, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that the right to property is a constitutional right, emphasizing that an individual cannot be deprived of their property without adequate compensation. The judgment, delivered by Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, addressed an appeal related to the Bengaluru-Mysuru Infrastructure Corridor Project (BMICP), underscoring the enduring significance of Article 300-A of the Constitution.
Although the right to property was removed as a fundamental right by the Constitution (Forty-Fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, the court clarified that it remains a protected constitutional right under Article 300-A. This article ensures that no person shall be deprived of their property save by authority of law. The decision came against the backdrop of a November 2022 judgment by the Karnataka High Court concerning land acquisition for the BMICP.
The bench noted the prolonged struggle faced by the landowners, appellants in the case, who have fought for fair compensation over the last 22 years without success. The justices criticized the “lethargic attitude” of the officers from the State and the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board (KIADB), attributing the delay in compensation to this inefficiency.
In January 2003, a preliminary notification was issued by KIADB for acquiring lands for the BMICP, and by November 2005, the land of the appellants had been taken over. Despite these actions, the appellants received no compensation, leading them to seek redress in the courts repeatedly.
Highlighting the critical importance of timely compensation, the Supreme Court observed that valuing the land based on market conditions from 2011 during the compensation determination in 2019, rather than those in 2003 when the land was initially earmarked for acquisition, would constitute a “travesty of justice.” To rectify this, the court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, directing that the compensation be recalculated based on the market values as of April 22, 2019.
The Supreme Court’s directive ensures that the Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) must issue a fresh award reflecting the 2019 market values within two months after consulting with the involved parties. Furthermore, it preserves the rights of the parties to challenge the award if they find it unsatisfactory.
