• In its majority opinion, the Supreme Court stated that the term "material resource" in Article 39(b) of the Constitution may encompass certain privately owned resources, but not all such resources fall under this category.

• Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud authored the majority ruling, joined by Justices Hrishikesh Roy, J B Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Rajesh Bindal, Satish Chandra Sharma, and Augustine George Masih. Justice B V Nagarathna offered a partial disagreement with the majority, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia provided a dissenting opinion.

• This ruling effectively revises a long-standing interpretation within Supreme Court jurisprudence. Historically, a series of judgments had extended Article 39(b) to both public and private resources, an interpretation that traces back to Justice V R Krishna Iyer’s minority opinion in State of Karnataka v Shri Ranganatha Reddy (1977).

• A subsequent 1982 ruling by a five-judge bench in Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Company vs Bharat Coking Coal Ltd, penned by Justice O Chinnappa Reddy, had upheld Justice Iyer’s interpretation.

• The current majority opinion, however, diverges from these earlier judgments, arguing that Justice Iyer broadened the definition too much by interpreting "material resources" as covering all resources meeting material needs, thus permitting government nationalization under Article 39(b).

• In his dissent, Justice Dhulia defended the broader and inclusive meaning previously assigned to "material resources of the community," arguing it remains both relevant and valuable.

• Article 39(b), part of the Directive Principles of State Policy in the Constitution, mandates that the state aim to distribute community resources in a manner that promotes the common good.

• Although the Directive Principles are intended to guide legislation, they are not legally enforceable in courts.

• The majority opinion asserted that Justice Iyer’s interpretation reflects a specific economic ideology. Including all private resources under Article 39(b), they argued, implies support for a particular economic structure. They noted that Iyer’s view in Sanjeev Coke was influenced by an economic school of thought that favored state acquisition of private property as beneficial for the nation

Fundamental Rights are a set of rights that are recognized and guaranteed by the constitution of a country as essential for the holistic development of individuals and for ensuring justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity in society. In the context of the Indian Constitution, Fundamental Rights are enshrined in Part III (Articles 12 to 35) and are considered vital for the protection of individual liberties and democratic principles.

Characteristics of Fundamental Rights

1.  Fundamental Rights are explicitly provided and protected by the Constitution.
2. These rights apply universally to all citizens, irrespective of their race, religion, caste, gender, or place of birth.
3. Individuals can directly approach the courts for the enforcement of their Fundamental Rights if they are violated.
4. These rights are justiciable, meaning that they can be challenged and defended in a court of law.
5. While Fundamental Rights are not absolute and can be reasonably restricted, such restrictions must be justifiable and in the public interest.

Right to Equality (Articles 14-18)

• Article 14: Equality before law and equal protection of laws.
• Article 15: Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex, or place of birth.
• Article 16: Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment.
• Article 17: Abolition of untouchability.
• Article 18: Abolition of titles except for military and academic distinctions.

Right to Freedom (Articles 19-22)

• Article 19: Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech, etc. (freedom of speech and expression, assembly, association, movement, residence, and profession).
• Article 20: Protection in respect of conviction for offences (protection against ex-post facto laws, double jeopardy, and self-incrimination).
• Article 21: Protection of life and personal liberty.
• Article 21A: Right to education.
• Article 22: Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases.

Right against Exploitation (Articles 23-24)

• Article 23: Prohibition of traffic in human beings and forced labour.
• Article 24: Prohibition of employment of children in factories, etc.

Right to Freedom of Religion (Articles 25-28)

• Article 25: Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice, and propagation of religion.
• Article 26: Freedom to manage religious affairs.
• Article 27: Freedom as to payment of taxes for promotion of any particular religion.
• Article 28: Freedom as to attendance at religious instruction or religious worship in certain educational institutions.

Cultural and Educational Rights (Articles 29-30)

• Article 29: Protection of interests of minorities (right to conserve language, script, or culture).
• Article 30: Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions.

Right to Constitutional Remedies (Article 32)

• Article 32: Right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

• They safeguard the liberties and freedoms of individuals against any arbitrary action by the state or other entities.
• Fundamental Rights ensure equality before the law and prohibit discrimination on various grounds.
• By guaranteeing freedoms such as speech and expression, they enable the functioning of a vibrant democracy.
• They provide a legal framework for the protection and redressal of rights, ensuring social, economic, and political justice.
• Fundamental Rights are essential for the development of the individual's personality and the preservation of human dignity.

• The state can impose reasonable restrictions on Fundamental Rights in the interest of sovereignty, security, public order, decency, or morality.
• While Fundamental Rights can be amended, such amendments must respect the basic structure of the Constitution, as laid down by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

• The Right to Property is not currently considered a fundamental right. The Constitution initially recognized it as a fundamental right under Article 31 until 1978.
• 44th Amendment of 1978 removed the Right to Property from the fundamental rights category (Articles 31 & 19(1)(f) were removed from Part III).
• The Right to Property remains a legal right protected under Article 300A, but it doesn't enjoy the same level of protection as fundamental rights. The government can acquire private property for public purposes, following due process and providing compensation.

• The primary motivation for removing the Right to Property from fundamental rights was that The government felt the absolute nature of the right hindered its ability to implement reforms that often involved land acquisition for public projects like infrastructure development or poverty alleviation schemes.

Article 300A states: "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." This essentially means that no one can be forced to give up their property unless there's a legal justification and the process is followed correctly.

Importance

Despite not being a fundamental right, Article 300A offers some crucial protections:

1. It prevents the government from taking away property without legal justification.
2. The article implies that compensation must be provided when property is acquired.

The judiciary can still review laws related to property acquisition to ensure they are fair and follow due process, even though the Right to Property isn't fundamental.

7. Way Forward

The Supreme Court's recent ruling reaffirms the importance of property rights and due process in India's legal framework, highlighting the ongoing role of the judiciary in safeguarding the rights of citizens and upholding the principles of justice and equality.

Source: The Indian Express