Have you also bought the land and are not able to go to see it now? Now the government has captured it without your permission. Can the government capture your property whenever you want? Recently, an important decision of the Supreme Court has come on one such case. Where, the government occupied the land without compensation and process. Let me tell you that the government cannot take your land without your consent. The Supreme Court has given an important verdict on such cases. The Supreme Court clearly stated in its judgment that the government cannot forcibly take possession of any person’s private property or land unless it follows the legal process and gives appropriate compensation. The Supreme Court has recently ruled in Sukh Dutt Ratra vs. Himachal Pradesh State (2022) case that this cannot be done at all.
What is this whole matter of Himachal?
This case is related to a land in Himachal Pradesh in which the government took possession of the road in the 1970s. For many years, the landowners neither got compensation nor the government adopted any legal process. When the landowners knocked on the door of the court in 2011, the government argued that they had prosecuted very late, so the case should be dismissed.
What did the Supreme Court say?
After the case was dismissed in the lower court, the Supreme Court dismissed the government’s plea and said that no illegal occupation would become valid due to the passage of time. Even if the person has demanded late justice, his right to property does not end. The Supreme Court also said on the government’s claim that people had given land orally, not legally valid. Written consent is necessary.
What does Article 300-A of the Constitution say?
Under Article 300-A, no person can be deprived of his property unless the government does so under any law. Even after the 44th Constitution Revision in 1978, the right to property may not have been a fundamental right, but it is still an important constitutional right.
Other cases also reference in this case
The Supreme Court cited several old cases in its judgment. In this case, Vidya Devi vs. Himachal Pradesh State (2020) – The occupation of land without paying compensation is unconstitutional. Hindustan Petroleum vs. Darius Shapur Chenai (2005) – Government action should be done under the legal process. Wazir Chand vs Himachal Pradesh State (1955) is against forcible occupation law.
What did the land owners get?
The court ordered the government to decide and pay proper compensation within 4 months. Give extra amount for solatium i.e. mental and money loss. Also, give people interest from 2001 to 2013. Apart from this, give legal expenses of Rs 50,000. At the same time, the court said that some people are compensated and not to give some, it is completely discriminatory and wrong.
Why is this decision important?
This decision teaches us that no person in India cannot be removed from his assets. Its authority cannot be eliminated in this way. The Supreme Court said that the government also has to work under the law. Regardless of how much time passes, if the occupation is done incorrectly, then the person can get justice.