SC: Permitting govt to occupy somebody’s land can be taken as condoning lawlessness

New Delhi, Nov 24 : The Supreme Court said on Tuesday that although the right to property is not a fundamental right protected under the Constitution, it remains a valuable constitutional right.
The top court directed the Centre to return the lands of some owners in south Bengaluru, and emphasised that economic liberty is a valuable right guaranteed under the Constitution.
A bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and S. Ravindra Bhat said, “To permit the state, whether the Union or any state government, to assert that it has an indefinite or overriding right to continue occupying one’s property (bereft of lawful sanction), whatever be the pretext, is no less than condoning lawlessness.” The bench observed that the courts’ role is to act as the guarantor and jealous protector of the people’s liberties, the right to equality and religion and cultural rights under Part III of the Constitution, or the right against deprivation, in any form, through any process other than law.
The bench emphasised that any condonation by the court is a validation of such unlawful executive behaviour “which it then can justify its conduct on the anvil of some loftier purpose, at any future time – aptly described as a loaded weapon ready for the hand of any authority that can bring forward a plausible claim of an urgent need”.
The top court allowed an appeal by B.K. Ravichandra and others challenging a Karnataka High Court order, which in 2008 had rejected their claim seeking the Centre to vacate their lands measuring over four acres in Bengaluru South, acquired in 1960s for defence purposes.