Decades of dispute later, SC: Not all private property can be taken over by state for ‘common good’

News: A nine-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in a majority judgement, held that not all private property can be deemed material resource of the community for redistribution under Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

1. The historical origin of the issue can be traced back to a minority opinion by Justice VR Krishna Iyer in the State of Karnataka Vs Shri Ranganatha Reddy Case (1977), wherein he held that both public and private resources fall within the ambit of ‘material resources of the community’ under Article 39(b).

2. Subsequently, Constitution Benches in Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Case (1982) and Mafatlal Industries Judgements (1997) relied on Justice Iyer’s opinion. This necessitated a reference to the nine-judge bench.

3. The majority judgement of the SC has now disagreed with these judgements holding that not all privately owned resources fall within the ambit of the phrase ‘material resource’ used in Article 39(b) of the Constitution.

4. While rejecting the views of Justice Iyer, the majority opinion held that India has moved on from socialism to liberalisation to market-based reforms.

5. Article 39(b) falls under Part IV of the Constitution (Directive Principles of State policy). It places an obligation on the state to create policy towards securing the ownership and control of the material resources of the community are so distributed as best to subserve the common good.