Wealth Inequality Still Enormous; Views Of Krishna Iyer & Chinnappa Reddy Haven't Lost Relevance : Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia In Dissent
Live LawIn a nine-judge Constitution bench judgment where majority held that all private properties cannot form part of the 'material resources of the community' which the State is obliged to equitably redistribute as per the Directive Principles of State Policy under Article 39 of the Constitution, Justice Sudhandhu Dhulia dissented. Material resources in Article 39 without privately owned resources being a part of it makes no sense Justice Dhulia held that there was only a 'doubt' raised whether material resources of the community would include private owned resources and said: "There should be no confusion that the expression “material resources of the community” used in Article 39 includes privately owned resources. Justice Dhulia further added: "The aims and objects of our freedom fighters, their vision for a just and equitable society, the extensive debates in the Constituent Assembly, the provisions incorporated in Part IV, even other than Article 39, all have to be taken into consideration and they leave us with no doubt that privately owned resources are a part of “material resources of the community”, as given in Article 39." Article 31C protection not available if private owned resources not a part of 'material resources of the community' Justice Dhulia also opined that the protection of Article 31-C is only required when private property and privately owned resources are being acquired to subserve the common good and while doing so it is violating Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution.
History of this topic
Supreme Court Overturns Krishna Iyer Doctrine on Private Property Rights and Material Resources
The Hindu
Can’t accept extreme view of all private property belonging to community: SC
Hindustan TimesDiscover Related
