freedoms of speech and expression is a fundamental right available only to citizen of india.
fundamental right available only to citizen of india?
freedoms of speech and expression
na
na
the constitution of india originally provided the right to property (which includes land) under articles 19 and 31. article 19 guaranteed that all citizens have the right to acquire, hold and dispose of property. article 31 stated that "no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law." it also indicated that compensation would be paid to a person whose property has been taken for public purposes (often subject to wide range of meaning). the forty-fourth amendment of 1978 deleted the right to property from the list of fundamental rights with an introduction of a new provision, article 300-a, which provided that "no person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law" (constitution 44th amendment, w.e.f. 10.6.1979). the amendment ensured that the right to property‟ is no longer a fundamental right but rather a constitutional/legal right/as a statutory right and in the event of breach, the remedy available to an aggrieved person is through the high court under article 226 of the indian constitution and not the supreme court under article 32 of the constitution. state must pay compensation at the market value for such land, building or structure acquired (inserted by constitution, seventeenth amendment) act, 1964, the same can be found in the earlier rulings when property right was a fundamental right (such as 1954 air 170, 1954 scr 558, which propounded that the word "compensation" deployed in article 31(2) implied full compensation, that is the market value of the property at the time of the acquisition. the legislature must "ensure that what is determined as payable must be compensation, that is, a just equivalent of what the owner has been deprived of"). elsewhere, justice, reddy, o chinnappa ruled (state of maharashtra v. chandrabhan tale on 7 july 1983) that the fundamental right to property has been abolished because of its incompatibility with the goals of "justice" social, economic and political and "equality of status and of opportunity" and with the establishment of "a socialist democratic republic, as contemplated by the constitution. there is no reason why a new concept of property should be introduced in the place of the old so as to bring in its wake the vestiges of the doctrine of laissez faire and create, in the name of efficiency, a new oligarchy. efficiency has many facets and one is yet to discover an infallible test of efficiency to suit the widely differing needs of a developing society such as ours" (1983 air 803, 1983 scr (3) 327). the concept of efficiency has been introduced by justice reddy, o chinnappa, coupled with the condition of infallibility.
land acquisition in india