The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh held that the right to property now falls within the realm of human rights. Disposing of a petition, Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal directed the Army, which had occupied the parcel of the petitioner’s land since 1978, to pay the rent accumulated over the last 46 years within a month.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh set a precedent by affirming that the right to property transcends its traditional categorization as a statutory or constitutional right, placing it firmly within the sphere of human rights.
This significant decision, delivered by Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal on November 20, mandates the Army to pay rent accrued over 46 years for land it occupied since 1978.
A Landmark Verdict on Human Rights and Property
In the judgment, Justice Nargal stated,
“The right to property is now considered not only a constitutional or statutory right but it falls within the realm of human rights. Human rights have been considered in the realm of individual rights such as right to shelter, livelihood, health, employment etc., and over the years, human rights have gained a multifaceted dimension.”
This pronouncement came while disposing of a petition filed in 2014 by Abdul Majeed Lone. The petitioner claimed that 1.6 acres of his land, located in Tangdhar near the Line of Control (LoC) in Kupwara District, had been under Army occupation since 1978.
Despite the prolonged use of his land, Lone asserted that he had not received any compensation or rent.
Eminent Domain and Compensation
Delving into the legal framework, the court elaborated on the concept of eminent domain, emphasizing the state’s obligations when intervening in private property rights. It observed,
“The state in exercise of its power of ‘eminent domain’ may interfere with the right of property of a person by acquiring the same but the same must be for a public purpose, and therefore, reasonable compensation must be paid.”
While the Centre’s counsel argued that the Army had not occupied the land, evidence provided by the revenue department contradicted this claim.
A court-ordered survey confirmed that the land in question had indeed been under the Army’s possession since 1978.
Violation of Fundamental Rights
The judgment criticized the respondents for failing to adhere to the due process of law, depriving the petitioner of his property without fair compensation. The court noted,
“The facts mentioned above clearly reveal that the respondents have violated the basic rights of the petitioner and have deprived him of the valuable constitutional right without following the procedure as envisaged under law.”
The court underscored that no state or agency has the authority to “dispossess a citizen of his property” without adhering to legal provisions.
Obligation to Compensate
Justice Nargal further highlighted the implicit duty of the state to ensure compensation in such cases, stating,
“The obligation to pay the compensation though not expressly included in Article 300A can be inferred from the said article.”
The ruling directed the Army to settle the accumulated rent within one month, ensuring that the petitioner’s rights are restored after decades of oversight.
Implications of the Judgment
This judgment not only delivers justice to Abdul Majeed Lone but also expands the understanding of human rights jurisprudence in India. By elevating property rights to the status of human rights, the court reinforces the principle that no individual can be arbitrarily deprived of their property.
The ruling serves as a reminder to state authorities of their responsibility to uphold both constitutional and human rights.
In essence, this case reiterates the inviolability of the rule of law and the need for governmental accountability, particularly when dealing with citizens’ fundamental entitlements.
The High Court’s decision could potentially influence similar cases in the future, ensuring that the sanctity of property rights remains protected within the framework of justice and equity.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Human Right
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
