Article 31 of Indian Constitution, Amendments, Case Laws

Article 31 of Indian Constitution originally guaranteed the Right to Property as a Fundamental Right. It was included in Part III of the Constitution and protected individuals from being deprived of their property without legal authority.

However, the Right to Property was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978. Today, property is protected as a constitutional legal right under Article 300A.

Article 31 of Indian Constitution and Land Reforms

Article 31 of the Indian Constitution played an important role in land reforms by protecting the Right to Property, but its strong protection often led to legal challenges against laws aimed at abolishing zamindari, redistributing land and reducing economic inequality.

• Land Acquisition: Protected property owners when the State acquired land for public purposes.
• Zamindari Abolition: Land reform laws were frequently challenged as violations of the Right to Property.
• Agrarian Reforms: Created constitutional challenges to laws aimed at redistribution of agricultural land.
• Social Justice: The government sought to balance private property rights with economic equality and social welfare.
• Constitutional Amendments: Articles 31A and 31B were introduced to protect certain land reform laws from Fundamental Rights challenges.
• Right to Property: The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978 removed the Right to Property from Fundamental Rights.
• Article 300A: Property is now protected as a constitutional legal right under Article 300A.

Important Amendments Related to Article 31 of Indian Constitution

The Important Amendments Related to Article 31 changed the constitutional status of the Right to Property and provided protection to land reforms and socio-economic legislation from certain Fundamental Rights challenges. 

‹ ›

Why Was Article 31 Deleted?

Article 31 was deleted because the Right to Property as a Fundamental Right often led to legal challenges against land reforms and public welfare laws. The government wanted greater freedom to implement land redistribution, economic reforms and development projects. The 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978 removed Article 31 from Part III. However, the Right to Property was retained as a constitutional legal right under Article 300A.

Articles 31A, 31B and 31C

Articles 31A, 31B and 31C were introduced through constitutional amendments to protect certain land reform, social welfare and socio-economic laws from challenges based on Fundamental Rights.

• Article 31A: Protects certain laws related to land reforms, acquisition of estates and management of property from challenges under Articles 14 and 19.
• Article 31B: Provides protection to laws listed in the Ninth Schedule from being declared invalid for violating Fundamental Rights, subject to the Basic Structure Doctrine.
• Article 31C: Provides protection to laws made to implement Article 39(b) and Article 39(c), relating to the distribution of resources and prevention of concentration of wealth.
• Important: Although Article 31 was deleted by the 44th Constitutional Amendment Act, 1978, Articles 31A, 31B and 31C continue to remain part of the Constitution.

Article 31 of Indian Constitution Case Laws

The Right to Property under Article 31 led to several landmark Supreme Court cases that shaped the relationship between Fundamental Rights, land reforms and Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.

• Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951): The Supreme Court upheld the First Constitutional Amendment and accepted Parliament’s power to amend Fundamental Rights.
• Sajjan Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1965): The Court upheld the 17th Constitutional Amendment, which protected certain land reform laws from constitutional challenges.
• Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967): The Supreme Court held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights in a way that takes away or abridges them.
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The Court established the Basic Structure Doctrine, holding that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution through amendments.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): The Court struck down the attempt to give unlimited priority to Directive Principles over Fundamental Rights and reinforced the importance of judicial review.
• I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007): The Supreme Court held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule after 24 April 1973 can be reviewed if they violate the Basic Structure of the Constitution.