SC Judgement on Article 39(b)

The Supreme Court, by an 8-1 majority of a nine-judge Constitution bench, has restricted the government’s power to acquire private resources for public distribution.

About Supreme Court’s Ruling

Definition of “Material Resources of the Community”: Only resources that are significant to the community and fulfil specific criteria can be acquired by the State under Article 39(b).
Balancing Public Welfare and Property Rights: Chief Justice of India emphasised that the government must respect private property rights even while pursuing public welfare.
Criteria for Acquisition: The resource must be both “material” and beneficial to the community, such as resources that are scarce or critical for public well-being.
Article 39(b) and Article 300A: The ruling highlights that Article 39(b) should be considered alongside Article 300A, which protects property rights, cautioning against its misuse.
Article 31C Immunity: Laws based on Articles 39(b) and (c) get immunity from challenges under Articles 14 and 19, only if they genuinely promote public welfare.

Iyer Doctrine

● In 1977, Justice VR Krishna Iyer interpreted that all private property could potentially qualify for redistribution as a community resource.

● This approach was followed by the SC in the 1982 Sanjeev Coke case, which had broadly interpreted state power over private resources.

Related Constitutional Articles

● Article 14: Ensures equality before the law, preventing discrimination.

● Article 19: Grants fundamental freedoms, including movement, association and profession, with reasonable restrictions for public welfare.

● Article 31C: Protects laws that enforce Article 39(b) and (c) from being challenged under Articles 14 and 19 if they serve public welfare.

● Article 39(b): Directs the State to distribute resources to benefit society. It guides policies that aim to reduce inequality and ensure resources benefit everyone

● Article 39(c): Prevents wealth concentration that could harm common welfare.