State Cannot Deny Compensation for Dispossession: Right to Property is a Constitutional and Human Right: Madhya Pradesh High Court Orders Compensation

In a recent Judgement Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled in favor of Shashi Pandey, ordering the State to pay compensation for illegally dispossessing her land for over 36 years. The court directed the government to compensate the petitioner at ₹10,000 per month, starting from February 5, 1988, until the land is properly acquired under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation, and Resettlement Act, 2013. The court condemned the State's failure to follow due process and recognized Pandey's constitutional and human right to property.

Shashi Pandey's land, located in Maharajpur village, Jabalpur, was taken by the authorities in 1988 for the construction of a highway bypass, but without following proper acquisition procedures under the Land Acquisition Act. Despite court orders and directions, the State delayed compensating Pandey or acquiring the land legally for more than three decades.

Illegal Dispossession: The court found that Pandey’s land was taken without her consent or legal acquisition, violating her right to property under Article 300-A of the Constitution. Despite several orders from various courts, the State failed to act, forcing her to continue fighting for her rights.

Right to Compensation: The court ruled that even if the State decides to retain the land, Pandey must be compensated for the period during which she was unlawfully deprived of it. The court stressed that compensation for illegal dispossession is inherent under Article 300-A, which guarantees the right to property.

Failure to Follow Acquisition Procedures: The State argued that compensation would only be provided after acquisition proceedings. The court rejected this, emphasizing that the State cannot indefinitely delay acquisition while occupying private property.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed the State to pay ₹10,000 per month as compensation to Pandey from the date of her dispossession until the land is legally acquired. The petitioner retains the right to file a civil suit for enhanced compensation if unsatisfied with the court’s order.

This ruling reinforces the constitutional and human right to property, condemning the State’s prolonged inaction in compensating the petitioner for decades of illegal dispossession. The court's decision ensures accountability and protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the State.

Date of Decision: October 3, 2024

Smt. Shashi Pandey v. The State of Madhya Pradesh​.