Article 300A is a constitutional provision in the Indian Constitution, located in Part XII under the chapter "Finance, Property, Contracts and Suits". The article's text is concise: "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law".
This provision was introduced by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, which fundamentally changed the status of the right to property in India. Before this amendment, the right to property was a Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(f) (the right to acquire, hold, and dispose of property) and Article 31 (protection against deprivation of property without compensation). The frequent use of property-related litigation created obstacles for the government in implementing socio-economic reforms, particularly land reforms, which led to several amendments to dilute the right.
The 44th Amendment Act, 1978, deleted Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31, and inserted Article 300A, transforming the right to property from a Fundamental Right into a constitutional right or a legal right. The key mechanism of Article 300A is that the State can only deprive a person of their property if it is done through a valid, existing law enacted by a competent legislature, and not merely by an executive order or fiat. This ensures protection against arbitrary state action.
The right under Article 300A is not absolute; it acknowledges the State's power of eminent domain, allowing property acquisition for public purposes, provided a lawful procedure is followed. While the article itself does not explicitly mandate compensation, the Supreme Court has often inferred the obligation to pay compensation, which must not be illusory or arbitrary. This provision connects directly to the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act), which governs the process and compensation for land acquisition. A violation of Article 300A cannot be directly challenged in the Supreme Court under Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies), as it is no longer a Fundamental Right, but it can be challenged in a High Court under Article 226.