Property Owners Association vs State Of Maharashtra

insc-2024-835 Supreme Court of India 5 November 2024 • Civil Appeal No. 1012 of 2002; Writ Petition No 660 of 1998; Civil Appeal No. 16879 of 1996; CIVIL APPEAL NO.1012 OF 2002; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.4367 OF 1992; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.5204 OF 1992; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.5777 OF 1992; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.7950 OF 1992; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8797 OF 1992; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.6744 OF 1993; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.2303 OF 1995; SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.13467 OF 1995; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.934 OF 1992; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.660 OF 1998; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.342 OF 1999; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.469 OF 2000; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.672 OF 2000; WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.66 OF 2024; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; Civil Appeal No.1012 of 2002; CIVIL APPEAL NO.1012 OF 2002 • 440 min read

Judges (9)

Augustine George Masih Coram B.V. Nagarathna Coram Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud Delivered Hrishikesh Roy Coram J.B. Pardiwala Coram Manoj Misra Coram Rajesh Bindal Coram Satish Chandra Sharma Coram Sudhanshu Dhulia Coram

Parties (2)

Property Owners Association Appellant State of Maharashtra Respondent

Case Significance

Property Owners Association vs State Of Maharashtra is a Supreme Court of India decision dated November 5, 2024 (citation: insc-2024-835). A 9-judge Constitution Bench considered the constitutional validity of Article 31C in light of the Kesavananda Bharati decision, examining whether 'material resources of the community' under Article 39(b) includes privately-owned resources. The majority held that privately owned resources can constitute material resources of the community, but the State must demonstrate a rational basis for distribution, and Article 31C as saved post-42nd Amendment remains valid. The bench comprised Justices Augustine George Masih, B.V. Nagarathna, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hrishikesh Roy and J.B. Pardiwala. The judgment was delivered by Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud.

Summary

A 9-judge Constitution Bench considered the constitutional validity of Article 31C in light of the Kesavananda Bharati decision, examining whether 'material resources of the community' under Article 39(b) includes privately-owned resources. The majority held that privately owned resources can constitute material resources of the community, but the State must demonstrate a rational basis for distribution, and Article 31C as saved post-42nd Amendment remains valid.

What was the outcome of Property Owners Association vs State Of Maharashtra?

A 9-judge Constitution Bench considered the constitutional validity of Article 31C in light of the Kesavananda Bharati decision, examining whether 'material resources of the community' under Article 3...

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (insc-2024-835)