TO PIC : DO C T R I

NE O F
EM INE N T
DO M A I N
Submitted by: Submitted to:
Jagriti Dr. Manjinder Gulyani
Roll no.: 87 (Assistant Professor of
Section ‘A’ Constitutional Law of
B.A.LL.B.(Hons.) India-I)
3rd Semester Institute of Law,KUK
EVOLUTION
Doctrine of Eminent Domain is derived from the
Western countries and was strictly followed in India.
The term “Eminent Domain” is taken from the legal
dissertation De Jure Belli et Pacis, written by the
Dutch jurist Hugo Grotius in 1625 which used the
term dominium eminens (Latin for supreme lordship).
 MEANING
Eminent domain is the right of the Central or State Government to
acquire private property for public purpose. It is the absolute power
over the land within its territory.
Eminent domain means the government deprives the
individual property for the interest of the general public.
The authority on the acquisition of land must pay the
compensation from what the land has been acquired.
MAXIMS RELIED ON EMINENT
DOMAIN
1) Salus Populi Supreme Les Esto
- The welfare of the people is the paramount law.
2) Necessita Public Major Est Quan
- The public necessity is greater than the private necessity.
 The expropriator must enter a private
property.

The entrance into private property must

be for more than a momentary period.
The entry into the property should be
ELEMENT under warrant or Colour of legal
S authority .
The property must be devoted to a
public use or otherwise informally
appropriated or injuriously affected.
The utilisation of the property for the
public use must be in such a way as to
oust the owner and deprive him of all
beneficial enjoyment of the property.
 APPLICATION OF EMINENT
DOMAIN
IN INDIA
• The Constitution of India first provided the Right to Property (which includes land) under Article
19 and 31.
• The Forty-Fourth Amendment 1978 erased the Right to Property from the list of important rights
with an introduction of a new provision, Article 300-A.
State of Maharashtra v. Chandrabhan
• The amendment safeguarded that the right to property “is no more a fundamental right but
somewhat a constitutional/legal right/ as a statutory right”.
• In the event of violation, the remedy obtainable to an affected person is through the High court
under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution and not under Supreme Court under Article 32 of the
Constitution.
ARTICLE 300-A AND THE
DOCTRINE OF EMINENT
DOMAIN
• Article 300-A which merely says, “No person shall be deprived of his property save by
authority of law.” Hence, the rights in property can be curtailed, abridged or modified by the
State only by exercising its legislative power. An executive order depriving a person of his
property without being backed by a law is not constitutionally valid.
CONDITIONS :
In addition to that, to say valid it must satisfy the following three tests:
i. The authority which ha enacted the law must have the legislative competency to do so;
ii. It must not infringe upon any other fundamental right guaranteed by part III of the
Constitutional; and
iii. It must not violate any other provision of the Constitution.
Basantibai v. State of Maharashtra
COMPENSATION
• State must pay compensation at the marketplace value for such land, building or structure
acquired (Inserted by Constitution, Seventeenth Amendmment) Act,1964, the same can be
found in the earlier decisions when property right was a fundamental right.
• The Collector shall determine the market value of the land by considering the,
1. Market value of the land.
2. The average sale price for a similar type of land situated in the nearest area or village.
3. Consented Compensation amount agreed.
 PUBLIC PURPOSE
The requirement of public purpose is implicit in compulsory acquisition of
property by the State or, what is called, the exercise of its power of “Eminent
Domain”.
The principle of compulsory acquisition of property, is founded on the superior
claims of the whole community over an individual citizen but is applicable
only in those cases where private property is wanted for public use, or
demanded by the public welfare and that no instance is known in which it has
been taken for the mere purpose of raising a revenue by sale or otherwise and
the exercise of such a power is utterly destructive of individual right.
State of Bombay v/s R.S. Nanji
Scindia Employees’ Union v/s State ofMaharashtra & Others
LIMITS OF THE DOCTRINE
OF EMINENT DOMAIN
The court have generally placed limitation on
themselves:-
• To provide the compensation for which the property is required.
• It stated that the interest of the community is always superior to
the interest of the individual.
Sooraram Pratap Reddy v. Collector
PROS OF EMINENT
DOMAIN
• The public benefits.
• It prevents the ability of a few or one to blackmail a government
into paying more.
• It helps everyone save money.
• Property proprietors can fight for what they feel is a reasonable cost.
CONS OF THE EMINENT
DOMAIN
• It is a framework that is effortlessly manhandled.
• Reasonable pay isn’t in every case reasonable.
• It makes the establishment for mass expulsions.
• Each state as various ways that the law works.
CONCLUSION
Conceptually, the origin of the State’s power to obtain land going to an individual lies in the right
of eminent domain. Therefore, Right to Property is not absolute right; it allows the state meddling
with it for genuine purposes. However to defend the State’s interference with private property
many Constitution and Human Rights leaflets require it to be the public interest.
therefore, the word “public purpose” defined under the Right to Fair Compensation and
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act is moderately less
unclear, it will still not stop the judiciary from looking into questions of misuse in actual gaining
or use of land but moderately fewer chances of abuse of eminent domain power.