Doctrine of Eminent Domain: Comprehensive Legal Notes

Definition : Eminent Domain is the inherent sovereign power of the

state to compulsorily acquire private property for public use, subject to
payment of just compensation to the property owner.
The doctrine is founded on two fundamental legal maxims:
"Salus populi suprema lex esto" - The well-being of the people is the
supreme law
"Necessitas publica major est quam" - Public need is greater than
private need
According to Black's Law Dictionary, eminent domain represents "the
inherent power of the government to take over privately owned property".
It encompasses the state's authority to take private property for public
use by a state, municipality, or private person/corporation authorized to
exercise functions of public character, following payment of just
compensation to the owner.
Understanding: Introduction in Plain Language
Imagine you own a piece of land, but the government needs it to build a
highway that will benefit thousands of people. The doctrine of eminent
domain allows the government to acquire your land even without your
consent, but only if three conditions are met: the taking must serve a
genuine public purpose, it must be done through proper legal procedures,
and you must receive fair compensation for your property.
This legal principle balances individual property rights with the broader
needs of society. It recognizes that sometimes private interests must give
way to public welfare, but it also protects property owners from arbitrary
government action by requiring due process and fair compensation.t
Real-World Examples
Infrastructure Development
Highway Construction: Government acquiring private land to build
roads, bridges, or expressways that serve public transportation needs
Railway Projects: Land acquisition for railway lines, stations, and related
infrastructure
Airport Expansion: Taking private property to expand airports for
improved air connectivity
Urban Development
 Slum Redevelopment: Acquiring slum areas to build better
housing and provide improved living conditions
 Smart City Projects: Land acquisition for developing modern
urban infrastructure under smart city initiatives
 Metro Rail Systems: Acquiring land for constructing metro rail
networks in major cities
Public Utilities
  Power Transmission: Acquiring land for power lines, substations,
and renewable energy projects
 Water Supply Systems: Land for reservoirs, treatment plants, and
distribution networks
 Telecommunications: Infrastructure for mobile towers and fiber
optic networks
Defense and Security
 Military Installations: Land acquisition for defense
establishments, cantonments, and strategic facilities
 Border Security: Acquiring land along international borders for
security infrastructure
Legal Information: Constitutional and Statutory Framework
Constitutional Provisions
Article 300-A
Article 300-A of the Indian Constitution states: "No person shall be
deprived of his property save by authority of law". This provision:
 Establishes property as a constitutional right (not fundamental right)
 Requires legislative authority for property acquisition
 Provides constitutional basis for eminent domain power.
Article 39(b) - Directive Principles
Recent Supreme Court interpretation clarifies that Article 39(b) does not
serve as a source of legislative power for property acquisition. The power
derives from sovereign eminent domain and Entry 42 of List III in the
Seventh Schedule.
Statutory Framework
The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
(RFCTLARR Act)
This Act replaced the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and includes:
Key Provisions:
Social Impact Assessment (SIA): Mandatory study to evaluate
broader consequences on communities
 Public Purpose Determination: Clear criteria for establishing
legitimate public purpose
 Consent Requirements: 70% consent for PPP projects, 80% for
private companies
 Fair Compensation: Enhanced compensation formula including
solatium and rehabilitation
Essential Elements of Eminent Domain:
1. Taking: Compulsory acquisition of private property
2. Private Property: Land, buildings, or other immovable assets
3. Public Use/Purpose: Legitimate benefit to the general public
4. Just Compensation: Fair market value plus additional benefits
Types of Compensation
 Compensation for complete property acquisition
 Compensation for partial property seizure
 Compensation for improvements and structures
 Compensation for business losses and livelihood
 Compensation for rented property rights
Case Laws: Landmark Judicial Decisions
State of Bombay v. R.S. Nanji (1956)
Key Holdings:
 "It is impossible to precisely define the expression 'public
purpose'"
 Prima facie test: Government is the best judge of public purpose
but not the sole judge
 Judicial Review: Courts have jurisdiction to determine whether
acquisition serves genuine public purpose
 Case-by-case analysis: All facts and circumstances must be
examined to establish public purpose
Significance: This judgment established the framework for judicial review
of eminent domain actions and emphasized that courts can scrutinize
government decisions on public purpose.
Scindia Employees' Union v. State of Maharashtra (1996)
Key Holdings:
 "The very object of compulsory acquisition is in exercise of
the power of eminent domain by the State against the
wishes or willingness of the owner"
 Continuity of Purpose: So long as public purpose subsists,
exercise of eminent domain cannot be questioned
 Sovereign Power: Confirmed eminent domain as essential
attribute of state sovereignty
Legal Principle: The case reinforced that eminent domain is a sovereign
power that can be exercised even against property owners' objections,
provided public purpose remains valid.
Property Owners Association v. State of Maharashtra (2024)
Recent Constitutional Bench Ruling:
 8-1 majority decision by Supreme Court
 Article 39(b) Clarification: Does not grant legislative power for
property acquisition
 Source of Power: Eminent domain derives from sovereign power
and Entry 42 of List III
 Material Resources: Not all private property qualifies as "material
resource of the community"
 Constitutional Safeguards: Acquisition must comply with Articles
14 (equality) and 300-A (property rights)
Coffee Board v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (1988)
Key Observation:
 "Eminent domain is an essential attribute of sovereignty of
every state"
 Universal Definition: Power of sovereign to take property for
public use without owner's consent upon making just compensation
 Inherent Power: Confirmed eminent domain as inherent
governmental authority
Compensation-Related Judicial Trends
Court decisions consistently show substantial increases in compensation
awards compared to government assessments. Examples from Punjab and
Haryana High Court:
 Ravinder Singh v. UT Chandigarh (2010): Compensation
increased from ₹3.57 lakh to ₹13.26 lakh per acre (271% increase)
 Vinita Kapoor v. State of Haryana (2010): Compensation
increased from ₹40,000 to ₹2.18 lakh per acre (445% increase)
 Chanchal Rani v. UT Chandigarh (2011): Compensation
increased from ₹4.74 lakh to ₹22.52 lakh per acre (4650% increase)
Constitutional Evolution
The doctrine has evolved through key constitutional amendments:
 Original Constitution (1950): Articles 19(1)(f) and 31 protected
property as fundamental right
 44th Amendment (1978): Removed property from fundamental
rights, introduced Article 300-A
 Keshavananda Bharati (1973): Established basic structure
doctrine protecting core constitutional features
Conclusion

The doctrine of eminent domain represents a carefully balanced legal

framework that permits state acquisition of private property while
protecting individual rights through constitutional and statutory
safeguards. Recent judicial developments, particularly the 2024 Supreme
Court ruling, have refined the scope and application of this doctrine,
emphasizing the need for genuine public purpose, due process, and fair
compensation. The evolution from the 1894 Act to the 2013 RFCTLARR Act
demonstrates India's commitment to making land acquisition more
transparent, participative, and equitable while maintaining the state's
essential power to acquire land for legitimate public purposes.