In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court’s nine-judge Constitution bench ruled on Tuesday that not all privately owned properties can be acquired by the government under Article 39(b) of the Constitution, even if it is for the public good.

The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, clarified that while the state may acquire certain private properties under specific circumstances, a blanket acquisition of all private resources is not allowed. This ruling overturns Justice Krishna Iyer’s earlier judgment, which had allowed the state to acquire all privately owned resources for distribution under Article 39(b).

The court emphasized that private properties can only be considered “material resources” of the community, as defined in Article 39(b), if they have a significant impact on the community. Furthermore, laws that advance the objectives of Article 39(b) will continue to receive constitutional protection under Article 31(C).

The majority opinion, written by CJI Chandrachud and supported by Justices Hrishikesh Roy, JB Pardiwala, Manoj Misra, Rajesh Bindal, SC Sharma, and Augustine George Masih, addressed the crucial issue of whether private properties could be classified as “material resources of the community” and thus subject to state acquisition for the common good.

Justice BV Nagarathna partially dissented, while Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia opposed the majority ruling in its entirety, disagreeing with all key aspects. This decision redefines the interpretation of Article 39(b), setting clearer boundaries on government authority over private property in India.