The Supreme Court's 2024 judgment in Property Owners' Association v. State of Maharashtra clarified the scope of which constitutional provision?

Explanation

In November 2024, a nine-judge Constitution Bench in Property Owners' Association v. State of Maharashtra clarified Article 39(b). The judgment framed the Article 39(b) issue as whether Justice Krishna Iyer's interpretation in Ranganatha Reddy, later followed in Sanjeev Coke, needed reconsideration, and whether privately owned resources could be treated as "material resources of the community". By a 7:2 majority, the Court held that privately owned resources may fall within Article 39(b), but not automatically and not merely because they satisfy material needs. It rejected the earlier expansive reading that covered all private resources, and required a context-specific assessment of the resource, its community impact, scarcity, and concentration in private hands.

Why the other options are wrong

• (A) Article 31C was discussed because it protects certain laws linked to Directive Principles, but the provision whose scope was substantively clarified in this reference was Article 39(b).
• (B) Article 14 appeared only as part of the background to earlier challenges; the central interpretive question was not equality but the meaning of "material resources of the community" in Article 39(b).
• (D) Article 300A concerns the right to property, but this case centred on whether Article 39(b) can cover privately owned resources and under what limits.

Concept

This tests Directive Principles of State Policy, especially how Article 39(b) interacts with property and redistribution. It recurs in RAS because constitutional governance questions often turn on the balance between social welfare objectives and individual property interests.

Source

• Supreme Court of India

Related questions

• A bill to amend the Constitution can be introduced:
• A bill under Article 3 for the formation of a new State requires:
• A CAG audit of the Pradhan Mantri Kaushal Vikas Yojana (PMKVY) revealed that what percentage of beneficiaries had blank, zero, Null or N/A bank-account details?
• A Financial Emergency under Article 360 must be approved by Parliament within:
• A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament can be summoned under which Article?
• A joint sitting of both Houses of Parliament under Article 108 can be called to resolve a deadlock on: