In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court has provided substantial relief to farmers in Noida and Greater Noida, ruling against a District Magistrate’s order that restricted the sale of agricultural land in the flood-prone areas of the Yamuna and Hindon rivers.
The court declared the DM’s directive, which required farmers to obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) before selling their land, as unlawful.
Justice MC Tripathi and Justice Prashant Kumar, leading the bench, emphasized that although the right to property is not a fundamental right, Article 300A of the Constitution protects it as a constitutional right.
Any restrictions on this right must be reasonable and justifiable.
Case Background
The court’s decision invalidates the DM’s order dated 30 September 2020, the subsequent office memorandum from 1 October 2020, and the government order issued on July 8, 2024.
The ruling followed the hearing of multiple petitions, including one from Suresh Chand, a farmer from Gautam Budh Nagar.
In its judgment, the court noted that the Disaster Management Act does not grant the District Magistrate the authority to enforce a NOC requirement for the sale of agricultural land.
Moreover, the court asserted that the right to property includes the right to develop land, which the court linked to the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The High Court criticized the government’s argument that a NOC was merely a procedural requirement rather than a ban, dismissing it as incorrect.
The judges also pointed out the apparent irony of authorities allowing illegal construction in flood zones while simultaneously restricting farmers from selling their own land.
The court’s ruling underscores the importance of safeguarding property rights and calls for reasonable measures to prevent illegal construction in flood-prone areas.
However, it firmly rejected the imposition of arbitrary conditions on farmers’ rights to sell their land, labeling such restrictions as discriminatory.
This decision marks a victory for the petitioners, who had challenged the DM’s order on the grounds that it violated their constitutional rights.
The court concluded by reaffirming that any limitation on property rights must be backed by valid and justifiable reasons, ensuring that the rights of landowners are respected.
Also Read: Allahabad HC Rejects Compromise In Child Sexual Abuse Cases
