"Right To Property" is discussed under article 300(a) of the constitution of India.
Definition of public property is defined under "prevention of damage to public property 1984" as " any property owned by the government (central or state or local level ) .This includes the property in movable or immovable form such as roads , bridges ,public buildings, transportation infrastructure ,machinery ,and parks".

Public property matter of union list - The central government can acquire any property under public property as welfare of public but this provision is also under judicial review now .It is further cited as "BULLDOZER JUSTICE" in the given article.

Historical Analysis: The history of property rights in India is marked by various amendments of the Constitution.

1. Land Ceiling Act During Independence: The land ceiling act limits the amount of land that a family or individual can own. Any land that exceeds the limit is called surplus land, and the Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP) provides guidelines for the state to ensure public welfare. Surplus land is distributed among landless people, such as tenants, farmers, or agricultural laborers.
    
2. Removal of Right to Property from Fundamental Rights: The 44th Amendment of the Constitution removed the right to property from the fundamental rights and made it a legal right.
    
3. Right to Property and Article 300A: ARTICLE 300A of the Constitution states that no person shall be deprived of their property without the authority of law. This ensures that property cannot be taken without proper legal procedure.
   1. The government must take physical possession of the property.
   2. The government may only deprive a person of their property for a greater public purpose.
   3. The government must follow a reasonable and efficient procedure to acquire property, including providing a reasonable decision, hearing objections, and providing notice.
   4. The government must pay fair compensation for the property.
   5. The right to property under Article 300A is a constitutional right, but not a fundamental right, which means one cannot approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 to challenge property deprivation.
       

Current Status of Property Right Under the Constitution:

The right to property is governed by Article 300A of the Indian Constitution, protecting individuals from being deprived of their property without legal authority. This applies to all people except non-citizens.

• DPSP (Responsibility of the State - Article 39(b)): Article 39(b) requires the state to create policies for distributing material resources to serve the common good. Private properties are excluded as they are not material resources. Explanation: Distribution of resources should aim to fulfill common goals and public welfare.
   
• Why a Legal Right: The right to property was made a legal right under Article 300A due to socio-economic changes and land reforms. For example, in AK Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950), the Madras HC upheld the constitutionality of state actions for public order.
   
• Status of Article 31(c) with respect to Articles 39(b) and 39(c):
  1. 1971: In Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala, the second part of Article 31C was struck down.
  2. 1976: The 42nd Amendment extended Article 31C to all DPSPs.
  3. 1980: In Minerva Mills v. Union of India, the 42nd Amendment was struck down, raising questions about Article 31C's scope.
      
• Bulldozer Justice:Refers to the unconstitutional use of bulldozers for political purposes, violating the rule of law and targeting families of accused individuals, depriving them of shelter.
   

Judicial Interpretation of Article 39(B) in Past Cases:

1. State of Karnataka v. Shri Ranganath Reddy (1977): The Supreme Court addressed nationalization of private transport companies, ruling that private resources generally do not fall under 'material resources of the community.'
    
2. Sanjeev Coke Manufacturing Co. v. Bharat Coking Coal Ltd.: The Supreme Court upheld the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalization) Act, 1972, affirming nationalization aligned with constitutional mandates.
    
3. Mafatlal Industries v. Union of India (1983): The Supreme Court clarified citizens' rights and remedies for the refund of unlawfully recovered taxes.

Supreme Court's Judgement Over Acquiring Private Property for Public Welfare:

In a landmark judgment on November 5, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that not all private property qualifies as "material resources of the community" under Article 39(b). The judgment emphasized:

1. Private property can only be acquired with substantial public welfare justification.
2. State acquisition must serve verified public welfare needs.
3. Arbitrary classification of private property as "community resources" is minimized.
4. Redistribution policies must promote fairness and ensure security for high-value assets.

Conclusion
From the historical analysis with respect to ruling of public property it is clearly evident that government for the interest of citizens and for building a welfare state may acquire a property as public property, but it may sometimes used as political tool to acquire maximum political benefits.

But, under the notion of India being democratic, system of checks and balances is assured over government by means of opposition as most importantly judiciary of India which is the guardian of fundamental rights of citizens and protecting against arbitrary and discriminating practices of government.

The recent example of which is, "BULLDOZER JUSTICE".