Consider the following statements in the context of the status of the...
The 44th Amendment Act of 1978 abolished the right to property as a Fundamental Right by repealing Article 19(1)(f) and Article 31 from Part III. Instead, the Act inserted a new Article 300A in Part XII under the heading ‘Right to Property’. It provides that no person shall be deprived of his property except by authority of law. Thus, the right to property remains a legal right or a constitutional right, though no longer a fundamental right.
The right to property as a legal right (as distinct from the Fundamental Rights) has the following implications:
a) It can be regulated i.e., curtailed, abridged or modified without a constitutional amendment by an ordinary law of the Parliament.
b) It protects private property against executive action but not against legislative action. So, statement 1 is not correct.
c) In case of violation, the aggrieved person cannot directly move the Supreme Court under Article 32 (right to constitutional remedies including writs) for its enforcement. He can move the High Court under Article 226. So, statement 2 is not correct.
d) No guaranteed right to compensation in case of acquisition or requisition of the private property by the State. So, statement 3 is not correct. Therefore, the correct answer is d.