1. Leave granted.

Introduction: The Kolkata Municipal Corporation claims to have acquired the property of respondent no. 1 in exercise of powers under Section 352 of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 .

A single Judge and the Division Bench of the High Court have concurrently held that there is no such power of compulsory acquisition of immovable property under Section 352 . While upholding the decision of the High Court, we have given our additional reasons by interpreting the text and the context in which Section 352 is placed in the Act. Rejecting the alternative argument of the appellant-Corporation that there is also a provision for compensation under Section 363 of the Act when land is acquired under Section 352 , we have examined the constitutional position of acquisition of immovable property whereunder the mere presence of power to acquire coupled with a provision for payment of fair compensation by itself is not sufficient for a valid acquisition. Interpreting “authority of law” in Article 300A of the Constitution, we have held that a minimum content of a constitutional right to property comprises of seven sub-rights or procedures such as the right to