- The Right to Property was originally a Fundamental Right under Article 31. However, it was removed from the list of Fundamental Rights by the 44th Amendment Act, 1978, and was made a legal right under Article 300A in Part XII of the Constitution. - Statement A is correct. As a legal right under Article 300A, the right to property can be regulated, curtailed, or modified by an ordinary law passed by Parliament, which does not require a constitutional amendment (unlike modifications to Fundamental Rights, which would typically require one). - Statement B is correct. Article 300A states that "No person shall be deprived of his property save by authority of law". This implies that deprivation of property can only occur through a valid law passed by the legislature (legislative action). It protects property against arbitrary action by the executive which is not backed by law, but a valid law can authorize the deprivation of property. - Statement C is correct. Since the Right to Property is no longer a Fundamental Right, a person whose right under Article 300A is violated cannot directly approach the Supreme Court under Article 32 (the right to constitutional remedies, which is only available for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights). However, they can approach the High Court under Article 226 for violation of a legal right, or file a suit in lower courts. Therefore, the statement that the aggrieved person can directly go to the High Court and not the Supreme Court (under Article 32) is correct.