22 Jan 2025

THE-STATE-IN-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-MEANING-AND-IMPLICATIONS-UNDER-ARTICLE-12

THE-STATE-IN-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-MEANING-AND-IMPLICATIONS-UNDER-ARTICLE-12

THE 'STATE' IN INDIAN CONSTITUTION: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 12

 

INTRODUCTION
Article 12 of the Indian Constitution defines the term "State" for the purpose of enforcing fundamental rights. It includes the Government of India, Parliament, State Legislatures, and local or other authorities within India or under its control. While the judiciary is also an organ of the State, it is not explicitly included unless it infringes fundamental rights while performing non-judicial functions. This definition ensures accountability of public bodies under the Constitution.


DEFINITION OF STATE

Under Article 12, unless the context otherwise requires, “the State” includes:

  1. The Government and Parliament of India

  2. The Government Legislature of each of the States

  3. All local or other authorities:

    • Within the territory of India; or

    • Under the control of the Government of India.

The term ‘local authorities’ refers to bodies such as Municipalities, District Boards, Panchayats, Improvement Trusts, Port Trusts, and Mining Settlement Boards.

The Supreme Court has clarified that ‘other authorities’ encompass all entities created by the Constitution or statute on whom powers are conferred by law. Notably, it is unnecessary for these authorities to perform exclusively government functions (Electricity Board, Rajasthan v. Mohanlal, AIR 1967 SC 1957).

  • The Gujarat High Court has ruled that the President acts as the “State” when issuing an order under Article 359 of the Constitution (Haroobhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1967 Guj 229).


DETERMINATION OF INSTRUMENTALITY OR AGENCY OF THE STATE

In Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib (AIR 1981 SC 481), the Supreme Court established six criteria to determine whether an entity qualifies as an instrumentality or agency of the State:

  1. Ownership of Share Capital: If the government holds the entire share capital of the corporation, it strongly indicates that the corporation is an instrumentality or agency of the government.

  2. Financial Dependence: Substantial financial assistance from the State, sufficient to meet nearly the entire expenditure of the corporation, indicates a government character.

  3. Monopoly Status: If the corporation enjoys a monopoly status granted or protected by the State, it may qualify as an instrumentality.

  4. Deep and Pervasive Control: Extensive State control over the corporation's functions and policies signifies its status as a State agency.

  5. Public Importance of Functions: If the corporation performs functions of public significance closely aligned with government functions, it is likely to be classified as an instrumentality.

  6. Transfer of Government Functions: The transfer of a government department to a corporation supports an inference of it being an agency of the State.


IMPORTANT JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS

  1. Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India (2005) 4 SCC 649:

    • Applying the Ajay Hasia tests, the Supreme Court held that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not a State for the purposes of Article 12. The Court reasoned that the BCCI was neither financially nor administratively dominated by the Government, and the regulatory control exercised by the Government was not pervasive.

  2. Judiciary and the State:

    • Although the judiciary is an organ of the State, it is not explicitly mentioned in Article 12. However, when performing judicial functions, such as interpreting fundamental rights against legislative or executive actions, it does not occasion the infringement of fundamental rights and thus falls outside the purview of ‘State’ under Article 12 (A.R. Antualay v. R.S. Nayak, (1988) 2 SCC 602).


CONCLUSION

The concept of “State” under Article 12 is crucial for the enforcement and protection of fundamental rights. It encompasses entities that are significantly controlled by the government or perform public functions. Private organizations, unless they fulfill specific criteria, are excluded. This distinction ensures that accountability for constitutional compliance is appropriately assigned to entities with public authority or functions.

"Unlock the Potential of Legal Expertise with LegalMantra.net - Your Trusted Legal Consultancy Partner”

DISCLAIMER: THE CONTENTS OF THIS DOCUMENT ARE PROVIDED BASED ON CURRENT PROVISIONS AND INFORMATION AVAILABLE. WHILE EVERY EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO ENSURE ACCURACY AND RELIABILITY, NO RESPONSIBILITY IS ASSUMED FOR ANY ERRORS OR OMISSIONS. USERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO REFER TO APPLICABLE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. THIS INFORMATION IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE, AND NO LIABILITY IS ACCEPTED FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES ARISING FROM ITS USE.

Article Compiled by:-

~Neel Lakhtariya

(LegalMantra.net Team)