Article 12 of the Costitution of India with Case law
Article 12 of the Constitution of India – Explained with Case Laws
🔹 Text of Article 12
“In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, ‘the State’ includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States, and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.”
🔹 Scope and Importance of Article 12
Article 12 defines the term "State" for the purpose of Part III (Fundamental Rights) of the Constitution. It is crucial because Fundamental Rights can be enforced only against the ‘State’, and not generally against private individuals or entities.
🔹 Entities Included Under "State"
As per Article 12, the following are considered as "State":
Government of India (Union Government)
Parliament of India
State Governments
State Legislatures
Local authorities – e.g., Municipalities, Panchayats
Other authorities – This has been interpreted broadly through judicial decisions.
🔹 Judicial Interpretation of "Other Authorities"
Courts have elaborated the term "other authorities" through various judgments, especially in determining whether a body or institution is "State" under Article 12.
🔹 Leading Case Laws on Article 12
✅ Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967 AIR 1857)
Held: The term "other authorities" includes all authorities created by the Constitution or by any law on whom powers are conferred by law.
Significance: First major case that extended "State" to statutory bodies.
✅ Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram (1975 AIR 1331)
Held: Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC), Life Insurance Corporation (LIC), and Industrial Finance Corporation are “State” under Article 12.
Reason: They performed public functions and were substantially controlled by the government.
✅ Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (1979 AIR 1628)
Held: A body is “State” if it is:
Created by a statute
Functionally or financially controlled by the government
Performs public duties
✅ Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981 AIR 487)
Held: A government-financed and controlled society (educational institution) was held to be a “State”.
Laid down a test:
Deep and pervasive control by the government
Public functions performed
Financial assistance by the State
✅ Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002 5 SCC 111)
Held: CSIR was held to be “State” under Article 12.
Significance: Reaffirmed the "functional and financial control test".
❌ Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India (2005 4 SCC 649)
Held: Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is not "State" under Article 12.
Reason: It was not substantially financed or controlled by the government.
Significance: Limits Article 12 to only those private bodies that perform governmental functions under State control.
🔹 Tests to Determine Whether a Body is a "State"
Courts have laid down six key tests:
Financial resources of the State used
Deep and pervasive State control
Functional character of the body (public duty)
Whether it is a government department transferred to a corporation
Enjoyment of State-conferred monopoly
Whether it is under a statutory obligation
🔹 Conclusion
Article 12 is a gateway to the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. It has evolved through judicial interpretations, especially with respect to "other authorities." Courts have maintained a balance between extending rights against powerful institutions and limiting it to avoid overreach into private entities.
RELATED Blog
0 comments