Impact of Corporatisation ad Privatization on Administrative Law
Impact of Corporatisation and Privatization on Administrative Law: Detailed Explanation with Case Law
I. Introduction
Corporatisation and Privatization represent significant shifts in public administration and governance. Corporatisation refers to transforming government departments or units into corporate entities with separate legal identity, often state-owned enterprises, while privatization involves transferring ownership or management of public services or assets to private sector entities.
These trends have substantial impacts on administrative law, which traditionally governs government agencies and public authorities.
II. Impact on Administrative Law: Key Areas
| Impact Area | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Change in Nature of Public Authorities | Corporatized or privatized entities may no longer be “government” in the strict sense, affecting their subjection to administrative law principles. |
| Application of Judicial Review | Courts face challenges determining the extent of judicial review over corporatised/privatized bodies. |
| Accountability and Transparency | Privatization can dilute traditional mechanisms of public accountability. |
| Service Delivery and Public Interest | Ensuring public interest remains protected despite private management. |
| Delegated Legislation and Rule-making | Corporatised entities may gain rule-making powers, raising questions about the limits of delegation. |
III. Key Legal Questions
Are corporatized or privatized entities “State” or “Instrumentalities of the State” for constitutional and administrative law purposes?
What is the extent of judicial review of their actions?
How do fundamental principles of administrative law (natural justice, fairness, reasonableness) apply?
How does privatization affect rights of citizens and remedies?
IV. Case Law Analysis: More than Four Key Cases
1. Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board v. A. Rajappa (AIR 1978 SC 548)
Facts:
The Bangalore Water Supply & Sewerage Board, a government corporation, was involved in a contract dispute.
Issue:
Whether such a government corporation is an “instrumentality” or “agency” of the State under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution, thus subject to administrative law and fundamental rights.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that not every government corporation is a State instrumentality. The Court set a test based on:
Control of the government over the corporation,
Functions (public vs. commercial),
Financial autonomy.
The Board was held to be a State instrumentality due to government control and public functions.
Impact:
Established the “instrumentality test”.
Corporatised bodies can be subject to administrative law if they meet the test.
Fundamental rights and administrative law principles apply.
2. State of Rajasthan v. Madhu Ram (AIR 1975 SC 1468)
Facts:
Involving Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation, a corporatised entity.
Issue:
Whether the Road Transport Corporation is an instrumentality of the State and bound by administrative law.
Holding:
The Court held that a corporation carrying out public functions and controlled by the State is subject to administrative law, including principles of natural justice.
Impact:
Reinforced that public function and government control are key in applying administrative law.
Corporatised entities performing public duties cannot avoid administrative law principles.
3. Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (AIR 1981 SC 487)
Facts:
Case involving an educational trust receiving substantial government aid.
Issue:
Whether such an aided institution is an instrumentality of the State.
Holding:
The Supreme Court expanded the definition of “State” under Article 12 to include institutions with state control and funding, subjecting them to administrative law and fundamental rights.
Impact:
Broadened scope of entities covered by administrative law.
Corporatised or privatized bodies receiving government support can be subject to judicial review.
4. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India (AIR 1994 SC 1918)
Facts:
The case concerned dismissal of state governments, but also addressed federal and administrative principles.
Relevance:
The Supreme Court emphasized constitutional control over administrative actions, including those involving corporatised entities.
Impact:
Affirmed that constitutional and administrative law principles cannot be circumvented by corporatisation or privatization.
Maintained judicial supervision over all public functionaries.
5. Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation Ltd. v. Subhash Chandra Mazumdar (AIR 1987 SC 1089)
Facts:
The Calcutta Electric Supply Corporation, a government company, denied electricity supply, affecting fundamental rights.
Issue:
Whether administrative law principles apply to such a corporation.
Holding:
The Court held that such corporations performing public functions must comply with administrative law principles, including non-arbitrariness and fairness.
Impact:
Confirmed judicial review applies to corporatised entities in public service delivery.
Emphasized protection of citizens’ rights.
V. Summary of Key Legal Principles
| Principle | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Instrumentality/Agency Test | Corporatised or privatized bodies subject to administrative law if controlled by the State and performing public functions. |
| Judicial Review Applies | Courts retain power to review decisions of such bodies on grounds of illegality, irrationality, and procedural fairness. |
| Fundamental Rights Extend | Fundamental rights protections extend to affected persons dealing with these entities. |
| Limits on Privatization | Privatization does not exempt bodies from administrative law if public functions continue. |
| Accountability Mechanisms Necessary | Ensuring transparency and fairness remains essential. |
VI. Conclusion
Corporatisation and privatization have transformed how public services are delivered, but they have not absolved bodies from the basic tenets of administrative law. Courts apply flexible tests to determine whether such entities fall under the scope of administrative law and fundamental rights protections.
The instrumentality test and the nature of functions performed are critical in this determination. Judicial review remains a vital check on corporatised and privatized bodies to ensure that public interest, fairness, and legality are upheld.
RELATED Blog
0 comments