State: Definition and Judicial Interpretation [Part-III: Article 12]

1. Introduction #

The term “State” in Article 12 of the Constitution of India determines against whom Fundamental Rights can be enforced.
Fundamental Rights are primarily available against State action, not private individuals. Hence, defining the “State” is crucial for enforcing constitutional guarantees under Part III.

---

2. Text of Article 12 #

“In this part, unless the context otherwise requires, the State includes—
(a) the Government and Parliament of India;
(b) the Government and the Legislature of each of the States; and
(c) all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.”

Thus, Article 12 uses an inclusive definition, not exhaustive — enabling courts to interpret it expansively.

---

3. Components of the State #

---

4. Judicial Interpretation — Evolution of “Other Authorities” #

The expression “other authorities” has been the subject of extensive judicial interpretation.
Courts have progressively expanded its meaning from strictly governmental bodies to semi-governmental and public sector bodies performing public functions.

5. Landmark Cases (FIRAC) #

CASE 1 — Held to be “State” #

Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (AIR 1967 SC 1857) #

Facts:
The Rajasthan Electricity Board, a statutory corporation, dismissed an employee. He challenged it on the ground that his Fundamental Rights under Article 14 were violated.

Issue:
Whether a statutory corporation like the Rajasthan Electricity Board is “State” under Article 12.

Rule:
“Other authorities” include all bodies created by the Constitution or statute, on which powers of the State are conferred.

Application:
The Board was established by statute, enjoyed governmental powers (supply of electricity, fixation of tariffs), and performed public duties.

Conclusion:
The Rajasthan Electricity Board was held to be State under Article 12.

Held: A statutory corporation performing public duties and created by law is “State.”

CASE 2 — Held to be “State” #

Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (AIR 1981 SC 487) #

Facts:
Admissions to an engineering college run by a society registered under the J&K Societies Registration Act were challenged as violating Article 14 (arbitrary procedure).

Issue:
Whether a society registered under a law (not a statutory corporation) but substantially controlled by the government can be regarded as “State.”

Rule:
A body is “State” if it is an instrumentality or agency of the government.

Application:
The college was fully financed, managed, and controlled by the Government; the governing council consisted of government nominees.

Conclusion:
Held to be “State” under Article 12 despite being a registered society.

Held: The test is functional and financial control, not the form of incorporation.

CASE 3 — Not Held to be “State” #

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

Facts:
BCCI (Board of Control for Cricket in India) was accused of violating Article 14 in team selection. The question was whether BCCI is “State.”

Issue:
Whether BCCI is an instrumentality of the government.

Rule:
A body performing a public function is not necessarily “State” unless it is financially, functionally, and administratively dominated by the government.

Application:
BCCI was an autonomous body; not created by statute, received no financial assistance, and functioned independently.

Conclusion:
BCCI is not “State” under Article 12.

Held: Mere performance of public duties (like organizing cricket) does not make a body “State.”

CASE 4 — Not Held to be “State” #

Chander Mohan Khanna v. NCERT (AIR 1992 SC 76) #

Facts:
An employee of NCERT alleged violation of Article 14 and sought constitutional remedy.

Issue:
Is NCERT a “State” under Article 12?

Rule:
To be “State,” a body must be under deep and pervasive control of the government, performing functions of public importance closely related to governmental duties.

Application:
Though NCERT received government aid and performed educational functions, it was an autonomous society with its own management.

Conclusion:
NCERT was not held to be “State.”

Held: Government funding or supervision alone is not enough — control must be deep, pervasive, and functional.

6. Tests Evolved by the Supreme Court (Ajay Hasia & Others) #

The presence of multiple factors increases the likelihood of being held “State,” though no single factor is conclusive.

7. Comprehensive Table: What Has Been Held as “State” and What Has Not #

---

8. Recent Trend #

• The Supreme Court now applies a “functional and public duty test.”

  Test	Question Asked	If Yes → Body May Be “State” or Amenable to Writ
  Functional Test	Does the body perform governmental or public functions?	✅ Yes
  Public Duty Test	Does it owe public obligations that impact Fundamental Rights?	✅ Yes

  ---

  In essence:
  👉 Functional test → Looks at the nature of functions performed.
  👉 Public duty test → Looks at the obligation owed to the public.

  Both together ensure that any entity — whether statutory, corporate, or private — cannot escape constitutional responsibility when performing public functions or duties.

• Even if a body is not “State,” it may still be amenable to writ jurisdiction (Article 226) if it performs a public function or public duty.

Example: BCCI v. Cricket Association of Bihar (2017) — Though not “State” under Article 12, BCCI was held amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 because it performs public functions like team selection and representing India internationally.

9. Conclusion #

The definition of “State” under Article 12 has evolved from a narrow, structural test to a broad, functional test.
It now covers statutory, constitutional, and government-controlled bodies performing public duties.
However, private entities with minimal government control remain outside its ambit, unless performing public functions affecting constitutional rights.

“The concept of ‘State’ is not frozen; it must grow with the expanding role of government in people’s lives.” — Justice P. N. Bhagwati (Ajay Hasia)