Introduction to State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India
Fundamental Rights form the cornerstone of the Indian Constitution. They guarantee essential freedoms and protections to individuals against arbitrary action. However, these rights are primarily enforceable against the “State.” Therefore, a clear understanding of what constitutes the “State” is essential for determining the scope and applicability of Fundamental Rights.
Article 12 of the Constitution provides an inclusive definition of the term “State” for the purpose of Part III. Over the years, the judiciary has played a crucial role in expanding and clarifying this definition to ensure that constitutional protections are not defeated by technical or formal distinctions.
This article examines the meaning of “State” under Article 12, its components, judicial interpretation, and the various tests evolved by courts to determine whether a body or authority falls within its ambit.
Also Read : Uniform Civil Code
Text of Article 12
Article 12 of the Constitution states:
“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.”
The use of the word “includes” indicates that the definition is not exhaustive. Instead, it is expansive and capable of judicial interpretation to meet changing constitutional needs.
Importance of Article 12
The definition of “State” under Article 12 is of critical importance because Fundamental Rights under Part III are enforceable primarily against the State. If an entity is classified as a “State,” its actions can be challenged for violation of Fundamental Rights.
Without a broad and functional interpretation of Article 12, the State could evade constitutional obligations by acting through corporations, societies, or autonomous bodies. Judicial expansion of Article 12 ensures that constitutional guarantees remain effective.
Components of “State” under Article 12
Article 12 expressly mentions the following components:
Government and Parliament of India
Government and Legislature of each State
Local authorities
Other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India
Each of these components has been elaborated upon through judicial interpretation.
Government and Parliament of India
This includes the executive and legislative organs of the Union Government. It covers ministries, departments, and other instrumentalities through which the Union exercises governmental functions.
Actions taken by the Union Government or Parliament that infringe Fundamental Rights can be directly challenged under Articles 32 and 226.
Also Read : Judicial Review of Orders Passed by the President and the Governor
Government and Legislature of the States
This includes State governments and State legislatures. Like the Union, State authorities are bound by Fundamental Rights and are subject to judicial review for violations.
Local Authorities
Local authorities include entities that perform local self-government functions, such as municipalities, panchayats, district boards, and municipal corporations.
In Union of India v. R.C. Jain, the Supreme Court held that a body qualifies as a local authority if it:
Has separate legal existence
Exercises governmental functions
Has the power to raise funds
Enjoys autonomy in administration
Local authorities are clearly included within the definition of State under Article 12.
Meaning of “Other Authorities”
The phrase “other authorities” has been the most litigated and expansively interpreted part of Article 12. Initially, courts adopted a narrow interpretation, limiting it to authorities exercising governmental or sovereign functions.
However, with the growth of the welfare state and public sector enterprises, this narrow view proved inadequate.
Early Interpretation of “Other Authorities”
In University of Madras v. Santa Bai, the Madras High Court adopted a restrictive interpretation, holding that “other authorities” referred only to authorities exercising governmental or sovereign functions.
This view was later rejected by the Supreme Court as being inconsistent with constitutional objectives.
Rajasthan State Electricity Board Case
A significant shift occurred in Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal. The Supreme Court held that “other authorities” includes bodies created by statute that have the power to make rules, regulations, or bye-laws having the force of law.
This case marked the beginning of a broader interpretation of Article 12.
Expansion through Functional Approach
The Supreme Court gradually moved toward a functional and pragmatic approach. The focus shifted from the form of the body to the nature of its functions and the degree of governmental control.
This approach was necessary to prevent the State from escaping constitutional responsibility by delegating functions to separate legal entities.
Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi
The landmark judgment in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi laid down a structured test to determine whether a body qualifies as “State” under Article 12.
The Court held that a body would be considered a State if it is an instrumentality or agency of the government. The Court laid down the following indicators:
Entire share capital held by the government
Financial assistance meeting almost the entire expenditure
Deep and pervasive State control
Performance of public or governmental functions
Transfer of a government department to a corporation
These factors are not conclusive but cumulative in nature.
Instrumentality or Agency Test
The instrumentality test focuses on whether the body acts as an arm of the government. If the government exercises substantial control and the entity performs public functions, it may fall within Article 12 even if it is registered as a society or company.
This test reflects the substance-over-form approach adopted by Indian courts.
Ramana Dayaram Shetty Case
In Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, the Supreme Court emphasized that even corporations created by statute and performing public functions must act fairly and reasonably.
The Court reaffirmed that such bodies are subject to Fundamental Rights obligations.
Bodies Not Covered under Article 12
Not all bodies performing public functions are considered State. In Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) was not a State under Article 12 due to lack of deep and pervasive governmental control.
This case illustrates that mere public importance of functions is not sufficient.
Judiciary as “State”
The judiciary is not expressly mentioned in Article 12. However, judicial actions are generally not subject to Fundamental Rights scrutiny, except where administrative or non-judicial actions are involved.
Courts have held that judicial decisions cannot be challenged as violating Fundamental Rights, though administrative actions of courts may be examined.
Article 12 and Expanding Welfare State
With the expansion of the welfare state, governments increasingly act through autonomous bodies, public sector undertakings, and statutory corporations. Judicial interpretation of Article 12 has evolved to reflect this reality.
A narrow interpretation would defeat the purpose of Fundamental Rights by allowing indirect violations.
Significance of Judicial Interpretation
The judiciary’s expansive interpretation of Article 12 ensures:
Effective enforcement of Fundamental Rights
Accountability of government-controlled bodies
Protection against arbitrary exercise of power
Article 12 acts as a gatekeeper provision that determines the reach of constitutional protections.
Conclusion
Article 12 plays a pivotal role in constitutional law by defining the entities against whom Fundamental Rights may be enforced. Through progressive judicial interpretation, the scope of “State” has expanded to include various bodies that function as instrumentalities of government.
The emphasis on functional control rather than formal structure ensures that constitutional guarantees remain meaningful in a modern administrative state. Understanding Article 12 is therefore essential for comprehending the working of Fundamental Rights and constitutional accountability in India.
Also Read : Fundamental Duties as a Means to Achieve Responsible Citizenry
