AB LEGALS: Article 12 in The Constitution Of India 1949

The term "state" has different meanings depending on the context in which it is used. According to the Cambridge dictionary, a state is defined as a part of a large country with its own government, such as in Germany, Australia, or the US. However, in the Constitution of India, the term "state" has a much wider meaning, which is defined under Article 12 and 36 respectively. Article 12 is related to fundamental rights, whereas Article 36 is related to directive principles of state policy. In this article, we will delve deeper into the various interpretations and implications of the term "state" in the Indian context.

Article 12 Under Part III of The Constitution Of India 1949

Definition 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.

Meaning

Article 12 of the Indian Constitution is a unique provision that expands the definition of "State," which includes the following.

The Government and Parliament of India,

This refers to the central government of India, which comprises of the President, Vice-President, Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers, and other government officials. The Parliament of India is made up of the Lok Sabha (House of the People) and the Rajya Sabha (Council of States). Additionally, all departments established by the central government are also included under this definition.
The Government and Legislature of each state in India,

This point refers to the state governments of India, which have their own elected Chief Ministers, Council of Ministers, and State Legislatures. It also includes the Union Territories of India.
Local authorities
according to General Clauses Act section 3(31) “local authority” shall mean a municipal committee, district board, body of port Commissioners or other authority legally entitled to, or entrusted by the Government with, the control or management of a municipal or local fund.
Other authorities,
It has been interpreted by various case laws some of them are as follows-

University of Madras v. Shanta Bai (1954)-

The court applied the principle of ejusdem generis, which means "of the same kind and nature," and held that only those authorities performing government or sovereign functions are covered under the ambit of the state. Hence, the University of Madras is not considered a state in the case of University of Madras v. Shanta Bai (1954). However, this approach to interpretation was rejected in the case of Ujjam Bai v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1963).

Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967),

In the case of Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967), the court held that the term "other authority" would include all authorities created by the constitution or statute, and that such authorities need to be engaged in performing government or sovereign functions. Based on this interpretation, the court held that a university is also a state.

Som Prakash Rekhi vs Union Of India(1980)

The question in this case was whether Bharat Petroleum (BPCL), a company acquired by the central government, is considered a "State" as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution, even though it is registered under the Company Act.

In the instant case, the Supreme Court held that Bharat Petroleum (BPCL), is considered a "State" as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution. Further, The court has laid down tests to determine if a body is considered a State under Article 12, including:

government holding the entire share capital

state financial support and control over management

deep and pervasive state control

state-conferred or protected monopoly status

performing important public functions related to government

transfer of a government department to the corporation.

R.D. Shetty vs airport Authority of India (1979)

the Supreme Court of India held that an entity could be considered an "authority" under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution if it is a government agency or instrumentality, regardless of its legal form. As a result, the International Airport Authority of India was considered a "State" under Article 12 and was bound by the fundamental rights guaranteed under the Indian Constitution. Further, Justice P.N Bhagwati gave 5 Point test This is a test to determine whether a body is an agency or instrumentality of the state and goes as follows –

Financial resources of the State, where State is the chief funding source i.e. the entire share capital is held by the government.
Deep and pervasive control of the State
The functional character being Governmental in its essence, meaning thereby that its functions have public importance or are of a governmental character.
A department of Government transferred to a corporation.
Enjoys “monopoly status” which State conferred or is protected by it.

Zee Telefilms Ltd. & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors (2005)

Fact in Issue: Whether the Board of Cricket for Control in India (BCCI) is a 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India?

The Supreme Court applied the tests laid down in R.D. Shetty vs International Airport Authority of India (1979) to determine whether BCCI is an instrumentality of the State and concluded that-

The government's control over BCCI was not sufficient to make it a 'State'.

BCCI did not receive significant financial assistance from the government.

BCCI's monopoly status in the field of cricket did not make it a 'State' as it was not performing a public duty.

BCCI's activities were primarily for commercial purposes and not for the benefit of the public.

Therefore, in the instant case held that BCCI is not a 'State' under Article 12.

A.R Antulay Vs. R.S Nayak(1988)

In the instant case, the Supreme Court of India held that the judiciary is considered a state while performing legislative and executive functions. This case reaffirmed the principle of separation of powers and emphasized the importance of maintaining the independence of the judiciary. However, in the case of Rupa Hurra vs Ashoke Hurra it was held that judiciary doesn't fall under the ambit of Article 12.

Conclusion

The word "state" has different meanings in different situations. In India's Constitution, for the purpose of fundamental rights, "state" is defined in Article 12 (Part III) to include the Indian Government and Parliament, state governments and legislatures, local authorities, and other authorities. Courts have established guidelines to decide whether an organization can be considered a "state.