The State (Article 12) || definition of state under article 12 || Article 12 of Indian Constitution

THE STATE (ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA):-

DEFINITION:-Article 12 unless the context otherwise requires the term “State” includes the following:-

1. The government and Parliament of India, i.e. Executive and Legislative of Union.

2. The government and Legislature of State, i.e. Executive and Legislature of State.

3. All local or other authorities within the territory of India.

4. All local and other authorities under the control of the Government of India.

AUTHORITIES:- 

In context of Article 12, “AUTHORITIES” means the power make law, order, regulation, bye-laws, notifications etc. which have the force of law and power to enforce these laws.

LOCAL AUTHORITIES:- 

According to 31(3) General Clauses Act, 1987, Local Authorities refers to authorities like municipalities, District Board, Panchayat Improvement Trust and mining settlement Boards which is legally entitled to or entrusted by government with the control and management or municipal or local fund.

In case of MOHAMMAD YASIN V. TOWN AREA COMMITTEE, The Supreme Court held that the bye-laws of a Municipal Committee charging a prescribed fee on the wholesale dealer wae an order by a state authority contravened under Art. 19(1)(g).

In case of SRI RAM V. NOTIFIED AREA COMMITTEE,1952, The court held that a free lived under Section 294 of the U.P. Municipalities Act,1919 was held to be invalid.

OTHER AUTHORITIES:- 

The term ‘other authorities’ in Article 12 has nowhere been defined. Neither in the Constitution nor in the general clauses Act, 1897 nor in any other statute of India. Therefore, its interpretation has caused a good deal of difficulty, and judicial opinion has undergone changes over time. 

The functions of a government can be performed either the governmental departments and officials or through autonomous bodies which exist outside the departmental structure. Such autonomous bodies may include companies, corporations etc.

So, for the purpose of determining what ‘other authorities’ fall under the scope of State, the judiciary has given several judgements as per the facts and circumstances of different cases.

In the UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS V. SHANTA BAI, 1954 In this case, the Madras High Court held that other authorities could only indicate authorities of a like nature, for example, ejusdem generis so construed, it could only mean authorities exercising governmental or sovereign Functions.

In the case of UJJAMMABAI V. STATE OF U.P., 1962, the Supreme Court overruled the principle of ‘ejusdem generis’ given by Madras High Court and held that this rule could not have resorted to the in interpreting ‘other authorities’. The bodies named under Article 12 have no common genus running through them and they cannot be placed in one single category on any rational basis.

In the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohanlal,1967, The Supreme Court held that the expression of “other authorities” is wide enough include all authorities created by Constitution or statute on whom powers are enforced by law.

In the case of SUKHDEV SINGH V. BHAGAT RAM,1975, The Supreme Court held that three statutory bodies i.e Life Insurance Corporation, Oil and Natural Gas Commission and the Finance Corporation falls within the term of Article 12.

In the case of RAMANA DAYARAM SHETTY V. International Airport Authority of India, AIR 1979,:-

If a body is an agency or instrumentality of government. The court laid down the test to determine whether a body is an agency or instrument of the State.

1. Financial Resources of the State is the chief funding source of the body.

2. Existence of deep and pervasive state control.

3. Functional character of the body is government in essence.

4. Department of government is transferred to a corporation.

5. Whether corporation enjoys monopoly status which is the state conferred or state protected.

In the case of AJAY HASIA V. KHALID MUJIB,1981, it is a landmark case decided by Justice P.N. Bhagwati, on Article 12 of the Indian Constitution which defines the expression of a 'State'. The court held that a society registered under the “Societies Registration Act, 1898” is an agency or “instrumentally of the State” and hence a “State” within the meaning of Article 12.

 

Article 12 Provides "The 'State' Includes the Government and Parliament of India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States and all local and other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India."

Whether State includes Judiciary?

The answer to this question lies in the distinction between the judicial and non-judicial functions of the courts. When the courts perform their non-judicial functions, they fall within the definition of the ‘State’. When the courts perform their judicial functions, they would not fall within the scope of the ‘State’.

The Judiciary, it is said, though not expressly mentioned in Article 12 it should be included within the expression “Other Authorities” since courts are set up by statute and exercise power conferred by law.

In the case of PREM CHAND GARG V. EXRISE COMMISSION, 1963, the Supreme court of India concluded that ‘judiciary’ while exercising its power of rulemaking comes within the meaning of state, but while performing its judicial functions it does not cover within the meaning of the state.

In the case of NARESH SRIDHAR MIRAJKAR V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, 1961, The Supreme Court held that the Supreme Court does not have the authority to issue a writ of certiorari to a High Court or another bench of the same Court under Article 32 unless the judgement is ultra-vires has become a well-established principle of Indian law. The majority conclusion was correct in this case because learned judges only issue orders after careful study, and an aggrieved party always has the option of appealing. As a result, the issue of issuing a writ of certiorari only arises in exceptional circumstances.

The majority opinion of the Supreme Court that prohibiting the publication of facts and evidence from an ongoing trial in the media does not violate the fundamental right to freedom of speech is correct, as evidenced by later legislation and case law. Because a fair trial and justice are so important, anything that may hinder or interfere with the process of justice should not be considered a contempt of court, as Article 19(2) also states. Given the current conditions of the media trial in the Sushant Singh Rajput case, the scope of this needs to be expanded.

In the case of A.R. ANTULAY V. R.S. NAIK, 1988, The Supreme Court held that the court can not pass an order or issue a direction which would be violative of fundamental rights of citizens, it can be said the expression “State” as defined in Article 12 of the Constitutional includes judiciary also. In other way, we can say that the Supreme Court has observed with Article 12 that however wide and plenary the language of the article, the direction given by the court should not be inconsistent with, repugnant to, or in violation of the specific provisions of any statute.

CONCLUSION:-

The Constitution of India not only gives fundamental right to the citizens but also imposes the duty on the state to ensure that the fundamental rights are protected. The court through its interpretations has widened the scope of the term State to include a variety of statutory and non-statutory bodies under its umbrella.

Not only that, the definition of state under Article 12 has several words which may not have definite meanings, words such as local authorities, control of the government, other authorities, etc. and as seen in the above sections, the courts have, through the course of their judgements, described the extent of the article by laying down a test and discussing the meaning of the terms.

The word 'State' under Article 12 has been interpreted by the Supreme Court as per the changing times. It has gained wider meaning which ensures that Part III can be applied to a larger extent. We hope that it would continue to the extent of its width in the coming time.