Article 12

Article 12 of the Constitution of India serves as the gateway provision to Part III of the Constitution, which guarantees Fundamental Rights. It defines the term “State” for the purpose of determining against whom these rights can be enforced. The interpretation of “State” under Article 12 is of immense constitutional significance, as it determines the entities that are bound by the obligations of upholding fundamental rights and can be held accountable for their violation.

Text of Article 12

Article 12 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.”
This definition is inclusive and expansive, not exhaustive. It enumerates certain specific entities—central and state governments, legislatures, and local authorities—while also extending to “other authorities,” a term that has been the subject of extensive judicial interpretation.

Components of the Definition

The scope of “State” under Article 12 encompasses four principal components:

1. Government and Parliament of India:This includes both the executive and legislative organs at the Union level, namely, the President, the Council of Ministers, and both Houses of Parliament. All actions of these bodies must conform to the guarantees of Fundamental Rights.
2. Government and Legislature of Each State:Similarly, this covers the executive and legislative organs at the state level, including the Governor, Council of Ministers, and State Legislature. They too are subject to judicial scrutiny for violations of Fundamental Rights.
3. Local Authorities:These are statutory administrative bodies functioning at the local level, including municipal corporations, municipalities, district boards, panchayats, and other similar entities. They derive their authority from legislation such as the Panchayati Raj Acts or the Municipalities Acts of various states.
4. Other Authorities:This is the most flexible and judicially significant part of the definition. It refers to any authority or body within India or under the control of the Government of India that performs governmental or public functions. The inclusion of this category ensures that the definition of “State” remains adaptable to evolving forms of governance and public administration.

Judicial Interpretation of “Other Authorities”

The phrase “other authorities” has been interpreted broadly by the judiciary to include statutory bodies, public sector undertakings, and even non-governmental entities performing functions of public importance or under significant governmental control. The following landmark cases illustrate this development:

• Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi (1975):The Supreme Court held that statutory corporations such as the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC), Life Insurance Corporation (LIC), and Industrial Finance Corporation (IFC) are “State” under Article 12 because they are created by statute and perform public functions under government control.
• R. D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (1979):The Court expanded the interpretation of “State” by holding that an authority created by statute or under government control, which performs public duties, falls within Article 12. This case laid down a set of criteria for determining when an organisation qualifies as “State.”
• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981):A significant judgment that extended the definition of “State” to include societies or bodies not created by statute but substantially financed, controlled, or managed by the government, and performing public functions. The Court observed that the test is functional rather than formal, focusing on the nature of activities and extent of government control.
• Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002):The Supreme Court reaffirmed and refined the earlier tests, holding that a body would qualify as “State” if it is financially, functionally, and administratively dominated by the government, and if it performs public functions. The decision clarified the approach to quasi-governmental and autonomous bodies.
• Bihar State Electricity Board v. Bihar Rajya Vidyut Parishad Mazdoor Union (2003):Public sector undertakings and statutory corporations performing essential public services were affirmed as “State” under Article 12, reinforcing the expansive nature of the term.

Local Authorities and their Role

Local authorities constitute the third component of Article 12. These bodies—such as municipalities, municipal corporations, district boards, and panchayats—are created by state legislatures to ensure local self-governance. They are entrusted with public duties like sanitation, water supply, urban planning, and rural development.
Given their statutory nature and their role in governance, local authorities are squarely included within the ambit of “State.” This ensures that individuals can enforce Fundamental Rights against them, for instance in cases of discrimination or denial of equal protection under the law.

Tests for Determining “Other Authorities”

Judicial decisions have evolved several tests to identify whether a body falls within the definition of “State” under Article 12:

• Ownership and Financial Control Test: Whether the government owns or controls the body, or provides substantial funding.
• Functional Test: Whether the body performs public or governmental functions.
• Administrative Control Test: The extent of government control in appointment, policy decisions, or supervision.
• Deep and Pervasive Control Test: Whether there exists deep and pervasive control by the government in the organisation’s affairs.
• Public Importance Test: Whether the entity performs functions that are of public importance or affect public interest.

An entity need not satisfy all these tests simultaneously; courts consider them cumulatively to determine whether an organisation qualifies as “State.”

Significance of Article 12

Article 12 holds immense constitutional significance as it determines the scope of Fundamental Rights enforcement. Only actions of the “State” and its instrumentalities are directly challengeable under Articles 32 and 226 for violation of Fundamental Rights. Therefore, defining “State” broadly ensures that a wide range of entities performing public functions are held accountable under the Constitution.
It thus serves two primary purposes:

• Ensuring Constitutional Accountability: All organs and instrumentalities of the State are bound to act within the framework of Fundamental Rights.
• Preventing Evasion of Responsibility: Government functions carried out through statutory bodies, corporations, or government-controlled entities cannot escape constitutional scrutiny by claiming autonomy.

Limitations and Exclusions

The definition of “State” under Article 12 is not all-encompassing. Purely private individuals, companies, and non-governmental organisations that do not perform public functions or are not subject to significant government control generally fall outside its scope. However, in exceptional cases where private entities perform functions of public significance—for example, running educational institutions or hospitals—they may be held accountable for adhering to fundamental rights obligations.

Relationship with Other Constitutional Provisions

• Article 13: Declares that laws inconsistent with or derogating from Fundamental Rights are void, applying this prohibition to all laws made by the “State” as defined in Article 12.
• Article 14: Guarantees equality before the law and equal protection of the laws, making it enforceable against all State actions.
• Articles 32 and 226: Empower citizens to seek remedies against the State for violations of Fundamental Rights.

Constitutional Importance

Article 12 forms the foundation for constitutional litigation in India. Its broad and evolving interpretation reflects the transformative spirit of the Constitution, ensuring that the guarantee of Fundamental Rights remains meaningful in a modern administrative and economic environment where governmental functions are increasingly performed through autonomous and semi-autonomous institutions.