Article 36

Article 36 of the Indian Constitution serves as an introductory provision to Part IV, which deals with the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs). It provides the definition of the term “the State” for the purposes of this Part. Understanding the meaning of “the State” is fundamental, as it determines the scope of authorities responsible for implementing the Directive Principles. These principles, though non-justiciable, are fundamental in the governance of the country and guide the State in formulating policies and laws that promote social, economic, and political justice.

Definition and Scope of “the State”

According to Article 36, the expression “the State” shall have the same meaning as that assigned to it in Part III of the Constitution, which deals with Fundamental Rights. This means that the term carries the same definition as provided under Article 12, ensuring uniformity in its interpretation across both Parts III and IV.
Under this definition, “the State” includes:

• The Government and Parliament of India;
• The Government and Legislature of each State;
• All local authorities within the territory of India; and
• Other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India.

This comprehensive definition ensures that all governmental and semi-governmental entities responsible for policy formulation and public administration are bound by both Fundamental Rights (Part III) and Directive Principles of State Policy (Part IV).

Constitutional Context and Purpose

The Directive Principles of State Policy, enumerated in Articles 36 to 51, lay down the framework for establishing a welfare state. While Fundamental Rights ensure individual liberty and equality, the Directive Principles aim to promote collective welfare and socio-economic justice.
Article 36, therefore, serves as a linking provision, carrying forward the definition of “the State” from Part III to Part IV. This ensures that the same entities which are constitutionally obligated to uphold Fundamental Rights are also responsible for achieving the objectives of the Directive Principles.
By doing so, the Constitution integrates both the moral and functional responsibilities of the State — protecting individual freedoms while simultaneously striving for social and economic development.

Relationship between Articles 12 and 36

Both Articles 12 and 36 define “the State”, but their application differs:

• Article 12 defines the State for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights (Part III).
• Article 36 adopts the same definition for the implementation of Directive Principles (Part IV).

This uniformity ensures that the same range of public authorities and government bodies are accountable under both Parts, creating a coherent constitutional framework that links the protection of rights with the promotion of welfare.

Judicial Interpretation and Expansion of “the State”

Over the years, the Supreme Court of India has adopted a liberal and expansive interpretation of the term “the State” to include not only traditional government organs but also statutory bodies, corporations, and agencies performing public functions.
Some of the leading judicial pronouncements that have clarified the scope of “the State” include:

• Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967): The Court held that statutory corporations created by law and performing governmental functions fall within the definition of “the State”.
• Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram (1975): Bodies like the Life Insurance Corporation (LIC) and the Oil and Natural Gas Commission (ONGC) were considered “State” authorities as they performed public duties and were subject to governmental control.
• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi (1981): The Court laid down tests to determine whether a body can be considered “the State”, such as the extent of governmental control, financial dependence, and whether it performs public functions.
• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): Reinforced the responsibility of the State to protect women’s rights in workplaces, broadening the concept of accountability under the State.
• Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology (2002): The Court reaffirmed that any authority substantially controlled or financed by the government could be deemed part of the State.

Through these judgments, the judiciary ensured that public accountability extends beyond conventional government institutions to any entity exercising public power or performing functions of public importance.

Implications of the Definition

The broad definition of “the State” under Article 36 has several constitutional and administrative implications:

• Comprehensive Responsibility: All levels of government — central, state, and local — are constitutionally bound to act in accordance with the Directive Principles.
• Uniform Accountability: It ensures consistency in constitutional obligations across various authorities in upholding the ideals of justice, equality, and welfare.
• Judicial Review: Courts can assess whether actions or policies of public authorities conform to constitutional objectives, even if Directive Principles are non-justiciable.
• Extension to Non-Governmental Bodies: Organisations performing public duties or receiving substantial government funding are also expected to adhere to constitutional norms and values.

Connection with the Directive Principles of State Policy

By defining “the State” for Part IV, Article 36 ensures that the entities responsible for governance are constitutionally obligated to implement the Directive Principles laid down in subsequent articles (Articles 37 to 51). These principles include ensuring social and economic justice, promoting equal pay, safeguarding public health, and promoting international peace and harmony.
The State, in this sense, acts as the instrument of socio-economic transformation, responsible for converting the constitutional vision of justice and equality into practical policy and legislative measures.

Significance in the Constitutional Scheme

Article 36 holds significant value in the broader framework of the Indian Constitution as it ensures:

• Consistency of Constitutional Obligations: By using the same definition as Article 12, it aligns the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and the implementation of Directive Principles.
• Accountability in Governance: It widens the sphere of institutions answerable to constitutional principles.
• Promotion of a Welfare State: It mandates that the State, in all its forms, strives to secure the objectives enshrined in the Directive Principles, such as equality, justice, and dignity.

Conclusion

Article 36 acts as the gateway provision to the Directive Principles of State Policy, defining the entities responsible for achieving the socio-economic goals envisioned by the Constitution. By adopting the same definition of “the State” as in Article 12, it ensures that both the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and the realisation of Directive Principles rest upon the same set of authorities.