Sukhdev v. Bhagatram (AIR 1975 SC 1331)

• Main Issue: Are ONGC, LIC, and IFCI “authorities” under Article 12?
• Do service regulations framed under their parent statutes have the force of law?
• Can employees rely on those regulations to seek constitutional remedies?

• Bodies created by statute, performing public duties, and under pervasive government control can be “State” under Article 12.
• Regulations framed under the statute have statutory force and bind the authority.
• Employees can challenge departures from such regulations through writs.

The Supreme Court held that ONGC, LIC, and IFCI are “authorities” under Article 12. They are created by statutes, deliver public services of high importance, and operate under deep and continuing government control. Their service regulations have statutory force and bind them. Therefore, their actions can be tested on constitutional grounds.

A body is “State” if, on the whole, it works as an instrumentality or agency of the Government. Consider the source (statute), the scale of control (appointments, finance, policy), monopoly/public function, and the binding nature of regulations.

• Opens the door for writ remedies against statutory corporations.
• Protects employees and citizens when public duties are breached.
• Laid groundwork for later “instrumentality” cases.

1. Creation by statute + deep control = strong Article 12 signal.
2. Service regulations under statute bind the authority.
3. Public function and monopoly strengthen the “State” tag.

Mnemonic: “STATUTE-CONTROL-DUTY”

• Statute creates the body.
• Control by Government is deep.
• Duty to serve the public.

Article 12

Defines “State” for Part III. Includes Government and “other authorities.”

Instrumentality/Agency

A body effectively acting for the Government due to control and function.

Statutory Regulations

Rules made under the parent Act; they carry legal force and bind the body.

Reviewed by The Law Easy