Patna High Court
Ram Briksh Prasad vs The Khadi & Village Industries on 28 April, 2010
Author: Navin Sinha
Bench: Navin Sinha, Dinesh Kumar Singh
Letters Patent Appeal No.270 OF 2006
(Against the judgment and order dated 04.07.2005
passed in C.W.J.C. No. 13338 of 2004 by a Single
Judge.)
RAM BRIKSH PRASAD, son of Late Nageshwar Prasad, resident of
village-Bada Khurd, P.O.-Bada Khurd, P.S.-Noorsarai, District-Nalanda.
-------------(Appellant)
Versus
1. The Khadi & Village Industries Commission, through the Chairman, Iria
Road, Ville Parle(West), Mumbai-400056.
2. The Chief Executive Officer, Khadi & Village Industries Commission, Irla
Road, Ville Parle(West), Mumbai-400056.
3. The Director, Khadi & Village Industries Commission, State Office, Bihar,
Near Veterinary College, Sheikhpura, P.O.B.V. College, P.S.-Shastri Nagar,
Patna, District-Patna.
4. Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh, through Chairman, Head Office at
Kagzi Mohalla, Biharsharif, District-Nalanda.
5. The Secretary, Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh, Head Office at Kagzi
Mohalla, Biharsharif, District-Nalanda.
--------------(Respondents)
For the appellant : Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, Adv
: Mr. Arun Kumar Mishra, Adv
: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Pandey, Adv
For K.V.I.C. : Mr. Dharmendra Choubey, Adv
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH
******
Navin Sinha & Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the
D.K. Singh,
J.J. respondents.
The judgment under appeal holds that the Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh against whom the relief was sought in the writ petition was not a state within 2 the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
Learned counsel for the appellant submits that this Court has entertain several writ petitions, details whereof are mentioned in paragraph No. 9 of the memo of appeal.
Counsel for the respondents relies upon two orders of this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3396 of 2009 and C.W.J.C. No. 4337 of 2003 which in turn relied upon other orders of this Court to arrive at the conclusion that the Patna Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh, a body registered under the Societies Registration Act like the Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh is not a state within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and no writ petition would lie.
We have also gone through the pleadings of the writ application. It only states that Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh was created after the decentralization of the Bihar Khadi Gramudyog Sangh which was registered under the Societies Registration Act. It had direct nexus with the Khadi and Villlage Industries Commission constituted by an act of Parliament. To classify it as a 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution of India something more was required including the financial administration, disciplinary control etc. The essential 3 attributes of a body being declared as a 'State' have been noticed in AIR 2005 SC 2677( M/S Zee Telefilms Ltd versus Union of India) at paragraph 21 as follows:-
"21. Thereafter the larger Bench of this Court in Pradeep Kumar Biswas(supra) after discussing the various case laws laid down the following parameters for gauging whether a particular body could be termed as State for the purpose of Article 12:-
"The picture that ultimately emerges is that the tests formulated in Ajay Hasia are not a rigid set of principles so that if a body falls within any one of them it must, ex hypothesi, be considered to be a State within the meaning of Article 12. The question in each case would be- whether in the light of the cumulative facts as established, the body is financially, functionally and administratively dominated by or under the control of the Government. Such control must be particular to the body in question and must be pervasive. If this is found then the body is a State within Article 12. On the other hand, when the control is merely regulatory whether under statute or otherwise, it would not serve to make the body a State"
There is no pleading in the writ application that 4 the Nalanda Zila Khadi Gramodyog Sangh meets the aforesaid requirements. The appeal stands dismissed.
(Navin Sinha, J) Patna High Court Dated 28th of April, 2010 Shageer/NAFR (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)