Constitution of Bharat: Article 12: Part 6

 Here are some significant judgments from the Supreme Court and High Court of India between 1961 and 1975 concerning Article 12 of the Constitution of India:

Naresh Sridhar Mirajkar vs. State of Maharashtra (1966)

Issue: Whether a judicial order can be held in violation of fundamental rights and if such judicial orders are amenable to writ jurisdiction. Judgment: The Supreme Court held that it is inappropriate to assume that a judicial decision pronounced by a court of competent jurisdiction can affect the fundamental rights of citizens. The judiciary, in discharging its judicial functions, cannot come under the definition of 'state' and is not amenable to writ jurisdiction.

Rajasthan Electricity Board vs. Mohan Lal (1967)

Issue: Whether the Rajasthan State Electricity Board falls under the purview of 'state' under Article 12. Judgment: The Supreme Court laid down the test for determining whether bodies fall under the ambit of 'other authorities' under Article 12. It held that if an authority has the power to issue directions, and any offense against them is punishable by law, and has the power to make rules with statutory effect, such authorities would come within the ambit of 'state'.

Sukhdev Singh vs. Bhagatram (1975)

Issue: Whether ONGC (Oil and Natural Gas Corporation), LIC (Life Insurance Corporation of India), and IFC (International Finance Corporation) fall within the ambit of 'state' under Article 12. Judgment: The Supreme Court held that these authorities come within the meaning of 'other authorities' under Article 12, as they received significant financial support from the government and were subject to a high degree of government control.

Sabhajit Tewary vs. Union of India (1975)

Issue: Whether the Council of Industrial and Scientific Research (CSIR) falls within the definition of 'state' under Article 12. Judgment: The Supreme Court held that CSIR, being registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1898, does not fall within the definition of 'state' under Article 12.

These judgments helped clarify the scope of Article 12, ensuring that only entities performing governmental or sovereign duties fall under its purview.