The Delhi High Court has held that the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses can be subjected to writ jurisdiction as it will be considered an instrumentality of the State owing to the overarching control of the Ministry of Defence over finances, recruitment, functioning etc.

In that context, the Bench of Chandra Dhari Singh observed that, "In the instant case, the overarching control of the Ministry of Defence over finances, recruitment, functioning etc. in the respondent Institute makes it evident that the Ministry has deep and pervasive control in the Institute. The presence of majority of the members in the EC from the Government is testament to the fact that the decisions taken by the EC are not independent of the Government control. Furthermore, it is also an undisputed fact that the respondent Institute undertakes research only for the Government and not any other private agencies. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the respondent Institute is an instrumentality of State and can be subjected to the writ jurisdiction of this Court."

Senior Counsel Sanjoy Ghosh, along with others, appeared for the petitioner, while Senior Counsel Raj Shekhar Rao, along with others, appeared for the respondent.

The petitioners had worked in various administrative and technical roles for the respondent organization from 1998 to 2010, accumulating at least 10 years of service. The respondent organization, established in 1965 and registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, focused on objective research and policy studies related to defense and security.

In 2021, the petitioners collectively sent a legal notice to the respondent requesting regularization of their employment, which went unanswered. Consequently, the petitioners filed petitions seeking regularization. The respondent's counsel argued that the organization did not qualify as an "instrumentality of the State" as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution, thus rendering the petitions non-maintainable.

However, the petitioners' counsel contended that the Ministry of Defence exerted significant control over the respondent's functioning, administrative, and financial matters, evidenced by its conception as an inter-services organization under the Ministry. Additionally, they pointed out a notification issued by the President of India in the Gazette of India dated December 30, 2019, which classified the respondent under an extraordinary classification, further supporting their claim that the respondent was indeed an instrumentality of the State.

The Court placed referred to the Apex Court's judgment in the case of Pradeep Kumar Biswas vs Indian Institute of Chemical Biology & Ors., which made it clear that an entity needs to be financially, functionally and administrative under the control of the Government and then only can be termed as a State.

With that background, it was observed that, "the test laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court with regard to inclusion of an entity as a State is duly met in the case of the respondent Institute, where it is apparent that the Ministry of Defence, i.e. the Government has control over functioning, finance and administration of the respondent Institute which makes the same an instrumentality of State under Article 12 and thus, amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court."

Appearances:

Petitioners: Senior Counsel Sanjoy Ghost, Counsels Fidel Sebastian and Rohan

Respondents: Senior Counsel Raj Shekhar Rao, Counsel Gauri Puri

Cause Title: Shri Mukesh Kumar Jha & Ors vs Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses

Click here to read/download the Judgment


Justice Chandra Dhari SinghDelhi High CourtConstitution of India

Verdictum News Desk