Whether High Court on administrative side is a State within meaning of Article 12 of Constitution?

 Hence, in accordance with such judgments holding that
the judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court
cannot be subjected to writ jurisdiction and for want of
requisite governmental control, judiciary cannot be a State
under Article 12, we also hold that while acting on the judicial
side the courts are not included in the definition of the State.
Only when they deal with their employees or act in other
matters purely in administrative capacity, the courts may fall
within the definition of the State for attracting writ jurisdiction
against their administrative actions only. In our view, such a
contextual interpretation must be preferred because it shall
promote justice, especially through impartial adjudication in
matters of protection of fundamental rights governed by Part
III of the Constitution.”


22. The afore-stated authorities/observations of the Apex Court
clearly indicate that on the judicial side, the courts are not included in the
definition of “State”, but while dealing with the employees or taking
decisions in administrative capacity, the courts would fall within the
definition of “State” under Article 12. Writ jurisdiction gets attracted in
respect of the administrative decisions and actions only.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION LODGING NO. 1137 OF 2018
The National Federation of the
Blind Maharashtra and anr. 
Vs.
The High Court of Judicature of Bombay
WITH APPELLATE SIDE
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 72 OF 2018
(PIL No. 46 of 2018)
(Transferred from Aurangabad Bench)
Sachin Bhaurao Chavan
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and anr. 

 CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL &
 G. S. KULKARNI, JJ.

 PRONOUNCEMENT: MAY 03, 2018.
Citation: 2018(5) MHLJ 903

Print Page