JUDGMENT

Ruma Pal, J.-The appellants were employees of the respondent No.1 (ICRISAT). Their services were terminated. They filed writ petitions before the High Court of Karnataka against ICRISAT and the Union of India. The writ petitions were dismissed. The first writ petition so dismissed was W.P. No. 2730/1981 (K.S. Mathew v. ICRISAT). A second group of writ petitions was dismissed on 30th June 1988. The dismissals are the subject matter of these appeals. Both the Division Benches held that ICRISAT was an international organization and was immune from being sued because of a Notification issued in 1972 under the United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947 and that a writ under Article 226 could not be issued to ICRISAT.

2. What or who is ICRISAT? Was the High Court right in holding that it was not amenable to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226?

3. ICRISAT was proposed to be set up as a non-profit research and training centre by the Consultative Group on international Agricultural Research (CGIAR). The CGIAR is an informal association of about 50 government and non-governmental bodies and is co-sponsored by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations, (