The judgment establishes the principle that the maintainability of a writ petition depends on whether the respondent performs a public function and if the contract of service is imbued with a statutory flavor.

ORDER

CM APPL. 27483/2022 (for exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application shall stand allowed.

W.P.(C) 9134/2022 & CM APPL. 27482/2022(Interim Relief), CM APPL. 27484/2022(Virtual Hearing)

3. This writ petition has been preferred laying allegations against the second respondent of racial discrimination and harassment against the petioner.

4. The first issue which arises is with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition itself.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner drawing the attention of the Court to Annexure -15, points out that the second respondent has been constituted by an Act of Parliament of France. It is pointed out that its essential functions would indicate that it is an autonomous civil entity which has been constituted for the following purposes:-

1. To seek out, in France as well as abroad, the elements of a complete and objective information service;

2. To place that information at the disposal of users in exchange for payment.

6. The attention of the Court has also been drawn to Article 2 of the aforesaid charter which is reproduced hereinbelow:-

Article 2

The activities of Agence France-Presse must comply with the following fundamental obligations:

1. Agence France-Presse may under no circumstances take account of influences or considerations liable to compromise the exactitude or the objectivity of the information it provides; it may under no circumstances fall under the control, either de facto or de jure, of any ideological, political or economic grouping;

2. Agence France-Presse must, to the full extent that its resources permit, develop and enhance its organisation so as to provide French and foreign users with exact, impartial and trustworthy information on a regular and uninterrupted basis;

3. Agence France-Presse must, to the full extent that its resources permit, ensure the existence of a network of facilities giving it the status of a worldwide information service.

7. Learned counsel submits that the respondent press agency clearly performs a public function and since allegations of racial discrimination have been levelled, the writ petition would clearly lie. The Court finds its unable to sustain the submission for the following reasons.

8. While it may be true that the second respondent had been constituted by an Act by the Parliament of France, it becomes relevant to note that the newspaper or an agency engaged in the dissemination of news cannot be viewed as performing a public function. Regard must be had to the fact that the expression public function and public duty have been understood to be those which are akin to functions performed by the State in its sovereign capacity. The Court further notes that the contract of service between the petitioner and the second respondent is not imbued with any statutory flavour. The Court bears in mind the following principles as were enunciated by the Supreme Court in Ramakrishna Mission & Anr. vs. Kago Kunya & Ors. [(2019) 16 SCC 303].

24. In G. Bassi Reddy v. International Crops Research Institute [G. Bassi Reddy v. International Crops Research Institute, (2003) 4 SCC 225], a two-Judge Bench of this Court dealt with whether the International Crop Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRISAT) which is a nonprofit research and training centre, is amenable to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226. The dispute concerned the termination of employees of ICRISAT. The Court held that only functions which are similar or closely related to those that are performed by the State in its sovereign capacity qualify as public functions or a public duty: (SCC p. 237, para 28)

28. A writ under Article 226 can lie against a person if it is a statutory body or performs a public function or discharges a public or statutory duty. Icrisat has not been set up by a statute nor are its activities statutorily controlled. Although, it is not easy to define what a public function or public duty is, it can reasonably be said that such functions are si