1984 Supreme(J&K) 89
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT JAMMU
A.S. Anand,M.L. Bhat, JJ.
Jagdish Chander Gupta - Appellant
Versus
J&K Bank Ltd. & Ors. - Respondent
LPA (W) No. 34/1985
Decided On : 19 December, 1984
Advocate For Appellant: Joginder Singh
Advocate For Respondent: H.L. Bhagotra
A company, corporation, or society can be deemed as an instrumentality or agency of the State Government and will be termed as an authority for the purposes of Article 12 of the Constitution of India only if it fulfills the tests laid down by the Supreme Court in Ajay Hasias case (Supra).
Headnote:
J&K BANK - WRIT JURISDICTION - AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - WHETHER RESPONDENT BANK IS AN AUTHORITY - TESTS TO DETERMINE INSTRUMENTALITY OR AGENCY OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT - WHETHER RESPONDENT BANK FULFILLS ANY OF THE TESTS - HELD, RESPONDENT BANK IS NOT AN AUTHORITY UNDER ARTICLE 12 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, an employee of Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited, filed a writ petition challenging an enquiry conducted against him. The learned Single Judge dismissed the petition, holding that the enquiry was valid and that the High Court was not a court of appeal to over-set the decision arrived at a departmental enquiry by a competent authority. The appellant filed an appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the respondent bank is not an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The court applied the tests laid down by the Supreme Court in Ajay Hasias case (Supra) to determine whether a company, corporation, or society can be deemed as an instrumentality or agency of the State Government and held that the respondent bank does not fulfill any of the tests.
Issues: Whether the respondent bank is an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent bank is not an authority under Article 12 of the Constitution of India because: * The entire share capital of the respondent bank is not owned by the State Government. * The entire expenditure of the respondent bank is not met with the financial assistance of the State Government. * The respondent bank does not enjoy monopoly status which is State conferred or State protected. * There is no deep or pervasive State control over the respondent bank. * The functions of the respondent bank are not of public importance and closely related to the Government functions. * The respondent bank is not a Government department transferred to the Corporation.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the writ petition was incompetent and that it would not go into the merits of the controversy.
2. At the time of admission of this appeal. Mr. Bhagotra appearing for the respondents raised preliminary objection about the maintainability of the writ petition. His objection is that Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited and its officers are not authorities with in the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution of this court. The objebtion raised by Mr. Bhagotra is of considerable importance, is such we have heard the learned counsel for the parties on this point in detail.
3. Mr. Joginder Singh appearing for the appellant submitted that on the basis of a Supreme Court authority viz : Ajay Hasia etc. Vs. Khalid Mujib and others, AIR 1981 S. C. 487, the respondent Bank is an authority for the purposes of Art, 12 of the Constitution of India and amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. The contention is that in terms of Articles of Association of the respondent Bank, it is a Government Company within the meaning of Section 617 of the Companies Act, and therefore, is to be treated as an instrumentality or agency of the Government, He next cont ended that the State Government has issued directions to its departments that they should conduct all business through the Jammu and Kashmir Bank Limited and thirdly because the Chairman of the respondent Bank is to be appointed by the State Government, therefore, also it should be treated under the administrative control of the Government and would be as such treated as an authority within the meaning of Art. 12 of the Constitution of India.
4. It is necessary to refer to the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the respondent Bank to find out the object and the functioning of the respondent Bank. As early as on 1-10-1983 about eight promotees had formed the Jammu and Kashmir Bank and got it registered in accordance with the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Companies Act of 1977. (1920 A.D.) Act No.Xl of 1977The said Act was repealed subsequently and companies Act of 1956 by means of the Jammu and Kashmir (Extension of Laws) Act of 1956 was made applicable to the State of Jammu and Kashmir and respondent No. 1 came lo be regulated by the Companies Act of 1956. It was provided in the Articles of Association that the respondent-Bank shall be Government Company within the meaning of Sec. 617 of the Companies Act. The object of the Bank for which it was established was to carry on banking business and transact all other business in relation to borrowing receiving or taking of money, lending or advancing of money, drawing, making, accepting, discounting, buying, selling, collecting and dealing in bills of exchange, hoondees, promissory notes, coupons, drafts, bills of lading, railway receipts, warrants, debentures, certificates, scripts and other instruments and securities etc. etc. It was to act as agents for Governments or local authorities or for any other persons or persons for carrying on agency business of any description excluding the business of a managing agent but including the power to act as att