Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT GWALIOR
VIVEK RUSIA, RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
Dhiraj Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of M.P. – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The petitioner/appellant has filed this present writ appeal against the order dated 08.09.2023, whereby the Writ Court has dismissed W.P. No.29192/2022 as not maintainable.
Short facts of the case are as under:-
1.1 The Madhya Pradesh State Tourism Development Corporation (in short: MPSTDC) is a government agency that conducts and regulates the tourism activities of Madhya Pradesh, established in 1978 by the Government of M.P. The MPSTDC has headquartered in Bhopal and has regional offices across all the districts of Madhya Pradesh and in other states as well. The MPSTDC also operates homestays, hotels, resorts, and tourist rest houses in different key locations within the state. The MPSTDC issued an advertisement for the appointment of a Marketing Executive on a contract basis. The appellant applied for the said post, and he was called for an interview test. Vide order dated 11.02.2011, he was appointed to the post of Marketing Executive on a fixed salary of Rs.15,000/- per month with certain benefits of leave, TA/DA, deductions etc. Vide order dated 26.02.2011 the appellant was posted at the Regional Office, Gwalior and since then the appellant has been working there. Res
A government company, fully owned by the State, qualifies as an 'authority' under Article 12 of the Constitution, making it amenable to writ jurisdiction.
A company can be classified as 'State' under Article 12 of the Constitution if it operates significantly under government control and serves public functions.
A multinational company cannot be classified as an 'instrumentality of the State' under Article 12 without pervasive control or public duty imposed by the State.
Writs cannot be issued against private entities as they do not perform public duties, reaffirming the limits of Article 12 applicability.
A private entity, not under pervasive government control, does not qualify as 'State' under Article 12, making a writ petition against it not maintainable.
Writ petitions against private entities are not maintainable under Article 226 unless public law elements are involved; termination from a private company does not invoke judicial review.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the status of an entity as an 'authority' under Article 226 of the Constitution of India depends on the nature of the public duties it dis....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
