IMPORTANT POINT
International Crops Research Institute in an international organisation and is immune from being sued in India and a writ under Article 226 cannot be issued against it.

Headnote:Constitution of India-Articles 12 and 226-United Nations (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1947-Notification under of 1972-Clause 6 of 28 March 1972 agreement providing for grant of immunity to International Crops Research Institute (ICRISAT)-Appellant were employees of ICRISAT -Their services terminated-Writ petitions-High Court dismissed them as not maintainable-Appeal to Supreme Court-Was the High Court right in holding that ICRISAT is not amenable to the writ jurisdiction under Article 226? (Yes)-Appeal dismissed.
       Held : The facts which have been narrated earlier clearly show that ICRISAT does not fulfil any of these tests. It was not set up by the Government and it gives its services voluntarily to a large number of countries besides India. It is not controlled by not is it accountable to the Government. The Indian Government s financial contribution to ICRISAT is minimal. Its participation in ICRISAT s administration is limited to 3 out of 15 members. It cannot therefore be said that ICRISAT is a State or other authority as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution. (Para 25)
       We are therefore of the view that the High Court was right in its conclusion that the writ petition of the appellant was not maintainable against ICRISAT. (Para 28)

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, (FAO), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), the United Environment Program (UNEP) and the World Bank. The members of the CGIAR at the relevant time were the African Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, Belgium. Canada, Denmark, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States, Ford Foundation, Francs, Germany, the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, the International Development Research Centre. Japan, Kellogg Foundation, Netherlands, Norway, Rockefeller Foundation Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom, United Nations Development Programme and the United States of America. In addition there were representatives from the five major developing regions of the world, namely, Africa, Asia and the Far East, Latin America, the Middle East, Southern and Eastern Europe.

4. The object of setting up ICRISAT was to help developing countries in semi-arid tropics to alleviate rural poverty and hunger in ways that are environmentally sustainable. The developing countries include India, parts of south-Asian, Sub-Saharan and South and Eastern Africa and parts of Latin America. The object was sought to be achieved by research and development of scientific technologies which could improve the quantity and quality of sorghum (bajra), pearl and finger millet, pigeon peas, chick peas and ground nut.

5. Certain members of the Consultative Group agreed to provide funds to support the setting up and continued functioning of ICRISAT. The financing members of CGIAR entered into an agreement on 20th March 1972 with the International Bank for Re-construction and Development (IBRD) to establish a special account. The IBRD then entered into an agreement with Ford Foundation under which Ford Foundation undertook to implement the proposal for setting up ICRISAT.

6. A memorandum of agreement was then entered into between the Government of India and the Ford Foundation (acting on behalf of the Consultative Group) on 28th March 1972 (referred to as the March agreement) for the establishment of ICRISAT. The agreement provided that the principal headquarters of ICRISAT would be at Hyderabad, India. The agreement recorded that ICRISAT would, inter-alia, serve, as a world centre for conducting research and training of scientists for the improvement of sorghum, millet pigeon peas and chick peas.

7. Clause 4 of the March agreement under the head Administration and Governance provided:

"The institute shall be established in India as an autonomous, international philanthropic, non-profit, research, educational, and training organisation.

The Institute shall be administered by a Director who shall be selected by the Governing Board. The Director shall be responsible for the internal operation and management o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2003 Supreme(SC) 184

IMPORTANT POINTInternational Crops Research Institute in an international organisation and is immune from being sued in India and a writ under Article 226 cannot be issued against it.

Cases Referred (7)

IMPORTANT POINT
International Crops Research Institute in an international organisation and is immune from being sued in India and a writ under Article 226 cannot be issued against it.