Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Cooperative Banks and 'State' under Article 12 - Several judgments analyze whether Cooperative Banks qualify as 'State' under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution. The consensus is that Cooperative Banks are generally not considered 'State' unless they meet specific criteria of governmental control or authority. For example, in Greater Bombay Cooperative Bank Limited v. United Yarn Tex Private Limited (2020), the Supreme Court overruled earlier judgments, clarifying that Cooperative Banks do not automatically fall within the ambit of 'State' 2024 0 Supreme(AP) 299.
Judicial Tests for 'State' - Courts rely on tests from landmark cases like Pradeep Kumar Biswas and S.S. Rana, examining factors such as government control, funding, and statutory backing. Many High Courts have held that unless a Cooperative Bank exhibits significant governmental control or performs governmental functions, it is not 'State' for constitutional purposes 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 3141, 2024 0 Supreme(HP) 62.
Implication for Writ Jurisdiction - Since Cooperative Banks are typically not 'State', writ petitions against them are generally not maintainable under Article 226. However, if statutory rules are violated, petitions may still be entertained, as seen in cases involving Cooperative Societies and Banks 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 3145.
Specific Cases and Statutory Context - Several judgments discuss the status of cooperative societies and banks in different states, such as Uttar Pradesh, Odisha, and Jammu & Kashmir. They highlight that the mere receipt of government aid or regulatory oversight does not automatically make a Cooperative Bank 'State'. For example, the Odisha State Cooperative Bank's meetings and management are conducted as per internal rules, not as a government body 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 5533.
Main Insight - The main point across these judgments is that Cooperative Banks are generally considered autonomous entities and do not constitute 'State' under Article 12, unless they fulfill specific criteria of governmental control or perform governmental functions. Consequently, they are not amenable to writ jurisdiction unless statutory violations are involved.
In the realm of Indian constitutional law, a pivotal question often arises: Is a cooperative bank considered a 'State' under ? This inquiry is crucial because Article 12 defines 'State' to include government and authorities or instrumentalities of the State, thereby extending enforcement and under .
Cooperative banks, registered under , straddle the line between private entities and public institutions. Landmark judgments have shaped this debate, balancing factors like governmental control, public functions, and autonomy. This post delves into key precedents, factors, and implications, drawing from and rulings. Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified lawyer for specific cases.
Article 12 states: In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires, 'the State' includes the Government and and the Government and the Legislature of each of the States and all local or other authorities within the territory of India or under the control of the . Courts have expanded this to include '' based on tests from cases like .
The status determines if writ petitions are maintainable against such banks. Generally, cooperative banks are not deemed 'State' unless they exhibit deep governmental permeation. However, exceptions exist based on specific facts.
Indian courts have delivered nuanced rulings, often case-specific. Here's a breakdown of key judgments:
The held that cooperative banks do not constitute a State or instrumentality under Article 12, as they function like private entities. The bench emphasized limited state control and autonomous operations. 2020 0 Supreme(HP) 566
Here, a primary cooperative agricultural bank was deemed 'State' due to substantial State control and governmental functions. This marked an early recognition of pervasive influence. 1993 0 Supreme(Kar) 269
The classified this bank as an instrumentality of the State, citing heavy state government control over employee service conditions. 2016 0 Supreme(Raj) 82
In and related matters, courts ruled it not a State, failing criteria like state control. 2015 0 Supreme(HP) 948 2016 0 Supreme(Raj) 1070
Relying on Thalappalam and 's Rhea Chakraborty v. Union of India ( SCC Online Bom 990), courts reaffirmed that cooperative banks lack 'State' status absent exceptional control. Promotion of cooperatives under the Constitution does not elevate them automatically. 2023 0 Supreme(Chh) 69
In , the overruled prior views, clarifying cooperative banks do not automatically qualify as 'State'. 2024 0 Supreme(AP) 299
High Courts echo this: Writs against cooperatives are typically not maintainable unless statutory violations occur, as they aren't 'State' under Article 12. 2023 0 Supreme(All) 848 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 3141
Judges apply a multi-factor test from Pradeep Kumar Biswas and others:
Judicial Tests: Courts examine government funding, statutory backing, and control per S.S. Rana. Unless significant, banks remain autonomous. 2023 0 Supreme(P&H) 3141 2024 0 Supreme(HP) 62
Conflicting views persist: Some older rulings found 'State' status 2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 840, while recent ones emphasize private nature 2021 0 Supreme(Mad) 1443.
Typically, writ petitions against cooperative banks are not maintainable under Article 226, as they aren't 'State'. However:
Undisputedly the cooperative society cannot be termed as State within the meaning of Article 12. 2023 0 Supreme(All) 848
Mere regulatory oversight or aid doesn't confer status, as seen in Odisha and UP cases. 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ori) 5533
This affects employee disputes, recoveries, and governance challenges. Businesses and members must pursue civil remedies unless exceptional circumstances apply.
Counsel should argue based on specific control evidence, avoiding blanket assumptions.
The prevailing view is that cooperative banks are generally not 'State' under Article 12, prioritizing autonomy unless substantial governmental control or public functions exist. Landmark rulings like Thalappalam () and Greater Bombay () reinforce this, resolving earlier conflicts.
Key Takeaways:- Default: Not 'State' – no writs.- Exceptions: Heavy control = possible 'State'.- Always fact-specific; seek expert advice.
This evolving jurisprudence underscores cooperatives' role in financial inclusion without full public accountability. Stay updated via primary sources.
References (Inline citations above correspond to documents like 2020 0 Supreme(HP) 566, 1993 0 Supreme(Kar) 269, etc.). For full texts, refer to legal databases.
#Article12 #CoopBanks #SupremeCourt
In similar circumstances, a Division Bench of the High Court for the State of Telangana by relying on the judgment in Pandurang Ganpati Chaugule v. Vishwasrao Patil Murgud Sahakari Bank Limited case (supra) held that in the judgment in the case of Greater Bombay Cooperative Bank Limited v. ... Learned Senior Counsel for the respondent-bank relied on the judgme....
within the meaning of Article 12. ... The issues involved in the present writ petition are : a) whether Cooperative Society falls within the ambit of 'State' as enumerated under Article 12 of the Constitution of India?'. ... It has been averred that the Cooperative Society does not fall within the definition of 'State' as enumerated under A....
the meaning of Article 12. ... Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Limited and others" to hold that even though cooperative society is not 'State', yet the writ petition can be maintained in case statutory rules have been violated. ... The majority opined that the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) was a 'State' wi....
Thus, the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in C.K. Malhotra was upheld in so far as it had held that the Bank was not a State or other authority within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution. ... Firstly, whether the State Cooperative Banks are State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constit....
Relying on the judgment passed by the Bombay High Court in Rhea Chakraborty vs. Union of India, 2020 SCC Online Bom. 990, Thalappalam Service Co-operative Bank Limited vs. State of Kerala, (2013) 16 SCC 82 and D.A.V. College Trust and Management Society vs. ... 12. ... Promotion of cooperative societies - The State shall endeavour to promote voluntary formation, autonomous functioning, ....
State of Uttar Pradesh and Another delivered a judgment on 04.12.2015 striking down the word "unmarried" in Rule 2 (c)(iii) of the Dying in Harness Rules applicable to the State Government employees. ... Parity of the judgment in the case of Vimla Srivastava was given to another individual, namely, Neha Srivastava by a judgment of this Court delivered by a Division Bench on 23.....
He submitted that if such a liberty is granted, it will amount to the Cooperative Court exercising the powers of CPC when there is a lack of inherent jurisdiction. 12. ... By following the principles settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court, in the case of Suvarnayug Sahakari Bank, set aside the judgment and order passed by the Cooperative Court in a similar dispute between the Cooperati....
He submitted that the writ petition against the cooperative society is not maintainable. Undisputedly the cooperative society cannot be termed as State within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution of India. ... In order to hold that a body would be amenable to the writ jurisdiction of this Court as conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution it would have to be necessarily found tha....
It is apt to note here that by notice at Annexure-6 the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Ltd. convened a meeting of the Managing Committee of the Odisha State Cooperative Bank Ltd. on 23.12.2025 (Tuesday) at 11.30 AM in the premises of INDIAN RED CROSS SOCIETY, Red Cross Bhawan Bhubaneswar. ... The Petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are the Directors of Odisha State ....
In this writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of Constitution of J&K State, the petitioner-Bank has prayed for the following writs/reliefs: a. ... JUDGMENT : 1. ... The revision petition filed by the petitioner-Bank was dismissed by the learned Tribunal on 30.12.2011. ... Petitioner-Bank through the medium of this writ ....
(a) in a Central Bank, or the State Cooperative Bank, Investment of funds:- (1) A society may invest, or deposits its fund,—
The two division benches of this Court, in Ganesh Morto Naik vs. Goa State Co-operative Bank Ltd. and in another case of Surendra J. Kalangutkar vs. Goa State Co-operative Bank Ltd. ruled that the Goa State Cooperative Bank Ltd. 1. The cleavage of opinions between the two sets of perspectives on the issue as to whether a 'Goa State Cooperative Bank' is a 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 and whether the said Bank is discharging any public function, so as to render it amenable ....
(hereinafter referred to as GSCB) is a 'State' for the purpose of Article 12 and that since it is discharging public functions, it is amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The two division benches of this Court, in Ganesh Morto Naik v/s. Goa State Co-operative Bank Ltd.,1991 SCCOnLineBom 211 and in another case of Surendra J. Kalangutkar v/s. Goa State Cooperative Bank Ltd.,2016 SCCOnLineBom 2587 ruled that the Goa State Cooperative Bank Ltd. T....
At paragraph 27 of the report, the Supreme Court noticed the use of the word "person" in Article 226 of the Constitution and observed that in terms of Section 2(42) of the General Clauses Act, 1897 "person" is defined to include any company or association or body of individuals, whether incorporated or not. The court observed that when the Constitution as the fountainhead of all statutes was clear in the use of the language "we cannot put shackles on the High Courts to limit their jurisdiction....
On the other hand, a judgment in Nawanshehar Central Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. M/s Sohan Lal and Sons etc. 1982 CLJ 416, was relied upon by that Court to hold that the expression “relating to the business of the Society”, is material and if the suit does not relate to the business of the Society under winding up proceedings, the jurisdiction of the civil Court cannot be held to be barred. A judgment of a Full Bench of this Court, in Mam Raj v. State of Haryana and others 1982 ....
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
