What was the key question in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib?

Whether the society running REC Srinagar qualified as ‘State’ under Article 12, and whether its admission process breached Article 14.

Why did the Court treat the college as an instrumentality of the State?

Because of deep and pervasive government control and funding, bringing it within Article 12.

What happened to the challenge against the admissions?

The petition was dismissed on facts, though the Court laid down the Article 12 tests.

Which Articles are central to this case?

Article 12 (definition of State) and Article 14 (equality).

What is the long-term impact of the ruling?

It guides courts to decide when bodies are public authorities, expanding fundamental rights protection.

Law Easy

02 November, 2025

1551

Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib case note: Article 12 ‘State’ tests & Article 14 equality, easy English

Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib

AIR 1981 SC 487.

Supreme Court of India 1981 Constitution Bench (5-Judge) Citation: AIR 1981 SC 487 Area: Constitutional Law Reading time: ~6 min

Author: Gulzar Hashmi Location: India Published: 24 Oct 2025

Quick Summary

This case explains when a body is treated as “State” under Article 12. The Court looked at how much control and money the Government had over the college. Since control was deep and funds were heavy, the college counted as an instrumentality of the State. The admissions challenge on facts did not succeed, but the Court set clear tests for future cases.

Court: Supreme Court of India (1981)
Main provisions: Article 12 and Article 14
Outcome: Petition dismissed; Article 12 tests clarified

Issues

Is the society running Regional Engineering College, Srinagar, a “State” under Article 12?
Did the admission process, especially the brief viva, violate equality under Article 14?

Rules

Article 12: Defines “State” for Part III rights.
Article 14: Guarantees equality; decision-making must be fair, non-arbitrary.

Courts may treat bodies as “State” if they are under strong government control, depend heavily on public funds, or perform public functions.

Facts (Timeline)

REC Srinagar was run by a society under the J&K Societies Registration Act, 1898, and sponsored by the Government of India.

The admission process used a written test and a very short viva (2–3 minutes) with personal questions, not subject questions.

The petitioner scored well in qualifying exams but received very low viva marks; lower-ranked candidates scored high in viva and got seats.

A writ was filed under Article 32 alleging violation of Article 14 and challenging the process.

Arguments

Appellant (Petitioner)

Society is under government control → falls within Article 12.
Viva was arbitrary and irrelevant → violates Article 14.

Respondent (College/Society)

Society is an independent body, not “State”.
Viva process was applied to all; no unequal treatment.

Judgment

Holding on Article 12

The college was treated as an instrumentality of the State because the Government’s financial support and control were dominant and continuous.

Relief on Admissions

The specific challenge to the admissions failed on facts. The petition was dismissed.

Ratio: When is a Body “State” under Article 12?

The Court listed helpful indicators. Think of them as a checklist, not a rigid formula:

	Indicator	What it means (easy)
1	Government owns full (or near full) stake	If the State funds and owns the body, it likely acts as its arm.
2	Almost entire expenses met by State funds	Heavy public funding points to public character.
3	State-given monopoly	Exclusive powers or protection suggest a public role.
4	Deep and pervasive State control	Government directs key decisions and policy.
5	Public functions close to government work	Activities serve public interest like a government service.
6	Government department replaced by corporation	If a department’s job is shifted to a body, treat it like State.

Use multiple indicators together. The overall picture matters.

Why It Matters

Many services today are delivered by societies, trusts, or corporations. This judgment brings such bodies within the reach of fundamental rights when they act like public authorities. It keeps equality and fairness at the center of public-facing actions.

Key Takeaways

REC Srinagar’s society = “State” due to funding and control.
Article 12 tests are practical indicators, not a strict formula.
Article 14 prohibits arbitrary selection methods.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: F-M-C-C-P-D → Funds, Monopoly, Control, Close public function, Public money, Department shifted.

Find Funds: Who pays the bills?
Check Control: Who calls the shots?
Public Purpose: Is it doing a government-like job?

IRAC Outline

Issue

Is the college’s society “State” under Article 12, and was the viva-based selection arbitrary under Article 14?

Rule

Article 12 and 14; public funding + pervasive control + public function can make a body “State”.

Application

REC Srinagar had strong government control and funding; therefore, fundamental rights apply to its actions.

Conclusion

Society is an instrumentality of the State. Petition on admissions was dismissed on the facts.

Glossary

Instrumentality of State: A body so connected with the Government that it must respect fundamental rights.
Pervasive Control: Government controls key decisions, policies, and finances.
Arbitrariness: Decision without fair reason or proper standards; hits Article 14.

FAQs (Student-Friendly)

Heavy public funding and close Government control over management and policy.

No. The overall challenge failed on facts, so the petition was dismissed.

It stops arbitrary methods in public selection; authorities must act fairly and reasonably.

They are indicators. Courts see the total picture, not one factor alone.

Comment

Nothing for now