Article 12, Constitution

57 Constitutional Cases in Brief: Quick Notes

Issue: Can the government choose judges even when the Chief Justice disagrees?

48 min read 16 Oct 2026

57 Landmark Constitutional Cases: Complete Notes

About this topic ▶ Watch this part of the lecture (0:00) These notes cover the 57 most important cases of Indian Constitutional Law . They are the cases that keep coming up in LL.B. examinations, in judiciary examinations and in every serious discussion of constitutional law. Every case is studied…

411 min read 16 Oct 2026

Administrative Law One Shot

Administrative law is "the law relating to the administration. It determines the organization, powers, and duties of administrative authorities.

61 min read 9 Sep 2026

Constitution II One Shot

A child born in India before July 1, 1987, automatically acquired Indian citizenship regardless of their parents' nationality.

57 min read 9 Sep 2026

Constitutional Law II: Complete Notes

Constitutional Law II deals with civil liberties. It is studied in eight units, from the question of who is a citizen of India to how the Constitution enforces the rights it gives. These rights are at work in ordinary life: when a person speaks his mind online, prays in his own way, or is stopped b…

130 min read 16 Oct 2026

A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, by a 4:1 majority, held that barring women aged 10 to 50 from the Sabarimala temple was unconstitutional. It struck down Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules and held that the right to worship under Article 25(1) belongs equally to women. The case matters because it uses constitutional morality and the essential religious practices test to resolve the clash between faith and gender equality, and its larger questions are now pending before a nine-judge bench.

A seven-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held, by a majority of five to two, that the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (C.S.I.R.) is "State" under Article 12 because the government controls it deeply and pervasively in financial, functional and administrative matters. The Court overruled the earlier Sabhajit Tewary decision. The case gave the leading test for deciding when a body counts as "other authority" under Article 12, and the test looks at substance, not form.

The Supreme Court held that the Rajasthan State Electricity Board, a statutory body created under the Electricity Supply Act, 1948, is 'State' under Article 12. It held that 'other authorities' must be read broadly and not limited by the rule of ejusdem generis, so fundamental rights and writs apply against such bodies. The case started the wide reading of Article 12 that later courts built on.

A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held, by a majority of four to one, that statutory corporations such as O.N.G.C., L.I.C. and the Industrial Finance Corporation are 'State' under Article 12. Regulations made under their Acts have the force of law, so an employee removed in breach of them can get a declaration that he continues in service, not just damages. The case matters because it brought public sector corporations under constitutional accountability, and Justice Mathew's concurring opinion laid the seed of the later 'instrumentality' test.

In Zee Telefilms v. Union of India (2005), a five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held, by a 3:2 majority, that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (B.C.C.I.) is not a 'State' under Article 12. So a writ petition under Article 32 is not maintainable against it. However, because B.C.C.I. performs public functions, High Courts can issue writs against it under Article 226. The case is a key part of the Article 12 line of cases that follows Pradeep Kumar Biswas.

A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held, by a 3:2 majority, that the Board of Control for Cricket in India (B.C.C.I.) is not a 'State' under Article 12, so a writ petition under Article 32 is not maintainable against it. The Court also accepted that B.C.C.I. performs public functions, so High Courts can still issue writs against it under Article 226. The case is a key part of the Article 12 line of cases after Pradeep Kumar Biswas.