Case: State Electricity Board’s Accountability to Fundamental Rights

Facts of the Case:

• The State Electricity Board, established under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, initiated disciplinary action against some of its employees.
• These employees approached the High Court seeking remedies for alleged violations of their Fundamental Rights by the Board.

Issues in the Case:

• Is the State Electricity Board considered as “State” under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution and thus amenable to fundamental rights?

Principle:

• Article 12 of the Indian Constitution defines the term “State,” which includes the government and parliament of India, the government and legislature of each state, and all local or other authorities within the territory of India.

Judgement:

• In the case of Electricity Board, Rajasthan v. Mohan Lal (AIR 1967 SC 1857), the Supreme Court interpreted the term “other authorities” mentioned in Article 12.
• The Supreme Court ruled that the expression “other authorities” encompasses all authorities created by the Constitution or statute to whom powers are conferred by law.
• It is not necessary for the statutory authority to perform governmental or sovereign functions to be considered as “State” under Article 12.
• Therefore, the expression “other authorities” includes entities like the Rajasthan Electricity Board.
• As a result, the State Electricity Board constituted under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, falls under the definition of “State” as per Article 12 of the Indian Constitution.
• Consequently, the State Electricity Board is amenable to fundamental rights, and individuals can approach the High Court for remedies in case of violations of their fundamental rights by the Board.

Based on the interpretation of Article 12 provided by the Supreme Court in the case of Electricity Board, Rajasthan v. Mohan Lal, the State Electricity Board is considered as “State” and is thus accountable to fundamental rights.