Under which Article, "a statutory authority can not, in absence of the provision of a statute, be treated to be an agency of the state. Agency of a state would ordinarily mean an instrumentality of a state. A statutory authority does not answer the description of an agency under the control of the state"?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct option is 2:

Detailed explanation of why it is correct — include conceptual, or contextual depth:

The correct option is Article 36. To understand why, students must recall the fundamental structure of the Indian Constitution's Part III (Fundamental Rights) and Part IV (Directive Principles of State Policy - DPSP). The concept of 'State' is defined broadly in Article 12 for the purpose of Fundamental Rights, ensuring these rights can be enforced against the government and its instrumentalities. Article 36, found at the beginning of Part IV (DPSP), explicitly states that the definition of 'the State' in this Part shall be the same as that given in Article 12, unless the context otherwise requires. The quoted statement—"a statutory authority cannot, in absence of the provision of a statute, be treated to be an agency of the state..."—is a critical judicial interpretation that elaborates on the scope and limitations of what constitutes an 'agency' or 'instrumentality' of the State for constitutional purposes. While Article 12 provides the definition used to enforce Fundamental Rights, Article 36 extends this very same definition to the DPSP. Therefore, any judicial ruling clarifying the ambit of 'State' under Article 12, especially concerning statutory bodies and instrumentalities, directly applies to Article 36 as well, making Article 36 the correct reference point in the context of Parts III and IV.

The incorrect option is 1:

Article 13 primarily deals with the relationship between fundamental rights and laws. It declares that any law that is inconsistent with or in derogation of any of the Fundamental Rights shall be void. It is the basis for judicial review, empowering the courts to strike down unconstitutional legislation. While Article 13 is crucial for upholding fundamental rights, it addresses the *effect* of laws on rights, not the *definition* of the State or its instrumentalities against which those rights can be enforced. The interpretation regarding whether a statutory authority is an "agency of the state" is an essential part of defining 'State' under Article 12, which Article 13 then uses in its context.

The incorrect option is 3:

Article 21 is one of the most celebrated and expansive fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution, guaranteeing protection of life and personal liberty. This article states that "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law." Judicial interpretation has broadened Article 21 to include rights such as the right to a clean environment, the right to health, and the right to education. Although the enforcement of Article 21 depends on correctly identifying whether the entity violating the right is indeed the 'State' (as defined by Article 12/36), Article 21 itself deals with the *substantive right* of life and liberty, not the constitutional definition of a State agency.

The incorrect option is 4:

Article 33 grants Parliament the power to modify the application of Fundamental Rights to specific groups, such as members of the Armed Forces, police forces, or intelligence agencies. This modification is done to ensure the proper discharge of their duties and the maintenance of discipline. Article 33 is a specific provision that creates an exception to the universality of fundamental rights for certain functional groups. It has no bearing on the general definition of 'State' or whether a non-sovereign statutory authority should be legally considered an "agency or instrumentality of the State."