Delhi HC: Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies is Instrumentality of State

PTI, Apr 23, 2024, 11:54 AM IST

The Delhi High Court has held that the government has control over functioning of the Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses which makes it an instrumentality of the State under the Constitution and is amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the court.

The high court said the ”overarching control” of the Ministry of Defence over finances, recruitment and functioning in the institute makes it evident that the ministry has ”deep and pervasive control” there.

“The presence of a majority of the members in the Executive Council (EC) from the government is testament to the fact that the decisions taken by the EC are not independent of the government control. Furthermore, it is also an undisputed fact that the respondent institute undertakes research only for the government and not any other private agencies,” Justice Chandra Dhari Singh said.

Instrumentalities are means through which the state discharges its functions and they fall within the scope of state under Article 12 of the Constitution.

The court passed the interim order on a plea by the institute which raised objection on the maintainability of a batch of petitions by persons who were employed as administrative and technical staff with the institute and were seeking regularisation of their services.

The counsel for the institute contended that it was not an instrumentality of State as defined in Article 12 of the Constitution and the writ petitions were not maintainable. It said the petitioners cannot seek parity between the employment of the government and the institute.

The counsel said the institute is a society having its own rules and regulations and it was constituted with an objective of initiating study, discussions and research on problems of national security and impact of defence measures and was a think tank dedicated to extensive research in the field of defence.

It was submitted that as per the bye-laws formulated by the members of the institute, it was governed by an EC which was responsible for the management and administration of its day-to-day affairs.

The high court, however, held that the petitions were maintainable and the court was within its power to adjudicate them on merits.

The court said it was of the view that the Ministry of Defence enjoyed full control over the finances of the institute and the conclusion was drawn not only from the fact that the institute was fully funded by the government, but also from the fact that the government has control over the finances.

It said merely because the institute was separately functioning from the ministry does not mean that it was independent of the control of the government.

The court listed the main petitions for hearing on merits on September 3 and added that the interim stay on termination of services of petitioners shall further continue. The court asked the institute to file its reply to the petitions.