Institute For Plasma Research Not 'State', Employees Can't File Writ Petitions: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has upheld an order dismissing a man's writ petition against termination of services as an engineer by the Institute for Plasma Research, on the ground that the institute is an independent and autonomous body and merely because it is under the authority of Department of Atomic Energy it cannot be termed as 'State'. 

The court was hearing an appeal against a single judge's order which had that the petition is not maintainable against the Institute as it was not a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India.

A division bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Hemant Prachchhak in its order referred to Supreme Court's decision in Pradeep Kumar Biswas Vs. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology & ors (2002) where the apex court had held that Council of Scientific and Industrial Research is state under Article 12 of the Constitution as there was a dominant role played by the Government of India in the governing body of the CSIR. 

Applying the parameters in Pradeep Kumar Biswas to the present case, the bench said, 

"...what we find from the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Institute as well as the Union of India, is that the Institute of Plasma Research was initially a part of the Physical Research Laboratory dealing in experimental studies in plasma physics. It was an institute setup and recognized for its contributions to fundamental and applied research in plasma physics and associated technologies. It was an experimental program supported by the Department of Science & Technology. True it is that the institute is a research and development organization under the authority of Department of Atomic Energy, but that itself would not make the institute a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India".

The court further said that even if it considered the bye laws it is evident that the institute is an audited institute under the Department of Atomic Energy. It said that though the property of the institute vests in the Department of Atomic Energy and the governing council in his position as Chairperson as the Secretary of Department of Atomic Energy and Scientists nominated by the government, no comparison can be made to Pradeep Kumar Biswas as the Prime Minister was the President of CSIR, which was not the case in Institute for Plasma Research.

"Merely because the composition is of the Government of India is mainly dominated by officers of the Department of Atomic Energy, that itself will not make it a body over which it cannot be said to be the State's pervasive functional control, much less, administrative control. Unlike what was brought before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CSIR where 70% of the funding was by the State agency, nothing is on record before us as to what extent the Central Government funds the institute. We may, further, fall back upon the Memorandum of Association placed on record which indicates that the institute shall maintain a fund to which shall be credited: (I) all moneys provided by Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, (ii) all fees and other charges received by the Institute and (iii) all moneys received by the Institute by way of grant, gifts, donations or other contributions," it said.

It further said that the bye laws of the institute were merely regulatory in nature, and that the Union government does not interfere in the day-to-day management of the institute. 

Finding no error in the single judge's order which had dismissed the appellant's plea the bench said:

"In the facts of the present case, we find that the institute is purely an academic and research institute  setup as an autonomous research and development organization and it can never be said that merely because it is under the authority of Department of Atomic Energy it becomes a State. The institute is largely involved in theoretical and experimental studies in plasma science including basic plasma physics which is a scientific and research activity which cannot be termed to be fundamental to the governance of the country and certainly therefore, the Institute cannot be a “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. We are, therefore of the opinion that the learned Single Judge committed no error in dismissing the petition".

Case title: HIMANSHU DINESHCHANDRA PAREKH v/s INSTITUTE FOR PLASMA RESEARCH & ORS.

Click Here To Read/Download Order

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Guj) 60