In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court on Wednesday held that the Air Force School located at Bamrauli, Allahabad, does not qualify as a “State” under Article 12 of the Constitution, thereby ruling out the applicability of writ jurisdiction in service-related matters involving its contractual employees.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Abhay S Oka, by a 2:1 majority, upheld the Allahabad High Court’s finding that the school, managed by the Indian Air Force Educational and Cultural Society, is not under state control to the extent required by Article 12.
Majority Opinion: No All-Pervasive State Control
Authoring the majority opinion, Justice Oka — speaking for himself and Justice Augustine George Masih — observed that the Indian Air Force (IAF) headquarters exercised no “all-pervasive control” over the school’s daily functioning. Though some funds may originate from the Army Welfare Society, that alone did not suffice to establish governmental control.
“It is not shown how the IAF headquarters has any control over the management of the said school,” the majority held. “The relationship between the appellants and the school is in the realm of private contract…therefore, there is no merit in the appeals, and the same are dismissed.”
The bench also noted that the school operates under the Education Code, which lacks statutory backing and does not elevate the institution to the status of a public authority. Since the school is managed by a private society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, the majority concluded that writ jurisdiction cannot be invoked.
Dissenting View: Public Function and Governmental Control
Dissenting from the majority, Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah asserted that the Air Force School performs a “public function” by imparting education, especially to children of Air Force personnel posted in remote areas.
He pointed out that serving IAF officers occupy ex-officio roles in the school’s managing committee, indicating “dominant and functional control” by a state agency. “The school has been established primarily to impart education which is a public function… juxtaposed with the dominant and all-pervasive control exercised on the School through the Committee by serving officers of the IAF,” he noted.
Background of the Case
The judgment arose from appeals filed by two former teachers — Dileep Kumar Pandey and Sanjay Kumar Sharma — challenging their termination and seeking relief through writ petitions. The appellants claimed that since the school was functioning under the aegis of the Indian Air Force, it should be treated as an instrumentality of the state.
While dismissing their pleas, the Supreme Court clarified that the appellants are free to explore other legal remedies arising out of private contractual rights.
