Supreme Court Clarifies Article 131 Scope
The Supreme Court of India has unequivocally held that a statutory authority or an instrumentality of the State is precluded from invoking its original jurisdiction under Article 131 of the Constitution. The Court reiterated that the ambit of Article 131 is strictly limited to disputes involving the Union of India and one or more constituent States, or between two or more States. This significant clarification was delivered by a Bench comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Sheel Nagu, which simultaneously set aside an order of the Allahabad High Court.
Background of the Lucknow Development Authority's Petition
The ruling originated from a long-pending writ petition filed by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) before the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench. The LDA, a statutory body established under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, had initiated proceedings against the Union of India, the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Central Command, and the Station Commander, Sub-Area, Cantonment, Lucknow. The core of the dispute revolved around land in Lucknow where the LDA had developed a residential colony, subsequently allotting plots and flats to various beneficiaries. The LDA contended that officers from the Union Government and defence establishments were unlawfully interfering with the physical possession of these allottees, asserting ownership claims over the land.
High Court's Erroneous Direction
Following unsuccessful attempts to facilitate a resolution between the concerned authorities, the Allahabad High Court, in an order dated September 19, 2023, dismissed the LDA's writ petition. The High Court concluded that the dispute was not amenable to resolution through writ proceedings and granted the parties the liberty to initiate proceedings under Article 131 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, however, found this approach to be legally untenable, characterising it as a "gross error" on the part of the High Court.
Supreme Court's Legal Rationale on Article 131
The Supreme Court observed that the High Court had fundamentally misconstrued the nature of the dispute and the specific scope of Article 131. The Bench emphasised that the writ petition had been filed by the LDA, not by the State of Uttar Pradesh. While acknowledging that the LDA, as a body corporate, might fall within the expansive definition of "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court clarified that this classification does not extend to its status for the purposes of Article 131. The Court underscored that Article 131 specifically confers original jurisdiction upon the Supreme Court for disputes between the Government of India and one or more States, or between two or more States.
The Bench meticulously distinguished between the definition of "State" under Article 12 and the expression "States" as used in Article 131. The Supreme Court elucidated that the term "States" in Article 131 refers exclusively to the constituent States of the Union, as enumerated in the First Schedule to the Constitution. This interpretation, the Court held, is distinct from the broader definition of "State" encompassing various authorities and instrumentalities under Article 12. Consequently, the Supreme Court concluded that an authority such as the LDA is not entitled to invoke the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 131.
The Court explicitly stated, "The expression 'States' in Article 131 refers to the constituent States of the Union enlisted in the First Schedule of the Constitution, as distinct from a 'State' defined in Article 12. While the appellant may fall within Article 12 as an instrumentality of the State, it is not a State for the purposes of Article 131. The jurisdiction under clauses (a), (b) and (c) of Article 131 can be invoked only by the States specified in the First Schedule, and not by any authority or instrumentality covered by Article 12. Therefore, on the very terms of Article 131, it is not open to the appellant to approach this Court in its original jurisdiction."
Operative Directions and Remittal
Given the High Court's erroneous dismissal of the writ petition on the premise that the dispute was between the Union and the State, the Supreme Court found it necessary to intervene. The Bench noted that the writ petition had remained pending for nearly two and a half decades, highlighting the considerable delay in its resolution. Accordingly, the Supreme Court remitted the writ petition to the Allahabad High Court for a fresh decision to be rendered in accordance with the law. In light of the substantial time that has elapsed since the petition's institution, the Supreme Court specifically requested the High Court to decide the matter expeditiously. The case was titled Lucknow Development Authority v. Union of India & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 11201 of 2026, with the citation 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 864.