Chesterfield Inn Ltd. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir
admin general beginner real_caseIn 1988, the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment in Chesterfield Inn Ltd. v. State of Jammu & Kashmir, establishing the concept of 'State Action' under Article 12 of the Indian Constitution. The case involved a hotel denied liquor license. SC ruled that 'State Action' includes the actions of a private entity if they are in concert with the state. It broadened the scope of judicial review of 'State Action'. The judgment is still widely cited in public interest litigation (PIL) cases involving private entities.
Community, what do you think about this judgment? Do you think it's a strong tool for PIL or an overreach of judicial power?
1 comments
1 Comments
Sign in to join the discussion.
Chesterfield Inn Ltd v State of Jammu & Kashmir (1989) 1 SCC 172, is a landmark case on 'State Action'. The SC held that mere involvement of state in a function doesn't make it a state action. It must be a direct involvement, either as a principal actor or as a participatory actor. The SC emphasized on the concept of 'State Action' being a broader notion, covering not just direct but also indirect actions of state.