Air Force Group Insurance Society Held ‘State’ Under Article 12 | SC

Case Details: Ravi Khokhar vs. Union of India - [2026] 184 taxmann.com 334 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Sanjay Karol & Vipul M. Pancholi, JJ.
• Sourav Roy, AOR, Udai Khanna, Anshu Deshpande, Hemant Gupta & Pranav Bafna, Advs. for the Member, for the Appellant.
• Vikramjeet Banerjee, A.S.G, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Vardhman Kaushik, AORs, B Sunita Rao, P V Yogeswaran, Ms Sakshi Kakkar, Praneet Pranav, Navanjay Mahapatra & Abhishek Khanna, Advs. for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, the appellants were the employees of Air Force Group Insurance Society (AFGIS), a society established under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, with the sanction of the President of India.

In 2017, the AFGIS revised employees’ pay structures and de-linked them from the Central Government pay parity. The appellants filed the writ petitions challenging, inter alia, the maintainability and pay revision.

The High Court dismissed the writ petitions, holding that the AFGIS was not ‘State’ or ‘other authority’ under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Thereafter, an appeal was made before the Supreme Court.

It was noted that, for a body to be held to be a ‘State’, it is the cumulative effect and impact of deep and pervasive control, financial and administrative control, along with other factors such as carrying out the public duty.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court observed that the protection and welfare of the armed forces personnel is a core government function, and providing insurance coverage is a public function as it addresses a collective obligation the State has towards a defined public class whose service is indispensable.

The Supreme Court held that the Air Force Group Insurance Society (AFGIS) would be ‘State’ under Article 12 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, the writ petition before the High Court was maintainable. Thus, the writ petition on the appellants’ grievance was to be restored to the High Court for a decision on the merits.

List of Cases Reviewed

• Order of Delhi High Court in WP(C) No. 5024 of 2017; WP(C) No. 16428 of 2022, CM APPL 51620 of 2022; WP(C) No. 6759 of 2022; WP(C) No. 13858 of 2018; WP(C) No. 863 of 2019; WP(C) No. 15835 of 2022 & CM APPL. 49280 of 2022, Dated 01-02-2023 (para 19) set aside

List of Cases Referred to

• Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi [1981] 1 SCC 722 (para 3.2)
• Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology 2002 taxmann.com 4816 (SC) (para 3.2)
• Chander Mohan Khanna v. National Council of Educational Research and Training [1991] 4 SCC 578 (para 3.2)
• Sagarika Singh v. Union of India 2011 SCC OnLine Del 3612 (para 3.2)
• Ex. Sub. Rajender Singh v. Union of India 2013 SCC OnLine Del 1598 (para 3.2)
• Rajkaran Singh v. Union of India 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2138 (para 4)
• Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India [1979] 3 SCC 489 (para 7.1)
• Zee Telefilms Ltd. v. Union of India [2005] 4 SCC 649 (para 7.4).