Writ jurisdiction and contractual employment rights cannot be enforced against a non-statutory institute lacking public duty.

Article 226 relief is unavailable where the respondent is not a State, statutory body, or authority performing a public duty, and the dispute is only a contractual employment matter. An international institute established by agreement, funded mainly by foreign contributors, and not financially, functionally, or administratively dominated by the Government of India was treated as outside writ jurisdiction. Its research and training functions were held to be voluntary and not public duties owed to the Indian public. The contractual employment claim could not be enforced by writ, and the prayer against the Union of India was in substance a claim against the institute, with no specifically enforceable domestic right shown under the agreement.

---

---

Issues: Whether the respondent institute was amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and whether the relief sought against the Union of India for implementation of the agreement could be granted.

Analysis: A writ under Article 226 lies only where a legal right is infringed and the respondent is a State, authority, statutory body, or a person performing a public or statutory duty. On the facts, the institute was an international organisation established through an agreement, financially supported mainly by foreign contributors, and not financially, functionally, or administratively dominated by the Government of India. Its activities were voluntary research and training functions and did not constitute a public duty owed to the Indian public. The employment relationship was contractual, and a writ was not available to enforce such contractual rights or to quash termination of service in the absence of a statutory obligation. The prayer against the Union of India was in substance only a claim against the institute and the agreement was not shown to be specifically enforceable in domestic proceedings.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable against the institute, and no relief could be granted on the basis of the agreement against the Union of India.

Ratio Decidendi: Article 226 does not lie to enforce a purely contractual employment dispute against a body that is neither State under Article 12 nor a statutory or public-duty authority.

---