Vicarious Liability of the State in India: A Critical Analysis of Constitutional Principles, Judicial Trends and the Need for Legislative Reform

Author

Priyanga B


Abstract

 The doctrine of State vicarious liability is a cornerstone of public accountability and dictates the circumstances in which the State will be liable to compensate an individual for a civil wrong done by a public servant in the course of his employment. In India the law of State vicarious liability is still very much based upon Article 300 of the Constitution of India, the principles of common law tort and judicial construction. The Supreme Court has in recent times moved to provide greater accountability to the State, particularly where the acts of a public authority are found to be in breach of fundamental rights. The law of ordinary tort liability however continues to be a source of uncertainty with respect to the functions of the State, the scope of employment and the extent of immunity. This paper looks at the development of State liability through a number of key cases: State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram Jain v. State of Uttar Pradesh, Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, Saheli v. Commissioner of Police and Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa. It makes the distinction between private law vicarious liability and public law compensation for a violation of the Constitution. It looks at the effect of the reasoning in N. Nagendra Rao & Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh and concludes that whilst constitutional compensation has in effect rendered sovereign immunity largely irrelevant in the context of a violation of fundamental rights, it has not in any way eliminated the need for a proper statutory regime to govern State torts. A principled legislative model is proposed which is based on the concept of employment liability, with a very narrow range of exceptions, effective compensation procedures, transparent claims administration and accountability for serious official misconduct. The core proposition is that State liability should be structured around the nature of the State activity, the nature of the connection between the wrong and public employment and the availability of effective remedies rather than on an expansive and rather nebulous notion of sovereignty.


Keywords

Vicarious liability, State liability, Article 300, sovereign immunity, constitutional tort, public accountability, tort law, India.



Full Text:

Download Paper PDF


References


1) Reports

  1. i)  LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA, LIABILITY OF THE STATE IN TORT, FIRST REPORT   (1956).

2) Supreme courts decision

i)State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati, AIR 1962 SC 933.

  1. ii) Kasturi Lal Ralia Ram Jain v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1965 SC 1039.

iii) Rudul Sah v. State of Bihar, (1983) 4 SCC 141.

  1. iv) Saheli, A Women's Resources Centre v. Commissioner of Police, (1990) 1 SCC 422.

v)Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, (1993) 2 SCC 746.

vi)N. Nagendra Rao & Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1994) 6 SCC 205.

3) Books

  1. i) The Constitution of India ,1950 ( as amended by The Constitution 106th Act , 2023)
  2. ii)  C.K. Takwani’s Lectures on Administrative Law (2012), Fifth Edition, EBC Publishing (P) Ltd.

iii) Dr.R.K. Bangia’s  Law of Torts (2010), Twenty Third Edition, Allahabad law agency law publishers.

Share your valuable work from Social Media Buttons