Court case(2005) 4 SCC 649

BCCI invited bids for the exclusive television rights of cricket matches in India for four years. Zee Telefilms was declared the successful bidder but BCCI later cancelled the award. Zee moved the Supreme Court directly under Article 32, which required it to show that BCCI, a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, was 'State' under Article 12.

The majority held that BCCI is not 'State'. Applying Pradeep Kumar Biswas, Hegde J found that BCCI was not created by statute, no part of its share capital was held by government, it received practically no financial assistance from government, its monopoly in cricket was not conferred or protected by the State, and there was no deep and pervasive governmental control. A body is not 'State' merely because it performs public duties or enjoys a de facto monopoly. The majority added that an aggrieved party was not without remedy: when BCCI discharges public functions, a writ under Article 226 may lie. Sinha J, dissenting with Sema J, would have held BCCI to be 'State' because it exercises monopolistic public functions with State acquiescence.