“ From the aforesaid principles it would be seen that though no single test is decisive to reach the conclusion whether particular industry is carried on by or under the authority of Central Government yet, totality of circumstances in the light of the aforesaid principles may provide firm basis for conclusion. A company floated from public exchequer and owned wholly by Central Government is indicative of the fact that it is controlled by or under the authority of the Central Government. The employer industry is admittedly wholly owned by the Central Government and entire share capital has been contributed by it. Though the commercial activity is carried on by the employer industry in accordance with its byelaws and Memorandum of Association yet the employer undertaking is nothing but an extended arm of Government and it apparently is an instrumentality or agency of the 'State' and is 'State' within the meaning of Article 12 of Constitution of India. Its acts, values, regulations and governance power are subject to constitutional obligations and have to be in conformity with public law principles. The existence of deep and pervasive state control depends upon the facts and circumstances in a given situation. In the present case, it would be seen that the entire share capital of the employer was contributed by Central Government and it belongs to the Central Government. The Chairman, Managing Directors and other Directors are appointed by the President of India. The number of Directors, the salary and allowances of the Chairman, the Managing Director and Directors are determined by President of India. The directions are issued by President of India from time to time in regard to the conduct of business and affairs of the employer industry. It would thus, to be seen that for all practical purposes, it is the Central Government which exercises control and supervision over the working and function of the employer industry and the employer industry is virtually the agency and instrumentality of the Government of
