Best advocates in Chandigarh will be concluded that these tests are just as deficient as their English counterparts. In the third part of the chapter, a possible explanation will be provided as to why the Indian courts, like the English courts, have had difficulty in arriving at a coherent test to determine whether power, by virtue of its nature, is public. Finally, a tentative suggestion will briefly be made as to a test that the Indian courts might rely on to determine whether power, by virtue of its nature, is public. One test commonly referred to by the English courts, Best advocates in Chandigarh supposedly permits the courts to determine whether power, by virtue of its nature, is public for the purposes of judicial review, is known as the ‘but-for test’. Pursuant to that test power exercised in the carrying out of a particular function will be public if, in the absence of a Best advocates in Chandigarh body to carry out that function, the government itself would almost invariably undertake the function.