Adm…
⚖️ Administrative Law
I. What is Administrative Law?
Administrative law is the branch of public law that governs the organization, powers, procedures, and actions of administrative authorities (government agencies, regulatory bodies, tribunals, etc.). It ensures that the administration:
Acts within its legal powers (doctrine of ultra vires),
Follows due process and natural justice,
Is accountable to the law and, ultimately, to the courts.
II. Key Principles of Administrative Law
Rule of Law – No one is above the law, including government officers.
Separation of Powers – Administrative authorities should not overstep their role.
Natural Justice – Fair hearing and unbiased decision-making.
Judicial Review – Courts can review and correct unlawful administrative actions.
Delegated Legislation – Law-making powers delegated to administrative bodies under legislative supervision.
Reasonableness & Proportionality – Actions must be rational and not excessive.
III. Case Law: Detailed Explanations (More than 5 Cases)
1. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1970 AIR 150, 1970 SCR (2) 457)
Issue: Whether administrative action is subject to the principles of natural justice.
Facts:
An Indian Forest Service selection board included a member who was also a candidate for the position. He took part in the decision-making process.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that administrative actions affecting rights must follow natural justice. The involvement of a candidate in the selection board was biased, violating the principle of a fair hearing.
Importance:
Blurred the line between administrative and quasi-judicial functions.
Natural justice applies to all forms of administrative action.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621)
Issue: Whether the right to travel can be restricted without giving a hearing.
Facts:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded by the government without furnishing reasons or providing her an opportunity to be heard.
Held:
The Supreme Court ruled that even administrative orders affecting fundamental rights must follow due process and natural justice.
Importance:
Expanded Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) to include procedural fairness.
Administrative discretion must be fair, reasonable, and not arbitrary.
3. State of Punjab v. Gurdial Singh (1980 AIR 319, 1980 SCR (2) 476)
Issue: Malafide use of administrative power – Land acquisition
Facts:
Land was acquired under administrative power for a public purpose, but it turned out to be to settle personal scores with the landowner.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that administrative powers must be exercised in good faith and for a legitimate purpose.
Importance:
Strengthens the doctrine of malafide.
Administrative action can be struck down if the real purpose is improper.
4. Union of India v. R. Gandhi (2010) 11 SCC 1
Issue: Judicial vs. Administrative functions – NCLT and separation of powers
Facts:
Challenge to the constitutional validity of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and the Appellate Tribunal.
Held:
The Supreme Court upheld the creation of tribunals but imposed strict judicial safeguards to ensure independence and fairness.
Importance:
Clarified the boundaries between judicial and administrative functions.
Ensured tribunal independence, which is critical in administrative adjudication.
5. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973 AIR 1461, 1973 SCR (1) 850)
Issue: Scope of constitutional amendments affecting administrative structure
Facts:
The challenge was against constitutional amendments affecting property rights and government powers.
Held:
The Court upheld the power of amendment but introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Importance:
Ensures that administrative powers and procedures cannot violate the basic structure of the Constitution (rule of law, separation of powers, etc.).
6. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975 AIR 2299, 1975 Supp SCC 1)
Issue: Administrative abuse of electoral power
Facts:
The Prime Minister’s election was challenged, and Parliament attempted to change laws retrospectively to save her seat.
Held:
The Court struck down the law for violating the basic structure, particularly free and fair elections and separation of powers.
Importance:
Reinforces limits on administrative and legislative overreach.
No authority is above the Constitutional framework.
7. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948) 1 KB 223
UK Case – Applied in Indian jurisprudence
Issue: When can courts interfere in administrative discretion?
Facts:
The Wednesbury Corporation gave permission to a cinema to open on Sundays with the condition that no children under 15 be allowed. The cinema challenged this as unreasonable.
Held:
The court laid down the "Wednesbury Principle": Administrative discretion will not be interfered with unless it is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would ever impose it.
Importance:
Introduced the test of Wednesbury unreasonableness.
Indian courts use this principle in judicial review of administrative discretion.
8. Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985 AIR 1416)
Issue: Dismissal of public servants without inquiry under Article 311(2)
Facts:
Government servants were dismissed without an inquiry, citing security of the state.
Held:
The Court upheld the dismissal, stating natural justice can be excluded in rare situations like national security.
Importance:
Shows exceptions to natural justice.
Balances administrative necessity with individual rights.
9. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997 AIR 610)
Issue: Abuse of administrative power by police – Custodial torture
Facts:
Concern over increasing custodial deaths led to a PIL demanding accountability.
Held:
The Court issued detailed guidelines for arrest and detention, mandating procedural safeguards.
Importance:
Landmark for accountability of administrative authorities.
Enforces constitutional protections through administrative procedures.
10. Purtabpore Company Ltd. v. Cane Commissioner of Bihar (1969 AIR 465)
Issue: Administrative discretion exercised for extraneous reasons
Facts:
The Cane Commissioner passed an order allocating sugarcane to a factory not on merits but under political pressure.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that administrative discretion must be exercised on relevant grounds and not for extraneous considerations.
Importance:
Reinforces malafide and irrelevant considerations as grounds for judicial review.
Upholds accountability in discretionary decisions.
IV. Conclusion
Administrative law ensures that power is exercised lawfully, fairly, and reasonably. Through these ten important cases, we see how courts regulate administrative actions to protect the rights of individuals and maintain constitutional order.
The principles of natural justice, judicial review, fair procedure, and reasonableness are the bedrock of administrative law, with wide implications in fields like education, employment, licensing, public service, and consumer protection.
RELATED Blog
0 comments