Administrative law and implied constitutional rights
🔹 Administrative Law and Implied Constitutional Rights
1. What is Administrative Law?
Administrative law governs the activities of government agencies and ensures their actions comply with the law and constitutional principles. It controls the powers exercised by administrative authorities and provides remedies against their misuse.
It includes principles of natural justice, fairness, reasonableness, due process, and accountability.
Aims to protect citizens from arbitrary decisions by administrative bodies.
2. What are Implied Constitutional Rights?
Some rights or principles are not explicitly stated in the Constitution but are inferred or implied from its text or spirit. Courts have recognized such rights to ensure justice, fairness, and uphold constitutional values.
Examples include:
Right to privacy
Right to livelihood
Right to a clean environment
🔹 Key Concepts in Administrative Law
Natural Justice: Right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem), rule against bias (nemo judex in causa sua).
Reasonableness: Administrative decisions must not be arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable.
Judicial Review: Courts have power to review administrative decisions.
Delegated Legislation: Power delegated by legislature to administrative bodies must be exercised within limits.
Proportionality: Actions of administrative bodies should be proportionate to the aim.
🔹 Important Case Laws on Administrative Law and Implied Rights
1. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded by the government without providing reasons.
Issues:
Whether the procedure followed violated Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty).
Can the government act arbitrarily without following due process?
Ruling:
Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21.
Held that any "procedure" depriving personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.
Emphasized due process — administrative actions must adhere to fairness.
The Court recognized the right to a fair hearing and protection against arbitrary action.
Significance:
Landmark judgment extending procedural due process in administrative decisions.
Set the foundation for reasonableness and natural justice in administrative law.
2. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461
Facts:
Challenged constitutional amendments affecting property rights.
Issue:
Does Parliament have unlimited power to amend the Constitution?
Ruling:
Introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine.
Certain fundamental features of the Constitution (like rule of law, fundamental rights) cannot be altered.
Implied in the Constitution is the protection of fundamental rights as inviolable.
Significance:
Implied protection of constitutional principles beyond express provisions.
Ensured administrative and legislative actions do not destroy constitutional framework.
3. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180
Facts:
Slum dwellers challenged eviction by municipal authorities.
Issue:
Whether the right to livelihood is part of Article 21 (Right to Life).
Ruling:
The Supreme Court ruled the right to life includes the right to livelihood.
Eviction without reasonable alternative accommodation violated fundamental rights.
Significance:
Expanded implied constitutional rights.
Introduced social justice dimension into administrative and constitutional law.
Imposed limits on administrative power when it affects fundamental rights.
4. A.K. Roy v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 710
Facts:
Challenge to detention under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA).
Issue:
Whether preventive detention violates Article 21.
Ruling:
Court acknowledged some restrictions may be valid but must conform to due process.
Held that administrative detention must be subject to judicial review.
Emphasized the right to be heard and safeguards against arbitrariness.
Significance:
Affirmed importance of natural justice in administrative detention.
Strengthened judicial control over administrative actions affecting liberty.
5. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (Judges’ Transfer Case), AIR 1982 SC 149
Facts:
Challenge regarding transfers and appointments of judges.
Issue:
Whether the executive’s power in judicial appointments is absolute.
Ruling:
Court held that the independence of judiciary is implied in the Constitution.
Administrative powers must not infringe judicial independence.
Emphasized the principle of checks and balances.
Significance:
Highlighted implied constitutional principles to protect institutional integrity.
Reinforced limits on administrative powers.
6. K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 (Right to Privacy Case)
Facts:
Challenge to Aadhaar scheme on privacy grounds.
Issue:
Whether the right to privacy is a fundamental right under the Constitution.
Ruling:
Supreme Court held that the right to privacy is an implied fundamental right under Article 21.
Privacy is intrinsic to dignity and autonomy.
Significance:
Recognized a new implied constitutional right.
Set guidelines on limits of administrative surveillance and data collection.
🔹 Summary of Key Principles
| Principle | Explanation | Case Law Reference |
|---|---|---|
| Natural Justice | Right to fair hearing and absence of bias | Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India |
| Due Process | Procedure must be fair, just, and reasonable | Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India |
| Judicial Review | Courts can review administrative decisions | A.K. Roy v. Union of India |
| Basic Structure Doctrine | Parliament cannot alter fundamental framework | Kesavananda Bharati v. Kerala |
| Right to Livelihood (implied) | Part of right to life under Article 21 | Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal |
| Right to Privacy (implied) | Privacy as a fundamental right | K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India |
| Institutional Independence | Implied protection of judicial independence | S.P. Gupta v. Union of India |
🔚 Conclusion
Administrative law acts as the guardian of citizens’ rights against arbitrary administrative actions, ensuring fairness, transparency, and accountability. Meanwhile, implied constitutional rights are judicially recognized protections inherent to the constitutional scheme, expanding the horizon of fundamental rights beyond explicit text. The cases mentioned are landmark judgments demonstrating how courts balance administrative efficiency with protection of individual rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments