Constitutional status of the right to good administration
Constitutional Status of the Right to Good Administration
What is the Right to Good Administration?
The right to good administration is a fundamental principle that demands administrative authorities act lawfully, fairly, impartially, and reasonably when making decisions affecting citizens. It includes procedural fairness, transparency, accountability, and the right to be heard.
Though this right is explicitly recognized in some international documents, in many countries, including India, it is derived implicitly from constitutional principles such as:
Article 14 (Right to Equality)
Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty)
Article 19 (Freedom of Speech and Expression)
Article 32 (Right to Constitutional Remedies)
It is part of the broader idea of due process and rule of law.
Constitutional Foundations
Article 14: Ensures equality before the law and equal protection of laws.
Article 21: The Supreme Court has interpreted "life and personal liberty" to include the right to live with human dignity, which entails fair administrative processes.
Article 19: Protects certain freedoms which require administrative fairness in regulation.
Article 32 & 226: Courts can enforce the right to fair administrative action through writs.
Significance
Prevents arbitrariness, bias, and abuse of power.
Ensures transparency, accountability, and fairness in administrative action.
Guarantees the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem rule).
Supports reasoned decisions by authorities.
Supports public trust in governance.
Important Case Laws on the Right to Good Administration
1. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Citation: AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded without providing reasons or an opportunity to be heard.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that the procedure established by law must be "right, just, and fair" and not arbitrary or oppressive. The Court interpreted Article 21 broadly to include the right to fair administrative procedures.
Significance:
This landmark judgment laid the foundation for the right to fair administrative action as a constitutional guarantee under Article 21. It established that any administrative action affecting personal liberty must be reasonable and fair.
2. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1982)
Citation: AIR 1982 SC 149
Facts:
Challenges were raised regarding appointments to constitutional bodies, alleging non-transparency and arbitrariness.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court emphasized transparency and fairness in administrative decisions affecting public interest. It ruled that administrative actions must follow principles of natural justice.
Significance:
This case reinforced that the right to good administration includes transparency, accountability, and fairness in public appointments and other governmental actions.
3. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969)
Citation: AIR 1969 SC 129
Facts:
The government’s decision on a mining lease was challenged for bias and lack of hearing.
Judgment:
The Court held that administrative authorities must observe natural justice rules — particularly the right to be heard. The decision was quashed for violation of these principles.
Significance:
This case affirmed that good administration requires impartiality and hearing before adverse action.
4. Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985)
Citation: AIR 1985 SC 1416
Facts:
Government employees were dismissed without opportunity to be heard.
Judgment:
The Court held that principles of natural justice are an essential part of service jurisprudence and are necessary for good administration.
Significance:
This judgment expanded the right to fair procedure to public servants, reinforcing accountability and fairness in administrative decisions.
5. D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997)
Citation: AIR 1997 SC 610
Facts:
The case dealt with custodial violence and abuse of administrative power by police.
Judgment:
The Court laid down detailed guidelines to ensure accountability, transparency, and protection of fundamental rights in police custody, emphasizing the right to good administration by state authorities.
Significance:
This case highlights that good administration includes protection of human rights and ensuring that administrative actions do not violate fundamental rights.
6. Delhi Development Authority v. Skipper Construction Co. (1996)
Citation: AIR 1996 SC 1752
Facts:
The Delhi Development Authority (DDA) acted without following statutory procedure, adversely affecting Skipper Construction.
Judgment:
The Court held that even statutory authorities must act fairly and provide reasons for their decisions.
Significance:
The judgment reinforced that good administration requires reasoned decisions and procedural fairness, even in statutory bodies.
Summary
The right to good administration is a fundamental principle underpinned by the Constitution of India, especially Articles 14 and 21.
It mandates that administrative action must be fair, reasonable, non-arbitrary, and transparent.
Courts have expanded this right through various rulings, emphasizing natural justice, due process, and accountability.
It applies to all administrative authorities, including police, statutory bodies, and government departments.
The right strengthens democracy by ensuring fair governance and protecting individual rights against misuse of power.
RELATED Blog
0 comments