Executive Control over Administrative Discretion
⚖️ Executive Control over Administrative Discretion
I. Meaning and Concept of Administrative Discretion
Administrative discretion refers to the power given to administrative officials or agencies to make decisions within the framework of law. Such discretion arises because not every situation can be governed by strict rules, requiring the administration to use judgment in applying laws or policies.
Executive control over this discretion means that the executive branch supervises, guides, or limits how administrative authorities exercise their discretionary powers to ensure proper governance, prevent misuse, and maintain accountability.
II. Need for Executive Control
Prevent arbitrary decisions: Administrative discretion, if unchecked, can lead to arbitrariness and abuse of power.
Maintain uniformity and consistency: Executive control ensures that policies are implemented uniformly across departments.
Policy alignment: Ensures administrative actions align with government policy and legislative intent.
Legal accountability: Helps maintain legality and transparency in administrative functions.
III. Modes of Executive Control
Rule-making and Regulations: The executive frames detailed rules and regulations guiding discretionary powers.
Supervision and Review: Higher executive authorities supervise decisions of subordinate authorities.
Delegated Legislation: Executive issues subsidiary legislation to regulate discretion.
Financial Control: Budgetary controls limit the extent of administrative actions.
Reporting and Monitoring: Regular reports and audits to check administrative discretion.
Power of Review and Revision: The executive can review or revise decisions of subordinate officials.
IV. Limits to Executive Control
While the executive controls discretion, it must:
Respect principles of natural justice.
Not exercise discretion in a malicious, arbitrary, or unreasonable manner.
Be subject to judicial review if discretion is abused.
V. Case Laws Illustrating Executive Control over Administrative Discretion
1. Union of India v. Cynamide India Ltd., AIR 1967 SC 1162
Facts:
The issue related to the discretionary power of the executive to regulate the manufacture and sale of cyanamide, a chemical.
Holding:
The Supreme Court observed that discretion is not unfettered. The executive’s discretion must be exercised reasonably, in good faith, and within the limits of the enabling statute.
Significance:
Emphasized that executive discretion is subject to legal constraints and oversight.
2. Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India, AIR 1979 SC 1628
Facts:
The Airport Authority exercised discretion in awarding a contract without following fair procedures.
Holding:
The Court held that discretion must be exercised fairly, reasonably, and not arbitrarily. Executive control includes ensuring procedural fairness in decision-making.
Significance:
Highlighted that discretionary powers are controlled to prevent arbitrariness and ensure fairness.
3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
The government impounded Maneka Gandhi’s passport without providing reasons or an opportunity to be heard.
Holding:
The Supreme Court ruled that administrative discretion is limited by the requirement of fairness, reasonableness, and due process under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Significance:
Asserted that executive discretion is subject to constitutional safeguards and procedural fairness.
4. S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan, AIR 1981 SC 1361
Facts:
The case involved the exercise of executive discretion in the transfer of a public servant.
Holding:
The Court emphasized that discretion must be exercised in good faith and for valid reasons; improper exercise amounts to abuse of discretion.
Significance:
Established that executive control ensures discretion is not misused.
5. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 865
Facts:
Concerns about the misuse of discretionary power by government officials.
Holding:
The Supreme Court ruled that discretionary power should be exercised in accordance with law and not arbitrarily or capriciously.
Significance:
Reiterated the principle that executive discretion is under continuous control to prevent misuse.
VI. Summary Table of Case Laws
| Case Name | Key Issue | Principle Established |
|---|---|---|
| Union of India v. Cynamide India | Reasonableness of discretion | Discretion must be exercised reasonably and in good faith |
| Ramana Dayaram Shetty v. IAAI | Fair procedure in discretion | Executive discretion must be free from arbitrariness and fair |
| Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India | Due process and fairness | Discretion limited by constitutional due process requirements |
| S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan | Abuse of discretion | Discretion must be exercised in good faith, not arbitrarily |
| State of UP v. Raj Narain | Misuse of discretionary power | Executive discretion is controlled to avoid arbitrariness |
VII. Conclusion
Executive control over administrative discretion is essential to balance the need for flexibility in governance with the protection of individual rights. While discretion allows administration to adapt laws to varied circumstances, executive control ensures that this power is exercised lawfully, fairly, and reasonably. The judiciary plays a crucial role by reviewing executive decisions to prevent misuse.
RELATED Blog
0 comments