Good governance and administrative law
Good Governance and Administrative Law
What is Good Governance?
Good governance refers to the process and structure of government that ensures the efficient, transparent, accountable, equitable, and responsive management of public affairs. It is about how public institutions conduct public affairs, manage resources, and guarantee the realization of rights and services to citizens.
Key Principles of Good Governance:
Accountability: Government officials must be answerable for their actions.
Transparency: Processes and decisions should be open and clear.
Rule of Law: Laws should be applied fairly and consistently.
Participation: Citizens should have a voice in governance.
Responsiveness: Institutions should respond promptly to citizens' needs.
Equity and Inclusiveness: Fair treatment of all groups in society.
What is Administrative Law?
Administrative law governs the activities of government agencies. It regulates how these agencies operate, make decisions, and enforce laws, ensuring they act within the law and respect citizens’ rights.
Key Functions:
Controls discretionary powers of the administration.
Ensures fairness and justice in administrative decisions.
Provides remedies like judicial review against arbitrary decisions.
Ensures rule of law in government actions.
Important Case Laws Related to Good Governance and Administrative Law
1. Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978)
Issue: Maneka Gandhi's passport was impounded without a proper reason or hearing.
Significance:
The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) to include the right to a fair procedure.
Established the principle of due process in administrative actions.
Introduced the concept of reasonableness and fairness in administrative decisions, reinforcing good governance.
Outcome: Government actions affecting personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable.
Significance for Administrative Law: Administrative decisions are subject to judicial review if they violate principles of natural justice.
2. A.K. Kraipak vs. Union of India (1969)
Issue: Alleged bias by members of a selection committee constituted by the government for recruitment.
Significance:
The Supreme Court ruled that quasi-judicial bodies must act fairly and impartially.
Emphasized that natural justice applies not only to courts but also to administrative bodies exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
Highlighted the principle of non-bias and the right to be heard.
Outcome: Selection or recruitment processes must be transparent, fair, and free from bias.
Good Governance Aspect: Reinforces accountability and fairness in administrative decision-making.
3. S.P. Gupta vs. Union of India (1981) (The Judges’ Transfer Case)
Issue: Judicial appointments and transfers by the executive without transparency.
Significance:
The Supreme Court held that transparency and fairness must guide appointments and transfers in the judiciary.
Emphasized accountability and transparency in government functioning, including judiciary.
Asserted that the government cannot act arbitrarily in matters affecting public interest.
Outcome: Encouraged institutional reforms promoting good governance in judicial administration.
Importance: Highlighted the need for institutional checks and balance of powers.
4. Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)
Issue: Eviction of pavement dwellers without providing alternative housing or notice.
Significance:
The Supreme Court recognized the right to livelihood as part of the fundamental right to life (Article 21).
Emphasized the principle of reasonableness and fairness in eviction decisions by government agencies.
Government authorities must act with compassion, fairness, and procedural safeguards in administrative decisions affecting livelihoods.
Outcome: Evictions without reasonable notice and alternatives were declared illegal.
Good Governance Aspect: Reinforces the need for responsive and humane governance.
5. Union of India vs. Tulsiram Patel (1985)
Issue: Dismissal of government employees without providing a reasonable opportunity to defend themselves.
Significance:
The Court held that principles of natural justice apply even to disciplinary proceedings by the government.
Stressed the right to show cause and fair hearing before any adverse administrative action.
Government cannot act arbitrarily and must follow fair procedures.
Outcome: Administrative decisions affecting individuals’ careers require due process.
Good Governance Aspect: Ensures accountability and fairness in administrative action.
Summary:
Good Governance demands transparency, accountability, fairness, and responsiveness in public administration.
Administrative Law provides the framework to control and check government agencies’ powers.
Case laws like Maneka Gandhi, A.K. Kraipak, Olga Tellis, and Tulsiram Patel emphasize fairness, due process, and non-arbitrariness in administrative actions.
These judgments ensure that the government respects citizens' rights and follows the rule of law, thereby promoting good governance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments