Judicial review of discretionary powers
⚖️ Judicial Review of Discretionary Powers
🔍 What are Discretionary Powers?
Discretionary powers are the authority granted to administrative or executive bodies to make decisions within certain legal boundaries. These powers allow decision-makers flexibility to choose among various options based on judgment, policy, or specific circumstances.
Discretion is not unlimited.
It must be exercised reasonably, lawfully, and in good faith.
Courts intervene if discretion is abused or exercised arbitrarily.
✅ Judicial Review of Discretionary Powers
Judicial review is the process by which courts examine decisions of public authorities to ensure they comply with the law.
Scope: Courts do not replace the decision but check if discretion was exercised within legal limits.
Grounds for review include:
Illegality: Decision beyond legal authority.
Irrationality: So unreasonable no reasonable authority would act similarly.
Procedural Impropriety: Failure to follow fair procedures.
Bad Faith or Improper Purpose: Using power for an unauthorized purpose.
📚 Case Law Illustrations
⚖️ 1. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948) – UK
Facts: The Wednesbury Corporation imposed a condition on cinema opening times. The cinema challenged it as unreasonable.
Judgment: The court held that discretionary decisions can be reviewed if they are so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would have made them (the “Wednesbury unreasonableness” test).
Key Principle: Judicial review protects against irrational or absurd decisions.
Impact: Established the standard of review for discretion—courts intervene only when decisions are unreasonable to an extreme degree.
⚖️ 2. Ridge v. Baldwin (1964) – UK
Facts: A chief constable was dismissed without being given a hearing.
Judgment: The House of Lords ruled that failure to give a fair hearing was a procedural impropriety making the exercise of discretion invalid.
Key Principle: Discretionary decisions must comply with natural justice/fair hearing rules.
Impact: Reinforced procedural fairness as a precondition to valid discretionary acts.
⚖️ 3. Pioneer Shipping Ltd. v. BTP Tioxide Ltd. (1982) – UK
Facts: The Minister refused a license based on discretion, but the reasons were vague.
Judgment: Court held that discretion must be exercised with relevant considerations and a rational basis.
Key Principle: Decisions must not be based on irrelevant factors or ignored relevant ones.
Impact: Clarified the reasonableness and relevance test in discretionary decisions.
⚖️ 4. Khatri v. State of Bihar (1981) AIR 928 – India
Facts: Discretionary powers were used in appointment to police services.
Judgment: The Supreme Court emphasized that discretion must be exercised judiciously, fairly, and without arbitrariness.
Key Principle: Discretion is subject to judicial review to prevent abuse or malafide use.
Impact: Set guidelines for fair exercise of administrative discretion in public appointments.
⚖️ 5. Pakistan Administrative Case: Messrs. Aftab Associates v. Government of Pakistan (PLD 1961 SC 83)
Facts: A government contract was canceled arbitrarily.
Judgment: The Supreme Court held that the discretionary power must be exercised within the law and in good faith, not arbitrarily.
Key Principle: Abuse of discretionary power amounts to illegality.
Impact: Affirmed judicial control over discretion in government contracts.
⚖️ 6. R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union (1995) – UK
Facts: Government failed to implement a compensation scheme promised by ministerial discretion.
Judgment: Court ruled that discretionary power cannot be used to frustrate a legitimate expectation.
Key Principle: Discretion must be exercised consistently with legitimate expectations.
Impact: Limits on discretion when promises create enforceable expectations.
📝 Summary of Legal Principles
| Ground of Review | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Illegality | Power exercised beyond authority. |
| Irrationality | Decision is unreasonable or absurd. |
| Procedural Impropriety | Failure to follow fair process. |
| Bad Faith/Improper Purpose | Power used for wrong reasons or malicious intent. |
🔍 Conclusion
Discretionary powers are essential for flexible governance but must be:
Exercised within the boundaries of law,
Guided by rationality and fairness,
Subject to procedural fairness,
Free from abuse or improper motives.
Judicial review acts as a safeguard ensuring administrative discretion is not arbitrary or oppressive but aligned with rule of law principles.
RELATED Blog
0 comments