Judicial Functions of Administration

Introduction:

History of Judicial Review [1]
The doctrine of judicial review has bought totally different nuances throughout the course of its evolution in the UK, USA, and India. Its origins are often traced to the UK that has no written Constitution. it’s become firmly established in the USA with a written Constitution establishing a federal polity. However, the doctrine reached its end result under the Indian Constitution once the Supreme Court of India presented on judicial review the widest extent and amplitude within the cases célèbre Keshvanand Bharti v. the State of Kerala. The very recent case on judicial review in England in which Dr Bonham’s chief justice Coke expressed that when an Act of Parliament was against common right or reason, offensive or not possible to perform, the Common Law would control it and declare such Act to be void. within the Historic case Marbury v. Madison the Supreme Court of America created it clears that Court had the ability of judicial review, chief justice George Marshall observed:

• “Certainly, all individuals that have framed the written Constitution contemplate them as constructing the fundamental and paramount law of the nations and theory of each such government should be that the legislature, repugnant to the Constitution is void”.

Meaning of Judicial Review[2]

As per the Judicial Review basically, it refers to the power of the judiciary which have the authority to interpret the constitution if it finds them in conflict the Constitution of India and to declare any such law or order of the legislature and executive void.

JUDICIAL REVIEW IS THE KEY  TO THE JUDICIARY BY WHICH:

• As per the litigation cases which comes before them, the court reviews the laws and rules of the legislature and executive.
• The constitutional validity of the laws and rules of the government is determined by the  court; and
• If the court finds something unconstitutional or against the Constitution the court rejects it

What are Administrative Actions?[3]

By the mid-20th century in India, Administrative law was recognized as a separate branch of legal discipline. the responsibilities of the state were few and limited, consisting of the safeguarding of public order, the conduct of foreign affairs and the disposition of the armed forces as per the past the nineteenth century. Nowadays, it’s far away different. In the concerns of protecting the public and maintaining law and order, the state intervenes into the lives of its citizens to a very considerable degree. The actions which are carried out under the administrative law are known as administrative actions. Legal action concerned with the conduct of a public administrative body which is known as an administrative action. This kind of action can compel an authority to take a particular action. It does not determine a right though it might affect a right. According to the “administrative powers” while exercising the principles of natural justice cannot be ignored.

As per mentioned in the case of “ A.K. KARPIAK V. UNION OF INDIA”, the Court was of the read that so as to see whether or not the action of the administrative the executive authority is “quasi-judicial or administrative, one should see the character of power conferred”, to whom power is given, the framework among that power is conferred and also the consequences.

Administrative action might also be statutory, having the force of law, or non-statutory, empty of such legal force. the majority of the executive action is statutory as a result of a statute or the Constitution offers it a legal force, however, in some cases, it’s going to be non-statutory, like issuing directions to subordinates not having the force of law, however, its violation could also be visited with disciplinary action. Although by an enormous body action is discretionary and relies on subjective satisfaction, however, the executive authority should act fairly, impartially, and reasonable.

Grounds of Judicial Review

1. JURISDICTIONAL ERROR
2. IRRATIONALITY
3. PROCEDURAL IMPROPRIETY
4. PROPORTIONALITY
5. LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION

Jurisdictional Error[4]

Basically, the term  ‘jurisdiction’ is known as the power to decide. There could be a ‘lack of jurisdiction’, ‘excess of jurisdiction’ or ‘abuse of jurisdiction’.  According to these three situations, the court might reject an administrative action on the ground of ultra vires.

As per mentioned case  ‘lack of jurisdiction’ is where the authority or tribunal holds no power or jurisdiction at all to pass an order. The court might review this administrative action on the ground that the authority exercised jurisdiction which it was not supposed to. In the following three grounds the power of review may be exercised on.

• That the law under that the executive authority is recognized and exercising jurisdiction is itself unconstitutional,
• That the authority isn’t properly recognized because the law needs, and
• That the authority has erroneously set a jurisdictional reality and henceforward assumed jurisdiction that didn’t belong to that initial.

A case of ‘excess of jurisdiction’ covers a state of affairs whereby although the authority initially had the jurisdiction over a matter then again it exceeded and after its actions become illegal. this will happen within the following things once –

• An administrative body continues to exercise jurisdiction despite the prevalence of an occasion exclusion the jurisdiction, and
• Once it’s entertaining matters outside its jurisdiction.

All body powers should be exercised Bonafede and fairly. If the powers are abused, it’ll make to a ground of review. an ‘abuse of power’ could arise below the subsequent conditions-

• Improper purpose- once an authority uses its power for a unique purpose
• Error apparent on the face of record- once it is observed by examining the record while not having to recourse to alternative proof.
• In unhealthy faith- wherever an administrative authority has acted deceitfully by stating to own acted for a specific motive once essentially the choice was soft on another motive in mind.
• Fettering discretion- once an authority adopts a policy within the exercise of its powers, which suggests that it’s not truly effort its discretion in the least.
• Non-consideration of relevant material- once a decision-maker doesn’t investigate the relevant matter.

 Five Remedies of Judicial Review/ Public Interest Litigation[5]

At this point, five types of writs are available for judicial review of administrative actions under Article of 32, and Article of 226 of Constitution of India.

1. Habeas Corpus Writ

It means that “have the body”. This official document is issued as an order calling upon the one who has detained another person to provide the political detainee before the court of law. If the court finds out that the detention has been unlawful or while not legal justification, it’ll order for the immediate unharness of the political detainee. the most objective of this writ isn’t to penalise the detainer however to unharness the political detainee from wrongful detention.

2 Writ of Mandamus

It suggests that “To command the common public authority” to carry out its public duty in India. it’s optional remedy even as all 5 writs are discretionary remedy in nature. “Court has full power to reject to consider a writ petition”. “ This writ isn’t lying on the president, governor, state legislatures, private individuals, or any registered body”.

3. Quo Warranto

It is an ancient common law remedy. It’s used against an interloper or wrongdoer of public office. “just about suggests that What is your authority”. Court directs the concerned one that by what authority he holds the workplace. The Court might oust a private from the work if he finds that he isn’t entitled to urge such work.

4. Prohibition

It is a rare perquisite judicial writ of prevention; it seeks to stop Courts, Tribunals, Quasi-judicial authorities, and officers from exceeding their jurisdiction. The most objective of this judicial writ is to stop the encroachment of jurisdiction.

5. Certiorari[6]

This judicial writ is issued by the Superior Courts (High Courts and therefore the Supreme Court) to the lower court or assembly or body which can exercise judicial or quasi-judicial functions, for the correction of jurisdiction or error of law committed by them. If any order elapsed them is prohibited, then the court might quash or demolish it. Grounds of this judicial writ are

• excess or failure to exercise the jurisdiction
• violation of the principles of natural justice
• authority has did not correct a blunder that has been apparent on the face of the record.

Conclusion

It is fundamentals of law that each power should be exercised inside the four corners of law and inside the legal limits. Exercise of administrative power isn’t an exception thereto basic rule. The doctrines by that those limits are determined and implemented kind the terrible marrow of law. unchained discretion cannot exist wherever the rule of law reigns. Again, all power is capable of abuse, which the ability to stop the abuse is that the appraisal of effective review. Below the standard theory, courts of law used to control existence and extend of exclusive right power however not the style of exercise therefrom. That position was, however, significantly changed when the choice in Council of civil service Unions v. Minister for civil service, whereby it had been emphasised that the reviewability of discretionary power should depend on the subject-matter and not upon its supply. The extent and degree of review and excusable space could vary from case to case.

“All power is, in Madison’s Phrase ‘of a trespassing nature’. Judicial Power isn’t immune against this human weakness. It additionally should get on guard against trespassing on the far side its correct bounds, and not the less thus since the sole restraint upon it’s self-restraint.”

---

References:

[1] Manoj Bhushan, Judicial Review of Administrative Actions in India, legalservicesindia.com

[2] Kk Gahi, Judicial Review in India: Meaning, Features and Other Details, Your article library. 

[3] Diganth Raj Sehgal, Judicial Review of Administrative Action, July 3, 2020, blog.ipleaders.

[4] Kk Gahi, Judicial Review in India: Meaning, Features and Other Details, Your article library . 

[5] Manoj Bhushan, Judicial Review of Administrative Actions in India, legalservicesindia.com

[6] Mayank Shekhar , Judicial Review of Administrative Action, April 23 2019, legal bite law &beyond .