GROUP-A

Administrative law
[ Short Answer Type Question, Attempt any FOUR] [4x5=20]

Q (4). What is writ and types oif writs.

Ans. Writs are formal written orders issued by a court or other legal authority,
directing a person or authority to act or abstain from acting in a certain way. In the
Indian legal context, writs are primarily used for the enforcement of Fundamental
Rights and are issued by the Supreme Court (under Article 32) and High
Courts (under Article 226) of the Constitution of India.

There are five types of writs:

1. Habeas Corpus

 Meaning: "To have the body"

 Purpose: To release a person who is illegally detained or imprisoned.
 Issued Against: Police, authorities, or even private individuals who are
holding someone unlawfully.
 Example: If a person is arrested without proper legal justification, their
family can file a habeas corpus writ.

2. Mandamus
o Meaning: "We command"
o Purpose: To direct a public official, government body, or lower court
to perform a duty they are legally obligated to do.
o Cannot Be Issued Against: Private individuals or organizations.
o Example: A university failing to declare exam results despite
obligation.

3. Prohibition
o Meaning: "To forbid"
o Purpose: Issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to stop
it from exceeding its jurisdiction.
o Issued Before: Judgment is given.
o Example: If a lower court takes up a case it is not authorized to hear.

4. Certiorari
 o Meaning: "To be certified"
o Purpose: Issued by a higher court to a lower court to transfer a case
or quash an order that is unlawful.
o Issued After: The judgment is given.
o Example: If a lower court passes an order in violation of principles of
natural justice.

5. Quo Warranto
o Meaning: "By what authority"
o Purpose: To challenge the legality of a person holding a public office.
o Issued When: A person holds a post without legal authority.
o Example: Someone occupying a government office without required
qualifications.

Q (5). Explain the conditions and grounds for the issue of

Certiorari writ with the help of decided case laws.

Ans. The writ of Certiorari is issued by a higher court (Supreme Court or High
Court) to a lower court or tribunal to quash its order or decision that is:

 Without jurisdiction
 In excess of jurisdiction
 In violation of the principles of natural justice
 Containing an error of law apparent on the face of the record

✅ Conditions for the Issue of Certiorari

1. There must be a judicial or quasi-judicial body:

o The writ is issued only against bodies that have the power to
adjudicate.
2. The authority has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction:
o If a lower court or tribunal exceeds the powers granted by law.
3. Violation of Natural Justice:
o If the party was not given a fair hearing or there was bias.
4. Error of Law Apparent on the Face of the Record:
o When there is a clear legal mistake in the judgment or order.
5. No Alternative Remedy Available:
o Though not always mandatory, generally writs are not issued when an
effective alternative remedy exists.
.

�⚖� Important Case Laws

1. Rafiq Khan v. State of U.P. (1954 AIR 162)

o The Supreme Court held that a writ of certiorari can be issued when a
lower court passes an order without jurisdiction.
2. State of U.P. v. Mohammad Nooh (1958 AIR 86)
o A departmental inquiry violated principles of natural justice. The
court held that Certiorari can quash such decisions.

Q (6). The delegated legislation may be assailed as ultra

vires. Explain the statement in the lights of judicial control
over delegated legislation.

Ans. ✅ Meaning of Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation refers to laws or rules made by an authority other than the
legislature, but with the legislature’s permission. Usually, the executive or
administrative bodies are authorized to make detailed rules, regulations, and by-
laws under a parent (enabling) Act.

✅ Meaning of Ultra Vires

Ultra vires means "beyond the powers."

Delegated legislation may be declared ultra vires if it exceeds the powers granted
by the parent statute, or violates constitutional provisions or principles of
natural justice.

⚖� Judicial Control over Delegated Legislation

Courts have the power to review and strike down delegated legislation if it is
found to be ultra vires. Judicial review ensures that delegated authorities do not
misuse or exceed the powers conferred upon them by the legislature.

✅ Grounds on Which Delegated Legislation Can Be Assailed as Ultra Vires

1. Substantive Ultra Vires

 When the content of the delegated legislation goes beyond the scope of the
enabling Act.
 Example: If the rule imposes a penalty not authorized by the parent Act.

2. Procedural Ultra Vires

 When the procedure laid down in the enabling Act for making rules is not
followed.
 Example: Not laying the rule before the legislature if required by the Act.

3. Constitutional Ultra Vires

 When the delegated legislation violates fundamental rights or any other

provision of the Constitution.
 Example: A rule that discriminates on the basis of religion or gender.

4. Violation of Natural Justice

 If the rules deny the right to be heard or are passed without fair process.

� ⚖� Important Case Laws

✅ Delhi Laws Act Case (1951 AIR SC 332)

 The Supreme Court laid down limits on delegation and held that essential
legislative functions cannot be delegated.
 But conditional legislation and delegated legislation within limits are
permissible.

✅ Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India (1985 SCR (2) 287)

 The Court stated that delegated legislation can be reviewed on the grounds
of unreasonableness and arbitrariness.

📌 Conclusion

The principle that delegated legislation may be assailed as ultra vires ensures
that the executive stays within its legal limits, protecting the rule of law and
fundamental rights. Judicial review acts as a safeguard against abuse or misuse
of delegated legislative powers.

Q (7). Explain Principle of Natural Justice and its importance

Ans. ✅ Meaning of Natural Justice

Natural Justice is a legal philosophy that ensures fairness, reasonableness, and

equity in judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative decisions. It is not codified in
law but is derived from common law and upheld in constitutional and
administrative jurisprudence.

Natural Justice is aimed at preventing miscarriage of justice and arbitrariness in

decision-making.

🔑 Main Principles of Natural Justice

There are two basic principles (sometimes three):

1. Nemo judex in causa sua

"No one should be a judge in his own cause."

 This ensures absence of bias.

 A person or authority deciding a case must not have a personal interest or
prejudice.

✅ Example: A judge cannot hear a case where his own family member is a party.

2. Audi alteram partem

"Hear the other side" or "No one should be condemned unheard."

 Every party must be given a fair opportunity to present their case,

respond to evidence, and be heard.

✅ Example: Dismissing a student without giving a chance to explain the alleged

misconduct violates this principle.

⚖� Importance of Natural Justice

 Aspect Explanation

✅ Fairness Prevents arbitrary or biased decisions.

✅ Protection of Safeguards the legal and fundamental rights of

Rights individuals.

✅ Good Governance Ensures administrative authorities act justly.

✅ Public Confidence Builds trust in legal and governmental processes.

✅ Rule of Law Upholds equality, legality, and justice in decision-making.

� ⚖� Important Case Laws

🔹 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978 AIR 597)

 Passport was impounded without hearing.

 Supreme Court held that fair hearing is a part of Article 21 (Right to Life
and Liberty).

A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969 AIR 150)

 Blurred lines between administrative and quasi-judicial functions.

 Natural justice must apply wherever decision affects rights.

📌 Conclusion

The Principle of Natural Justice is a cornerstone of fairness in legal and

administrative procedures. It protects individuals from arbitrary decisions and
strengthens justice, democracy, and the rule of law. Any decision affecting rights
must be unbiased, based on hearing both sides, and supported by reasons.

GROUP-C

[ Long Answer Type Question, Attempt any FOUR] [4x10=40]

Q (8). Discuss the various definitions of Administrative law.

Sate the nature and scope Administrative law.
Ans. ✅ I. Definitions of Administrative Law

Administrative Law is a branch of public law that governs the organization,

powers, and functions of administrative authorities. It also provides remedies to
individuals affected by administrative actions.

Here are some authoritative definitions:

🔹 Wade and Forsyth

"Administrative law is the law relating to the control of governmental power."

This emphasizes legal limitations and judicial review of administrative actions.

🔹 Jennings

"Administrative law is the law relating to the administration. It determines the

organization, powers and duties of administrative authorities."

Jennings focuses on the structure and functioning of the administration.

🔹 Ivor Jennings (Elaborated)

"Administrative law deals with the powers and duties of administrative authorities,
the procedure followed by them, and the remedies available to the aggrieved
persons."

This adds the procedural and remedial aspects of administrative law.

🔹 K.C. Davis

"Administrative law is the law concerning the powers and procedures of

administrative agencies, including especially the law governing judicial review of
administrative action."

Davis emphasizes both procedures and judicial control.

✅ II. Nature of Administrative Law

Administrative law has the following characteristics:

1. Public Law

 It deals with the relationship between the state and individuals.

2. Dynamic and Evolving

 It changes with economic, social, and political developments.

 Expands as government responsibilities increase.

3. Judge-Made and Statutory

 A significant part of administrative law comes from judicial decisions,

though it also includes statutes and rules.

4. Procedural and Substantive

 Governs both how decisions are made and what powers are exercised.

5. Remedial in Nature

 Provides remedies for abuse or misuse of power by authorities.

✅ III. Scope of Administrative Law

The scope of administrative law includes:

1. Administrative Powers and Functions

 Covers rule-making, adjudication, and execution of policies by

government agencies.

2. Delegated Legislation

 Deals with laws made by administrative authorities under powers

delegated by the legislature.

3. Administrative Adjudication

 Involves tribunals and quasi-judicial bodies deciding disputes (e.g., tax

tribunals, consumer forums).

4. Principles of Natural Justice

  Ensures fairness in administrative procedures.

5. Judicial Review of Administrative Actions

 Courts ensure administrative decisions are lawful, reasonable, and fair.

6. Public Corporations and Regulatory Bodies

 Governs functioning and accountability of statutory corporations like SEBI,

TRAI, etc.

7. Remedies Against Administrative Actions

 Writs (Article 32 & 226), appeals, and tribunal reviews are part of its
scope.

📌 Conclusion

Administrative law ensures that executive power is exercised legally, fairly, and
transparently. It defines the relationship between the government and citizens and
provides mechanisms to prevent abuse of power. As governance becomes more
complex, the importance and scope of administrative law continue to expand.

Q (9). Explain the reasons for the growth of administrative

law. And how Administrative law is different from
constitution law?

Ans. ✅ Part I: Reasons for the Growth of Administrative Law

The rise of the welfare state and increasing complexity of governance have led to
the rapid growth of administrative law in modern legal systems. Here are the key
reasons:

🔹 1. Welfare State Functioning

 Modern governments are not just rule-makers but also service providers
(education, healthcare, transport, etc.).
 Requires broad discretionary powers and regulatory mechanisms which
are governed by administrative law.
🔹 2. Increased Delegated Legislation

 Parliament cannot legislate on every minute detail due to lack of time and
technical expertise.
 Powers are delegated to administrative agencies to make rules, which
requires legal regulation and judicial control.

🔹 3. Need for Specialized Rule-Making

 Modern governance requires technical and expert bodies (e.g., SEBI,

TRAI).
 Administrative law governs the functioning, powers, and accountability of
these bodies.

🔹 4. Administrative Adjudication

 Tribunals and authorities resolve disputes in areas like tax, labor, telecom,
etc.
 Administrative law governs their procedures and decisions.

🔹 5. Flexibility and Speed

 Administrative decisions often need to be quick, practical, and flexible,

which traditional court processes cannot provide.

🔹 6. Protection of Individual Rights

 With the rise in administrative power, there is greater risk of abuse or

arbitrariness.
 Administrative law provides judicial review and remedies.

🔹 7. Growth of Judicial Activism

 Courts actively review administrative actions to ensure fairness, legality,

and accountability, contributing to the development of administrative law.
✅ Part II: Difference Between Administrative Law and Constitutional Law
Basis Administrative Law Constitutional Law

Narrow – deals with powers and

Broad – deals with structure
Scope functions of administrative
and framework of the state
authorities

Mostly statutory and judge-made Based on written Constitution

Source
law (e.g., Indian Constitution)

Day-to-day operations of
Fundamental framework of
Focus government departments and
government and rights
agencies

Establishes organs of
Regulates executive actions and
Purpose government and Fundamental
remedies
Rights

Authority Mainly executive and Covers legislature, executive,

Covered administrative bodies and judiciary

Flexibility More flexible and evolving More rigid and fundamental

Judicial review of a licensing Amendment to Constitution,

Examples
decision, tribunal procedures interpretation of rights

📌 Conclusion

Administrative law has grown to manage the complex realities of modern

governance and to control the vast discretionary powers of the executive. While
it works within the framework of constitutional law, it is distinct in its focus on
administrative machinery, ensuring that public power is exercised fairly,
legally, and efficiently.

Q (10). Explain the doctrine of “Rule of Law” and all its

postulates?

Ans. The doctrine of the "Rule of Law" is a foundational principle of modern

democratic legal systems, which asserts that the law governs a nation, not arbitrary
decisions by individual government officials. It ensures that all individuals,
institutions, and entities are accountable to the law, which is fairly applied and
enforced.

Origin and Evolution:

The term “Rule of Law” was popularized by A.V. Dicey, a British jurist, in his
book Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885). Although the
concept existed earlier, Dicey gave it a definitive form and outlined its essential
postulates.

Postulates of Rule of Law (as per A.V. Dicey)

1. Supremacy of Law

 Meaning: No person is above the law. The law is supreme and overrides
arbitrary power.
 Implication: Actions by the government and its officials must be authorized
by law.
 Example: A police officer cannot arrest a person unless the law provides for
it.

2. Equality Before the Law

 Meaning: Every person, regardless of rank or status, is subject to the same

laws and is treated equally by the courts.
 Implication: There is no special legal privilege for any individual or group.
 Example: A minister and a common citizen are both accountable under the
same legal framework.

3. Predominance of Legal Spirit / Constitution as a Result of the Rights of

Individuals

 Meaning: The rights of individuals are derived from the common law
traditions and judicial decisions, not granted by statutes or the constitution
alone.
 Implication: Courts play a key role in protecting individual liberties.
 Example: In England, many rights (e.g., personal liberty, freedom of
speech) were historically developed through judicial decisions.
Modern Postulates of the Rule of Law (Extended Understanding)

Modern democratic and constitutional systems have expanded Dicey's version. The
contemporary understanding includes the following:

4. Separation of Powers

 Different organs of government (Legislature, Executive, Judiciary) must

function independently to prevent misuse of power.

5. Legal Certainty

 Laws should be clear, publicized, stable, and just; applied evenly; and
protect fundamental rights.

6. Access to Justice

 Everyone must have access to independent and impartial courts and a fair
trial.

7. Accountability

 Government officials and public servants are accountable under the law for
their actions.

Rule of Law in Indian Context

 Enshrined in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution: “The State shall not deny
to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws.”
 It is a basic feature of the Constitution (as held in Kesavananda Bharati v.
State of Kerala).
 Emphasized in various Supreme Court judgments (e.g., ADM Jabalpur v.
Shivkant Shukla).

Conclusion

The Rule of Law is a bulwark against tyranny and arbitrary governance. It ensures
that governance is conducted within a legal framework that respects individual
rights, promotes fairness, and upholds justice. It is an evolving principle,
continually reinforced by judicial interpretation, constitutional provisions, and
democratic practice.
Q (11). Explain “Separation of power” , and how it followed
in U.S.A and India, with the help of case law.

Ans. Meaning of Separation of Powers

Separation of Powers is a constitutional doctrine that divides the powers and

responsibilities of government among three separate and independent organs:

1. Legislature – Makes laws

2. Executive – Implements laws
3. Judiciary – Interprets laws

The purpose is to prevent concentration of power in one body and to provide

checks and balances among the organs of the state, thereby safeguarding liberty
and ensuring accountability.

Separation of Powers in the U.S.A.

The doctrine is strictly followed in the United States, based on the model
proposed by Montesquieu in his work The Spirit of the Laws.

Features:

 The U.S. Constitution clearly demarcates the powers of each organ.

 Articles I, II, and III assign powers to the Legislature (Congress),
Executive (President), and Judiciary (Supreme Court) respectively.
 No overlapping of functions is permitted.
 System of checks and balances allows each branch to limit the powers of
the others.

Important Case:

Marbury v. Madison (1803)

 Established the principle of judicial review.

 The U.S. Supreme Court declared that it has the power to review the
constitutionality of legislative and executive actions.
Separation of Powers in India

India follows the doctrine in a flexible and functional form, not in its rigid sense
as in the U.S.

Features:

 The Constitution does not expressly mention "Separation of Powers," but

distributes powers among the three organs.
 There is functional overlapping:
o The President (Executive) has law-making powers like issuing
ordinances.
o The Judiciary can invalidate laws and also make guidelines (e.g.,
Vishaka Guidelines).
o The Legislature has powers of impeachment over judges and
executive heads.

Constitutional Provisions:

 Article 50 (Directive Principles): The State shall take steps to separate the
judiciary from the executive in the public services of the State.
 Articles 121 and 211: Prohibit the legislature from discussing the conduct
of judges except in impeachment.
 Article 122 and 212: Bars judicial interference in legislative procedures.

Important Case Laws in India:

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

 Supreme Court held that Separation of Powers is part of the basic

structure of the Constitution.
 Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a way that destroys its basic
structure.

2. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

 The court struck down a constitutional amendment that sought to place the
election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review, holding it violated the
doctrine of Separation of Powers.
3. Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab (1955)

 The Supreme Court held that the Indian Constitution has not recognized
the doctrine in the strict sense, but there is a broad division of functions.

Conclusion

 In the U.S.A., the doctrine of separation of powers is strictly followed with

well-defined roles and rigid boundaries.
 In India, it is flexible, with some overlap to allow for efficient governance,
but the independence of the judiciary and a system of checks and balances
ensures that no organ becomes too powerful.
 Both systems aim to maintain a balance of power to preserve democracy
and rule of law.

Q (12). Explain Rule of Bias and Different kind of Bias, with

the help of case laws.

Ans. Meaning of the Rule of Bias

The Rule of Bias is a fundamental principle of natural justice based on the

maxim:

"Nemo judex in causa sua" – No one should be a judge in his own cause.

This rule ensures impartiality in decision-making, particularly in judicial, quasi-

judicial, and administrative functions. If a decision is made by a biased authority,
it is void and liable to be set aside.

The major types of bias are:

1. Personal Bias

When the deciding authority has a personal relationship (friendship, enmity,

family ties, etc.) with a party involved.

Case: Dimes v. Grand Junction Canal (1852)

 A judge held shares in the company that was a party to the case.
  The decision was set aside due to pecuniary interest even though no actual
bias was proven.

2. Pecuniary Bias

When the decision-maker has a monetary or financial interest in the outcome of

the case, however small.

Case: R v. Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, ex parte Pinochet

(1999)

 Lord Hoffmann was a director of Amnesty International, which was a party

in the case.
 The House of Lords set aside its own decision due to indirect financial and
institutional interest.

3. Official Bias

Bias arising due to institutional or policy affiliations—e.g., when a person has

pre-decided views due to their official position or role.

Case: Franklin v. Minister of Town and Country Planning (1948)

 The Minister had a policy interest but was allowed to make decisions since
he was not acting in a judicial capacity.
 This case shows the court distinguishing between policy-making and
judicial decisions.

4. Subject Matter Bias

Where the authority has a direct interest in the subject matter of the case.

Case: Mineral Development Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1960)

 The officer granting mining lease had a direct role in policy and
administration.
 The decision was held to be biased due to conflict of interest.

5. Departmental/Institutional Bias
When members of a decision-making body are from the same department, which
may affect fairness and objectivity.

Case: Gullapalli Nageswara Rao v. APSRTC (1959)

 The same officer who initiated the inquiry also decided the matter.
 The Supreme Court quashed the decision, holding that institutional bias
violated natural justice.

Conclusion

The Rule Against Bias is central to ensuring fairness, impartiality, and public
confidence in decision-making. Various types of bias—personal, pecuniary,
official, subject-matter, and institutional—can invalidate decisions. Courts
emphasize the appearance of impartiality as much as actual fairness. Hence,
justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.

Q (13). Explain the “doctrine of Audi Alteram Partem” and

also the procedure to be followed.

Ans. Meaning of the Doctrine

The doctrine of "Audi Alteram Partem" is a fundamental principle of natural

justice, which means:

"Hear the other side" or "No one should be condemned unheard."

It ensures that no person is judged without a fair opportunity to present their

case, defend themselves, and rebut the evidence or arguments against them.

Essentials of the Doctrine

This doctrine applies to judicial, quasi-judicial, and administrative proceedings

wherever a person's rights, interests, or liberties are affected.

The key principles include:

1. Notice

 A person must be given clear, adequate, and timely notice of the charges
or allegations against them.
  The notice must contain:
o Nature of the case
o Time and place of hearing
o Rights of the individual to present their defense

Case: Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. Union of India (1973)

 The Supreme Court held that absence of proper notice violates natural
justice.

2. Right to be Heard

 The individual must be given a reasonable opportunity to:

o Present their side of the case
o Submit evidence
o Cross-examine witnesses, if applicable

Case: Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)

 The court held that the right to a fair hearing is part of Article 21 (Right to
Life and Personal Liberty).

3. Right to Legal Representation (if allowed)

 In complex cases or where the opposite party has legal counsel, the affected
party must be allowed legal representation.

4. Disclosure of Evidence

 All relevant material, documents, and evidence relied upon by the authority
must be disclosed to the person concerned.

5. Reasoned Decision

 The authority must provide a speaking order—i.e., a decision with

reasons—after considering both sides.

Case: Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan (1991)

 Supreme Court held that a copy of the inquiry report must be given before
taking disciplinary action.
Conclusion

The Rule Against Bias is central to ensuring fairness, impartiality, and public
confidence in decision-making. Various types of bias—personal, pecuniary,
official, subject-matter, and institutional—can invalidate decisions. Courts
emphasize the appearance of impartiality as much as actual fairness. Hence,
justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.

Q (14). Doctrine of seperation of power in the Indian

Constitution.

Ans. Meaning of the Doctrine

The Doctrine of Separation of Powers means that the three main organs of the
State — the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary — should function
independently and exercise separate and distinct powers and responsibilities.
This prevents the concentration of power in any one authority and ensures checks
and balances in a constitutional democracy.

Origin

 The doctrine was originally propounded by Montesquieu in his work “The

Spirit of the Laws” (1748).
 It is rigidly followed in countries like the United States, where each organ is
separate and co-equal.

Separation of Powers in the Indian Constitution

Unlike the U.S., India does not follow the doctrine in a strict or rigid sense.
Instead, India adopts a flexible and functional approach, as suitable for a
parliamentary system of government.

Key Features in the Indian Context

1. No Explicit Mention

 The Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention the term “separation
of powers.”
 However, the distribution of powers among the organs is clearly laid out in
the Constitution.
2. Distribution of Powers

 Legislature: Makes laws (Parliament and State Legislatures).

 Executive: Implements laws (President, Prime Minister, Governors, and
Council of Ministers).
 Judiciary: Interprets laws (Supreme Court, High Courts, Subordinate
Courts).

Judicial Interpretation

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973)

 The Supreme Court held that Separation of Powers is a part of the Basic
Structure of the Constitution.
 Parliament cannot destroy or damage this structure.

2. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975)

 The Court struck down a constitutional amendment that curtailed judicial

review of election disputes.
 Held that Judicial Review and Separation of Powers are essential features.

Conclusion

The Indian Constitution embraces the doctrine of separation of powers in a

pragmatic and flexible manner, allowing interdependence and coordination
among the three organs. While it avoids rigidity, the independence of the
judiciary and the principle of checks and balances ensure that democracy and
the rule of law are maintained.