JUDICIAL REVIEW IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

TANMOY MUKHERJI INSTITUTE OF JURIDICAL SCIENCE

Dr. Tanmoy Mukherji

Advocate

JUDICIAL REVIEW IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Tanmoy Mukherji

Advocate

1. INTRODUCTION-

Judicial Review is the power of courts to examine the legality, validity and constitutionality of:

→Administrative actions

→Executive decisions

→Delegated legislation

→Quasi-judicial orders

It ensures that authorities act:

→Within law

→Fairly

→Reasonably

→Constitutionally.

2. MEANING-

Judicial Review means the power of judiciary to review actions of the legislature, executive and administrative authorities to determine whether they are:

→Constitutional

→Legal

→Fair.

3. BASIC IDEA-

4. OBJECTIVES-

→Control administrative authorities

→Protect Fundamental Rights

→Maintain Rule of Law

→Prevent abuse of power

→Ensure fairness

→Protect natural justice

→Maintain constitutional supremacy

→Ensure accountability.

5. CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS (INDIA)-

Article 13: Laws violating Fundamental Rights void

Article 32: Writs by Supreme Court

Article 136: Special Leave Petition

Article 141: Law declared by SC binding

Article 142: Complete justice powers of SC

Article 226: Writs by High Courts

Article 227: Supervisory jurisdiction of High Courts.

6. NATURE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW-

Supervisory: Courts supervise administrative authorities.

Corrective: Courts correct illegal or improper actions.

Protective: Courts protect rights of citizens.

Constitutional: Based on Constitutional provisions.

7. SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW-

→Legality of action

→Procedural fairness

→Jurisdiction of authority

→Mala fide intention

→Abuse of discretion

→Violation of natural justice

→Irrationality / Unreasonableness

→Constitutional validity

→Proportionality.

8. GROUNDS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW-

→Illegality

→Irrationality (Wednesbury Unreasonableness)

→Procedural Impropriety

→Mala Fide

→Abuse of Discretion

→Proportionality

→Legitimate Expectation

→Violation of Natural Justice

9. PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE-

Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the other side): No person should be condemned without being heard.

Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (No one should be a judge in his own cause): Authority must be impartial.

10. GROUNDS – DETAILED EXPLANATION WITH EXAMPLES-

ILLEGALITY:

Authority must act within powers granted by law. If it acts beyond jurisdiction, the action is ultra vires.

Example: Municipality demolishes property without authority.

IRRATIONALITY:

Decision must not be arbitrary, illogical or unreasonable. If it is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would take it, it is irrational.

Case: Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corp.

PROCEDURAL IMPROPRIETY:

Authority must follow proper procedure prescribed by law and principles of natural justice.

Example: Employee dismissed without show cause notice.

MALA FIDE:

Action taken in bad faith, for improper purpose or with ill-will is invalid.

Example: Transfer ordered to victimize an employee.

ABUSE OF DISCRETION: Discretion must be exercised reasonably, considering only relevant factors and excluding irrelevant factors.

Example: License refused for irrelevant reasons.

PROPORTIONALITY:

Punishment or action must be proportionate to the purpose of the action.

Example: Minor misconduct punished with permanent dismissal.

LEGITIMATE EXPECTATION:

When an authority has, by past practice or representation, created an expectation, it must act fairly and consistently.

Case: Navjyoti Co-operative Group Housing Society v. UOI.

VIOLATION OF NATURAL JUSTICE:

If authority does not follow the principles of natural justice, its action is void.

Example: Order passed without hearing the affected party.

11. WRITS IN JUDICIAL REVIEW-

HABEAS CORPUS: A writ to produce a person before the court. Protects personal liberty from illegal detention.

MANDAMUS: A writ issued to compel a public authority to perform a public duty which it has failed to perform.

CERTIORARI: A writ issued to quash the order of an inferior court or tribunal which has acted without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction.

PROHIBITION: A writ issued to prohibit an inferior court or tribunal from exceeding their jurisdiction.

QUO WARRANTO: A writ issued to question the legality of a person holding a public office.

12. IMPORTANT CASE LAWS-

Case Name	Key Principles
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala AIR 1973 SC 1461	Judicial Review is part of the Basic Structure
Minerva Mills v. Union of India AIR 1980 SC 1789	Judicial review and limited government are essential features.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India AIR 1997 SC 1125	Power under Arts. 32 & 226 is part of basic structure. Tribunal decisions reviewable.
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India AIR 1970 SC 150	Natural justice applies to administrative actions.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India AIR 1978 SC 597	Procedure must be fair, just and reasonable
Tata Cellular v. Union of India AIR 1996 SC 11	Courts review process of decision making, not the merits.
Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for Civil Service (GCHQ Case) (1985)	Grounds: Illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 1974 SC 555	Arbitrariness is antithetical to equality.
State of Punjab v. V.K. Khanna	Mala fide administrative action is invalid.
Om Kumar v. Union of India AIR 2000 SC 3689	Doctrine of proportionality recognized.
Navjyoti Co-operative Group Housing Society v. Union of India AIR 1992 SC 477	Legitimate expectation protected
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla AIR 1976 SC 1207	Controversial case on judicial review during emergency.
I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu AIR 2007 SC 861	Judicial review integral to constitutional supremacy.

13. JUDICIAL REVIEW PROCESS-

14. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF DELEGATED LEGISLATION-

Courts review rules, regulations, bye-laws, notifications made by executive authorities.

GROUNDS:

→Ultra Vires (Beyond enabling Act)

→Excessive Delegation

→Mala Fide

→Unreasonableness

→Violation of Fundamental Rights

→Conflict with Parent Act / Constitution.

15. LIMITATIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW-

Courts do not interfere in:

→Policy matters

→Technical / expert matters

→Political questions

Unless there is:

→Illegality

→Mala fide

→Irrationality

→Unconstitutional action.

16. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APPEAL AND JUDICIAL REVIEW-

BASIS	APPEAL	JUDICIAL REVIEW
Concern	Correctness of decision	Legality of decision
Focus	Merits of the case	Decision-making process
Scope	Wide	Limited
Objective	Reconsideration	Control legality
Court	Higher forum	High Court / Supreme Court
Result	Confirm / Modify / Reverse	Quash / Set aside / Issue directions

 

17. ADVANTAGES-

→Protects Fundamental Rights

→Prevents arbitrariness

→Ensures accountability

→Maintains constitutional supremacy

→Strengthens democracy

→Protects natural justice

→Controls abuse of power.

18. RELATED DOCTRINES-

→Rule of Law

→Natural Justice

→Ultra Vires

→Legitimate Expectation

→Proportionality

→Wednesbury Principle

→Abuse of Discretion

→Reasonableness.

19. ROLE IN ADMINISTRATIVE LAW-

→Controls administrative discretion

→Reviews delegated legislation

→Ensures fairness and propriety

→Protects citizens from abuse

→Maintains balance between individual and State.

20. IMPORTANCE FOR LAW STUDENTS-

→Understands control of administration

→Helps in constitutional remedies

→Essential for exams and moot courts

→Important for litigation

→Helps in analysing cases and judgments.