ASSIGNMENT
Topic: Judicial Review and Administrative Action
1. Introduction
In every democratic society, the functioning of government must be regulated by law. To
ensure this, the judiciary plays a vital role in supervising the functioning of the legislative
and executive branches. Judicial review refers to the power of the judiciary to examine and
determine the constitutionality and legality of laws and administrative actions. It is an
integral part of the rule of law and separation of powers in India.
2. Meaning of Judicial Review
Judicial review means the power of the courts to assess whether a law, policy, or executive
action violates the Constitution or exceeds legal boundaries. If found unconstitutional or
ultra vires (beyond powers), the courts can declare them null and void.
This power ensures:
- Protection of Fundamental Rights.
- Supremacy of the Constitution.
- Accountability of public authorities.
3. Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review in India
Judicial review is not explicitly mentioned in one single article but is implied from several
provisions:
- Article 13 – Any law inconsistent with Fundamental Rights is void.
- Article 32 – Supreme Court can issue writs for Fundamental Rights.
- Article 226 – High Courts have wider powers to issue writs for any legal right.
- Article 136 – Special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court.
- Article 227 – Power of superintendence over all lower courts by High Courts.
4. Administrative Action: Meaning and Types
Administrative action refers to the day-to-day decisions and operations carried out by the
government and its officials.
Types of Administrative Action:
1. Rule-Making (Quasi-legislative): Making rules and regulations under delegated
legislation.
2. Adjudicatory (Quasi-judicial): Authorities deciding disputes, e.g., tax officers.
3. Purely Administrative (Executive): Functions like appointments, grants, licenses, etc.
5. Need for Judicial Review of Administrative Action
With the growth of administrative law and increased government involvement in welfare
activities, administrative bodies gained vast discretionary powers. However, there is always
a risk of:
- Abuse of power
- Violation of rights
- Arbitrary decisions
Judicial review acts as a check and balance ensuring that these powers are exercised
lawfully, fairly, and reasonably.
6. Grounds for Judicial Review of Administrative Action
The Indian judiciary uses several principles to test administrative actions:
a. Illegality
If an authority acts without legal power or exceeds the limits set by law.
b. Irrationality (Wednesbury Principle)
A decision is so unreasonable that no reasonable authority would ever take it.
c. Procedural Impropriety
Violation of the principles of natural justice:
- Right to be heard (audi alteram partem)
- No one can be a judge in their own cause (nemo judex in causa sua)
d. Proportionality
Actions must be proportionate to the object sought to be achieved.
e. Mala Fide (Bad Faith)
Action taken with dishonest intent or personal motives.
7. Important Case Laws
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Judicial review is part of the basic structure
of the Constitution.
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded the meaning of Article 21 and
introduced procedural fairness.
- A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969): Blurred the line between administrative and quasi-
judicial actions; natural justice must apply.
- R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority (1979): Public authorities must act fairly
even in administrative decisions.
- Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985): Explained circumstances where natural justice can
be excluded.
8. Limitations of Judicial Review
While judicial review is powerful, it is not unlimited.
- Policy matters are not interfered with unless arbitrary.
- Courts cannot substitute their opinion for that of administrators.
- Review is not an appeal – it checks legality, not correctness.
- Overuse of judicial review may lead to judicial overreach.
9. Judicial Review vs. Administrative Appeal
Judicial Review vs. Administrative Appeal:
- Judicial Review checks legality, whereas Administrative Appeal checks merits.
- It is done by courts, whereas appeals are handled by higher administrative authorities.
- Review is limited to legal issues like illegality or irrationality, while appeal may involve full
re-evaluation.
10. Conclusion
Judicial review of administrative actions is a cornerstone of the rule of law in India. It
prevents misuse of power, protects individual rights, and ensures government
accountability. However, courts must exercise this power with restraint to respect the
separation of powers. A balance must be maintained between judicial activism and judicial
restraint.
