The 'Rule of Law' is based on the principle of legality and is opposed to exercise of arbitrary powers." Discuss. Explain whether failure to give reasons amounts to exercising power arbitrarily.

Defining the Rule of Law and Legality

The Rule of Law, as conceptualized by A.V. Dicey, comprises three key elements: supremacy of law, equality before the law, and the absence of arbitrary power. Legality, a crucial aspect of the Rule of Law, dictates that all state actions must be authorized by law. This means that the state cannot act on its own whims; its actions must be grounded in pre-existing legal frameworks. The principle of legality mandates that laws must be clear, accessible, and predictable, allowing citizens to understand their obligations and rights.

Opposition to Arbitrary Power

The Rule of Law fundamentally opposes the exercise of arbitrary power. Arbitrary power implies decisions made without reason, based on personal whims, or influenced by extraneous factors. It undermines the predictability and fairness that the Rule of Law seeks to establish. Several constitutional provisions in India are designed to curb arbitrary power. Article 14 guarantees equality before the law and prohibits arbitrary state action. Article 21 guarantees the right to a reasoned decision-making process. The doctrine of natural justice, enshrined in Article 21, further reinforces this principle.

Failure to Give Reasons: Arbitrary Power?

The question of whether failure to give reasons amounts to exercising power arbitrarily is a complex one, and the jurisprudence surrounding it has evolved considerably. Initially, providing reasons was not considered mandatory. However, the Supreme Court has progressively recognized the importance of reasoned orders as an integral part of the Rule of Law. The landmark case of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and the right to a reasoned decision.

The Supreme Court in Asian Researches v. State of A.P. (2010) held that providing reasons is essential to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability. It helps in judicial review and allows affected parties to understand the rationale behind the decision and challenge it if necessary. The absence of reasons creates an opacity that shields the decision-maker from scrutiny and raises a strong presumption of arbitrariness.

However, it's crucial to note that not all decisions require elaborate reasons. The level of reasoning required depends on the nature of the decision and the potential impact on individuals. For instance, a decision impacting fundamental rights invariably requires detailed reasoning. Furthermore, the reasons provided must be relevant, coherent, and indicate a logical process of reasoning.

Exceptions and Nuances

While reasoned orders are generally expected, certain exceptions exist. National security concerns or commercial confidence may warrant withholding reasons. However, such exceptions must be narrowly construed and subject to judicial review. The principle of ‘Wednesbury unreasonableness’ – meaning a decision so outrageous that no reasonable authority could have come to it – remains a relevant benchmark for assessing arbitrariness, even with reasons provided.

Case Study: Union of India v. Prabha Patel (2004)

This case highlighted the importance of reasoned orders in the context of departmental inquiries. The Supreme Court held that the failure of the inquiry officer to provide reasons for adverse findings against the employee was a violation of the principles of natural justice and rendered the inquiry unsustainable. This case solidified the position that reasoned decisions are a crucial safeguard against arbitrary actions by administrative bodies.

Table: Comparison of Approaches to Reasoned Orders

Approach	Rationale	Legal Basis
Pre-1970s	Reasons not mandatory; discretionary power	Limited judicial scrutiny
Post-Maneka Gandhi (1978)	Reasoned orders enhance fairness and transparency	Article 14, Article 21, Natural Justice
Post-Asian Researches (2010)	Reasoned orders are essential for accountability and judicial review	Reinforced principles of fairness and legality

Scheme: e-Governance Initiatives

The Government of India’s e-Governance initiatives, such as the ‘MyGov’ portal and various online grievance redressal systems, aim to increase transparency and accountability in government actions. Requiring reasoned responses to grievances and online applications contributes to the broader goal of upholding the Rule of Law in the digital age. The National e-Governance Plan (NeGP) underscores the importance of citizen-centric governance, which inherently requires reasoned and transparent decision-making.