Model Answer
0 min readIntroduction
Judicial review is a cornerstone of the Indian constitutional framework, ensuring administrative accountability. It is the power of the judiciary to examine the legality of actions taken by administrative bodies. The principle, derived from the separation of powers doctrine, prevents arbitrary exercise of power and safeguards citizen's rights. Article 226 of the Constitution grants High Courts the power of judicial review, while the Supreme Court has similar powers under Article 32. Recent instances like challenges to environmental clearances and government policies highlight the continued relevance of judicial review.
Grounds for Judicial Review of Administrative Actions
Administrative actions are subject to judicial review on several grounds, broadly categorized as follows:
1. Illegality
- Ultra Vires: The action exceeds the powers conferred by the enabling legislation. Example: A municipality exceeding its authority to levy taxes.
- Violation of Natural Justice: Failure to observe the principles of fairness, including the right to be heard (audi alteram partem) and impartiality.
- Error of Law: The administrative body misinterprets or misapplies the law.
- Violation of Constitutional Provisions: The action contravenes fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. Example: An action violating Article 14 (equality).
2. Procedural Impropriety
- Failure to Follow Established Procedures: The administrative body does not adhere to the prescribed rules and regulations. Example: Not following due process in a land acquisition case.
- Lack of Consultation: Failure to consult with relevant stakeholders as mandated by law.
- Bias: Demonstrated prejudice or partiality on the part of the decision-maker.
3. Irrationality/Wednesbury Unreasonableness
- Arbitrariness: The action is not based on any reasonable or rational grounds. The decision is so outrageous that no reasonable authority could have taken it.
- Proportionality: The action is disproportionate to the objective being achieved. This principle is gaining prominence in Indian jurisprudence.
4. Other Grounds
- Malafide: The action is taken in bad faith or with ulterior motives.
- Manifest Arbitrariness: A clear and blatant disregard for principles of fairness and justice.
The scope of judicial review is not unlimited; courts generally do not substitute their own judgment for that of the administrative body, but rather examine the legality and fairness of the decision-making process.
| Ground | Description |
|---|---|
| Illegality | Action exceeds legal authority |
| Procedural Impropriety | Failure to follow proper procedures |
| Irrationality | Decision is unreasonable or arbitrary |
Conclusion
In conclusion, judicial review provides a vital check on administrative power, safeguarding constitutional principles and individual rights. The grounds for review are diverse, encompassing illegality, procedural impropriety, and irrationality. While the judiciary respects administrative discretion, it remains vigilant in ensuring that actions are taken fairly, lawfully, and reasonably. The evolving nature of administrative law necessitates continuous refinement of judicial review principles to address contemporary challenges.
Answer Length
This is a comprehensive model answer for learning purposes and may exceed the word limit. In the exam, always adhere to the prescribed word count.