1.

INTRODUCTION
The advent of the modern welfare state has witnessed an expansion of the
administrative and bureaucratic apparatus, its reach, functions and powers. The
significance and growth of Administrative Law is the direct result of this growth in
administrative powers and functions. If the State is to perform myriad functions to
discharge its socioeconomic duty towards citizens, it needs a huge administrative
apparatus or bureaucracy to implement these policies.
In practice, it is not sufficient to merely pass Acts of Parliament laying down
general principles and guidelines, and then leave it to the courts to enforce them in
particular situations. Because different situations involve problems of detail and issues
which cannot all be anticipated and planned for in advance, the practical application
of laws and enactments may require delegation of power to expert or local bodies, or
may necessitate discretionary power being vested in an authority to take decisions on
behalf of the State in individual cases. Consequently, when such extensive powers to
affect the life, liberty, and property of citizens are conferred upon the administration, it
becomes necessary to evolve rules of Administrative Law to protect citizens from a
potential overreach of power by the administration.
Seen in this light, the most apt definition of Administrative Law is given by Prof.
Wade when he pithily describes it as ‘the law relating to control of governmental
power.’ As stated by Prof. Sathe, Administrative Law deals with the following
questions:
(i) What sort of powers does the State exercise?
(ii) What are the limits on such power?
(iii) What procedures does it have to follow in exercise of its powers?
(iv) What are the methods by which the State can be kept within those limits?
(v) What remedies are available to the individual against abuse of power by the State?
Administrative law is the study of the law governing administrative agencies and
officials. Included are the proper procedures for promulgating legislative rules and
adjudicating disputes, legal issues raised by less formal actions of agencies, the
problem of improper conduct of administrative officials, and the judicial remedies
available in all these areas.

2. SOURCES OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Administrative law is essentially judge-made law, and is not contained in any single
legislative enactment. A Constitutional basis for Administrative Law can be found on
a conjoint reading of the Fundamental Rights chapter (Articles 12-35 in Part III), liability
of the State (Article 299), and the system of paramount judicial review of administrative
action (Articles 32, 226, and 227). The Constitution has also recognized the concept
of tribunals as instruments of quasi-judicial administrative adjudication (Articles 323-A
and 323-B), Public Sector (Article 298 read with Article 19(6)) and the principle of the
Executive’s accountability towards the Legislature as the supreme law making body
(Article 74).

While in England there are several major enactments and studies dealing with various
facets of Administrative Law such as the Donoughmoure Committee Report on
Minister’s Powers, 1932, the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946, the Tribunals and
Inquiries Act, 1958, and the Crown Proceedings Act, 1947, in India there has been
comparative legislative inertia in the matter of codifying principles of Administrative
Law. Consequently, the rules of Administrative Law prevalent in India have to be
pieced together using judicial decisions, Law Commission Reports, Reports of
Parliamentary and other Committees, and individual Statutes with Rules, Regulations,
and Orders framed thereunder. This has led to a degree of adhocism in the
development of Administrative Law in India.

3. IMPORTANCE AND FUNCTIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

The emergence of the social welfare has affected the democracies very profoundly. It
has led to state activism. There has occurred a phenomenal increase in the area of
sate operation; it has taken over a number of functions, which were previously left to
private enterprise. The state today pervades every aspect of human life. The functions
of a modern state may broadly be placed into five categories, viz, the state as:-
(i) protector,
(ii) provider,
(iii) entrepreneur,
(iv) economic controller and
(v) arbiter
Administration is the all-pervading feature of life today.The provinces of
administration is wide and embrace following things within its ambit, it makes policies,
(i) It provides leadership to the legislature
(ii) It executes and administers the law
(iii) It takes manifold decisions.
(iv) It exercises today not only the traditional functions of administration, but other
varied types of functions as well.
(v) It exercises legislative power and issues a plethora of rules, bye- laws and orders
of a general nature.
The advantage of the administrative processes that it could evolve new techniques,
processes and instrumentalities, acquire expertise and specialization, to meet and
handle new complex problems of modern society. Administration has become a highly
complicated job needing a good deal of technical knowledge, expertise and know-how.
Continuous experimentation and adjustment of detail has become an essential
requisite of modern administration. If a certain rule is found to be unsuitable in practice,
a new rule incorporating the lessons learned from experience has to be supplied. The
Administration can change an unsuitable rule without much delay. Even if it is dealing
with a problem case by case (as does a court), it could change its approach according
to the exigency of the situation and the demands of justice. Such a flexibility of
approach is not possible in the case of the legislative or the judicial process.
Administration has assumed such an extensive, sprawling and varied character, that
it is not now easy to define the term “administration” or to evolve a general norm to
identify an administrative body. It does not suffice to say that an administrative body
is one, which administers, for the administration does not only put the law into effect,
but does much more; it legislates and adjudicates. At times, administration is explained
in a negative manner by saying that what does not fall within the purview of the
legislature or the judiciary is administration.
In such a context, a study of administrative law becomes of great significance. The
increase in administrative functions has created a vast new complex of relations
between the administration and the citizen. The modern administration impinges more
and more on the individual; it has assumed a tremendous capacity to affect the rights
and liberties of the people. There is not a moment of a person’s existence when he is
not in contact with the administration in one-way or the other. This circumstance has
posed certain basic and critical questions for us to consider:
(i) Does arming the administration with more and more powers keep in view the
interests of the individual?
 (ii) Are adequate precautions being taken to ensure that the administrative
agencies follow in discharging their functions such procedures as are
reasonable, consistent with the rule of law, democratic values and natural
justice?
(iii)Has adequate control mechanism been developed so as to ensure that the
administrative powers are kept within the bounds of law, and that it would not
act as a power drunk creature, but would act only after informing its own mind,
weighing carefully the various issues involved and balancing the individual’s
interest against the needs of social control?
It has increasingly become important to control the administration, consistent with
the efficiency, in such a way that it does not interfere with impunity with the rights of
the individual. Between individual liberty and government, there is an age-old conflict
the need for constantly adjusting the relationship between the government and the
governed so that a proper balance may be evolved between private interest and public
interest. it is the demand of prudence that when sweeping powers are conferred on
administrative organs, effective control- mechanism be also evolved so as ensure that
the officers do not use their powers in an undue manner or for an unwarranted
purpose. It is the task of administrative law to ensure that the governmental functions
are exercised according to law, on proper legal principles and according to rules of
reason and justice fairness to the individual concerned is also a value to be achieved
along with efficient administration.
The goal of administrative law is to redress this inequality to ensure that, so far
as possible, the individual and the state are placed on a plane of equality before the
bar of justice. In reality there is no antithesis between a strong government and
controlling the exercise of administrative powers. Administrative powers are
exercised by thousands of officials and affect millions of people administrative
efficiency cannot be the end-all of administrative powers. There are also the
questions of protecting individual’s rights against bad administration will lead to good
administration.
A democracy will be no better than a mere façade if the rights of the people are
infringed with impunity without proper redressed mechanism. This makes the study of
administrative law important in every country. For India, however, it is of special
significance because of the proclaimed objectives of the Indian polity to build up a
socialistic pattern of society. This has generated administrative process, and hence
administrative law, on a large scale. Administration in India is bound to multiply further
and at a quick pace. If exercised properly, the vast powers of the administration may
lead to the welfare state; but if abused, they may lead to administrative despotism
and a totalitarian state A careful and systematic study and development of
administrative law becomes a desideratum as administrative law is an instrument of
control of the exercise of administrative powers.
4. NATURE AND DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Administrative Law is, in fact, the body of those which rules regulate and control
the administration. Administrative Law is that branch of law that is concerned with the
composition of power, duties, rights and liabilities of the various organs of the
Government that are engaged in public administration. Under it, we study all those
rules laws and procedures that are helpful in properly regulating and controlling the
administrative machinery.
There is a great divergence of opinion regarding the definition/conception of
administrative law. The reason being that there has been tremendous increase in
administrative process and it is impossible to attempt any precise definition of
administrative law, which can cover the entire range of administrative process.
Let us consider some of the definitions as given by the learned jurists.
Austin has defined administrative Law. As the law, this determines the ends
and modes to which the sovereign power shall be exercised. In his view, the sovereign
power shall be exercised either directly by the monarch or directly by the subordinate
political superiors to whom portions of those are delegated or committed in trust.
Holland regards Administrative Law ‘one of six’ divisions of public law. In his
famous book ‘Introduction to American Administrative Law 1958’.
Bernard Schwartz has defined Administrative Law as ‘the law applicable to
those administrative agencies which possess of delegated legislation and ad
judicatory authority.’
Jennings has defined Administrative Law as ‘the law relating to the
administration. It determines the organization, powers and duties of administrative
authorities.’
Dicey in 19th century defines it as. Firstly, portion of a nation’s legal system
which determines the legal statues and liabilities of all State officials. Secondly, defines
the right and liabilities of private individuals in their dealings with public officials.
Thirdly, specifies the procedure by which those rights and liabilities are enforced.
 This definition suffers from certain imperfections. It does not cover several
aspects of administrative law, e.g., it excludes the study of several administrative
authorities such as public corporations which are not included within the expression
‘State officials’, it excludes the study of various powers and functions of administrative
authorities and their control. His definition is mainly concerned with one aspect of
administrative. Law, namely, judicial control of public officials.
A famous jurist Hobbes has written that there was a time when the society was
in such a position that man did not feel secured in it. The main reason for this was that
there were no such things as administrative powers. Each person had to live in society
on the basis of his own might accordingly to Hobbes, ‘In such condition, there was no
place for industry, arts, letters and society. Worst of all was the continual fear of
danger, violent death and life of man solitary poor, nasty and brutish and short.’
The jurists are also of the view that might or force as a means for the
enforcement of any decision by man could continue only for some time. To put it is
other words, the situation of ‘might is right’ was only temporary. It may be said to be a
phase of development. This can be possible only through the medium of law. Hence,
law was made and in order to interpret it and in order to determine the rights and duties
on the basis of such interpretation, this work was entrusted to a special organ that we
now call judiciary. The organ, which was given the function of enforcing the decision
of judicial organ, is called executive. It has comparatively a very little concern with the
composition of the executive organ.
K.C. Davis has defined administrative law in the following words:
‘Administrative Law is the law concerning the powers and procedures of administrative
agencies including specially the law governing judicial review of administrative action.’
In the view of Friedman, Administrative Law includes the following.
(i) The legislative powers of the administration both at common law and under a
vast mass of statutes.
(ii) The administrative powers of the administration.
(iii) Judicial and quasi-judicial powers of the administration, all of them statutory.
(iv) The legal liability of public authorities.
(v) The powers of the ordinary courts to supervise the administrative authorities.
The Indian Institution of Law has defined Administrative Law in the following words;
Administrative Law deals with the structure, powers and functions of organs of
administration, the method and procedures followed by them in exercising their
 powers and functions, the method by which they are controlled and the remedies
which are available to a person against them when his rights are infringed by their
operation.
Thus, the concept of administrative law has assumed great importance and
remarkable advances in recent times. There are several principles of administrative
law, which have been evolved by the courts for the purpose of controlling the exercise
of power. So that it does not lead to arbitrariness or despotic use of power by the
instrumentalities or agencies of the state. During recent past judicial activism has
become very aggressive. It was born out of desire on the part of judiciary to usher in
rule of law society by enforcing the norms of good governance and thereby produced
a rich wealth of legal norms and added a new dimension to the discipline administrative
law.
In view of above discussion, we can derive at the following conclusions so far
asnature and scope of administrative law is concerned: -
(i) The administrative law has grown importance and interest and the administrative
law is the most outstanding phenomena in the welfare state of today. Knowledge
of administrative law is as important for the officials responsible for carrying on
administration as for the students of law.
(ii) Administrative law is not codified like the Indian Penal code or the law of
Contracts. It is based on the constitution. No doubt the Court of Law oversees
and ensures that the law of the land is enforced. However, the ‘very factor of a
rapid development and complexity which gave rise to regulation made specific
and complete treatment by legislation impossible and, instead, made necessary
the choice of the body of officers who could keep abreast of the novelties and
intricacies which the problems presented.’
(iii) Administrative law is essentially Judge made law. It is a branch of public law as
compared to private law-relations inter-se. Administrative law is an ever-
expanding subject in developing society and is bound to grow in size as well as
quality in coming the decades. We need an efficient regulatory system, which
ensures adequate protection of the people’s Rights.
(iv) Principles of administrative law emerge and development whenever any person
becomes victim of arbitrary exercise of public power. Therefore administrative
law deals with relationship individual with power.
(v) The administrative agencies derive their authority from constitutional law and
statutory law. The laws made by such agencies in exercise of the powers
conferred on them also regulate their action. The principle features are: (a)
transfer of power by legislature to administrative authorities, (b) exercise of
power by such agencies, and (c) judicial review of administrative decisions.
(vi) Administrative law relates to individual rights as well as public needs and ensures
transparent, open and honest governance, which is more people-friendly.
(vii) Inadequacy of the traditional Court to respond to new challenges has led to the
growth of administrative adjudicatory process. The traditional administration of
justice is technical, expensive and dilatory and is not keeping pace with the
dynamics of ever-increasing subject matter. Because of limitation of time, the
technical nature of legislation, the need for flexibility, experimentations and quick
action resulted in the inevitable growth of administrative legislative process.
(viii) Administrative law deals with the organization and powers of administrative and
powers quasi-administrative agencies
(ix) Administrative law primarily concerns with official action and the procedure by
which the official action is reached.
(x) Administrative law includes the control mechanism (judicial review) by which
administrative authorities are kept within bounds and made effective.
5. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE
LAW
Sometimes, a question is asked as to whether there is any distinction between
constitutional law and administrative law. Till recently, the subject of administrative law
was dealt with and discussed in the books of constitutional law and no separate and
independent treatment was given to it. In many definitions of administrative law, it was
included in constitutional law. Though in essence constitutional law does not differ
from administrative law inasmuch as both are concerned with functions of the
Government and both are a part of public law in the modern State and the sources of
both are the same and they are thus inter-related and complementary to each other
belonging to one and the same family. Strict demarcation, therefore, is not possible,
yet there is a distinction between the two. According to Maitland, while constitutional
law deals with structure and the broader rules which regulate the functions, the details
of the functions are left to administrative law. According to Hood Phillips,
‘Constitutional law is concerned with the organization and functions of Government at
rest whilst administrative law is concerned with that organization and those functions
in motion.’
But the opinion of English and American authors is that the distinction between
constitutional law and administrative law is one of degree, convenience and custom
rather than that of logic and principle. It is not essential and fundamental in character.
Keith rightly remarks: ‘It is logically impossible to distinguish administrative law from
constitutional law and all attempts to do so are artificial.’
India has a written Constitution. While constitutional law deals with the
general principles relating to the organization and power of the legislature, executive
and judiciary and their functions inter se and towards the citizen, administrative law is
that part of constitutional law which deals in detail with the powers and functions of
the administrative authorities, including civil services,
public departments, local authorities and other statutory
bodies. Thus, while constitutional law is concerned with constitutional status of
ministers and civil servants, administrative law is concerned with the organization of
the service and the proper working of various departments of the Government. The
doctrines in constitutional law abundantly influenced theadministrative law principles
and have left a grave impact on the relative ability of the three branches of
Government to influence agency change. Thus, it is necessary to articulate the
contextual and doctrinal links that exist between administrative law and constitutional
law and in doing so carves out those concomitant points where both the branches of
law follow a similar trajectory towards an identical horizon.
(i) Constitutional Law Viewed through Administrative Eyes
The impact of constitutional law upon administrative law in England is meagre and
blurred because the English Constitution is unwritten and, as Dicey elaborates it, the
rules which in other countries form part of a constitutional code are, in England, the
result of the ordinary law of the land. In the result whatever control the administrative
authorities can be subjected to must be deduced from the ordinary law, as contained
in statutes and judicial decisions. But, in countries having written constitution, there is
an additional source of control over administrative action, and that is the written
constitution which imposes limitations upon all organs of the body politic. In these
countries the sources and modes of exercising judicial control over the administrative
agencies are twofold, constitutional and non-constitutional. It is for this reason that
while at the very outset every author endeavour to distinguish the scope of
administrative law from that of constitutional law, they can never afford to forget to
mention that in a country having written constitution with judicial review, it is not
possible to separate the two into watertight compartments.
The reason being that the written constitution, being the organic law, not only sets
up but also imposes limitations upon the powers of all the organs of the State,
legislative, executive or judicial, and if any of these limitations be transgressed by any
of these organs, the act so done will be unconstitutional and invalid. So far as the acts
of the executive or the administration are concerned, this is secured in India in various
ways. The legislative acts of the administration i.e. statutory instruments (or
subordinate legislation) are expressly brought within the fold of Article 13 of the
Constitution, by defining law as including order, bye-law, rule, regulation, notification
having the force of law. A delegated legislation can therefore be challenged as invalid
not only on the ground of being ultra vires the statute which confers power to make it
(as in all common law countries), but also on the additional ground that it contravenes
any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.
A non-legislative and a purely administrative action having no statutory basis will be
void if it contravenes any of those fundamental rights which constitute limitations
against any State action. Thus, a non-statutory administrative act may be void if it
offends Article 14, guaranteeing equal protection; Article 29 or Article 30 guaranteeing
minority rights; Article19 guaranteeing freedom of speech, association, etc.; and
Article 16 guaranteeing equality of opportunity in employment. Thus, the court would
strike down any administrative instruction or policy, notwithstanding its temporary
nature, if it operates as discriminatory, so as to violate fundamental right under Article
14 of the person or persons discriminated against. A Non-statutory administrative
action will also be void if it seeks to affect a fundamental law by non-statutory action
where the Constitution provides that it can be done only by making a law e.g. (a) Article
19; (b) Article 21; and (c) Article 300-A.
An administrative act, whether statutory or non-statutory, will be void if it is in
contravention of any of the mandatory and justifiable provisions of the Constitution,
falling even outside the realm of fundamental rights like Articles 265, 301, 311 and
314. In cases of statutory administrative actions, there is an additional constitutional
ground upon which its validity may be challenged, namely, that the statute, under
which the administrative order has been made, is itself unconstitutional. Where the
impugned order is quasi-judicial, similarly, it may be challenged on the grounds, inter
alia, that the order is unconstitutional; that the law under which the order has been
made is itself unconstitutional. Constitutional law thus advances itself into the judicial
review chapter in administrative law in a country like the USA or India. The courts in
these countries have to secure that the administration is carried on not only subject to
the rule of law but also subject to the Constitution. While an attack upon the
constitutionality of a statute appertains to constitutional law, the constitutionality of an
administrative action properly belongs to administrative law; but the provisions of the
same Constitution constitute a touchstone in both the spheres.
The object of both the common law doctrine of rule of law or supremacy of law and
a written constitution is the same, namely, the control of arbitrary power and while the
rule of law insists that the agencies of the Government are no more free than the
private individual to act according to their own arbitrary will or whim but must conform
to legal rules developed and applied by the courts. The business of the written
constitution is to embody these standards in the form of constitutional guarantees and
limitations and it is the duty of the courts to protect the individual from an invasion of
these guarantees not only by the departments of the Government but also by all
administrative agencies, big or small.
(ii) Administrative Growth in Constitutional Matrix
Administrative law is a by-product of intensive form of Government. During the last
century, the role of Government has changed in almost every country of the world;
from laissez faire to paternalism and from paternalism to materialism. Today the
expectation from the Government is not only that it will protect its people from external
aggression and internal disturbance, but also that it will take care of its citizens from
the cradle to the grave. Therefore, the development of administrative process and the
administrative law has become the cornerstone of modern political philosophy.
Today there is a demand by the people that the Government must solve their
problems rather than merely define their rights. The rights are elaborately defined in
the Constitution but the policies to protect these rights are formulated by the
Government (the executive) and implemented by the administrative agents of the
State. There thus arises a direct nexus between the constitutional law and
administrative law where the former acts as a source from which the rights of the
individuals flow and the latter implements its policies accordingly mandated to
preserve the sanctity of those rights.
 It is felt that the right of equality in the American Constitution will be a sterile right
if the black is the first to lose his job and the last to be re-employed. In the same
manner the equality clause in the Indian Constitution would become meaningless
unless the Government comes forward to actively help the weaker sections of society
to bring about equality in fact. This implies the growth of administrative law and
process under the aegis of welfare philosophy embodied in the constitutional law. The
constitutional law being the prior in origin to administrative law, therefore, manifests
the phenomenon of absorption spectrum, from the former into the latter, of certain
substantive characteristics, endorsing thereby a class of blood relationship between
the two imperative branches of law.
(iii) The Genus-Species Relationship
Administrative law has been defined as the law relating to administration. It
determines the organisation, powers and duties of administrative authorities. This
definition does not make any attempt to distinguish administrative law from
constitutional law. Further, this definition is too wide, for the law which determines the
powers of administrative authorities, may also deal with the substantive aspects of
such powers. It may deal with matters such as public health, housing, town and country
planning, etc. These matters are not included within the scope of administrative law.
Administrative law, however, tends to deal with these matters for the Constitution has
embodied the principle of a welfare State and the State, only through administrative
laws, can execute and implement these rules veraciously in the society. Prof. Sathe
thus explicitly notes in his book Administrative Law that:
Administrative law is a part of constitutional law and all concerns of administrative law
are also concerns of constitutional law.
An inference can therefore be drawn that constitutional law has a wide arena of
jurisdiction, with administrative law capturing a substantive part. In other words,
constitutional law can be termed as the genus of which substantive portion of
administrative law is the species.
(iv) The Identical Mandate Protection Against Abuse
With the shift from laissez faire to welfare philosophy the State was confronted
with numerous functions. The State has not confined its scope to the traditional and
minimum functions of defence and administration of justice, but has adopted a positive
policy and consequently welfare State has undertaken to perform varied functions.
This resulted in the rise of administrative authorities which act as the State
instrumentalities to implement welfare policies of the Government in conformity with
constitutional norms. Also, the distance of legislature from the masses led to the
development of administrative law since the rules formulated by the legislature were
not informed of accurate social dynamics and therefore brought inconvenience to the
citizens. Administrative laws and rules with its functional approach and pragmatism
thus emerged to protect the citizens from becoming victims of ill-framed laws and
arbitrary State action. According to Wade, the primary purpose of administrative law
is to keep the powers of Government within their legal bounds, so as to protect the
citizen against their abuse. (Emphasis supplied). Similarly and importantly, the
mandate of constitutional law too inclines towards the interests of the civilians. The
constitutional law aims to protect the citizens from arbitrary State action or any other
fundamental rights violation. The Constitution of India in Part III provides a vibrant list
of fundamental rights and facilitates the remedy against violation under Articles 32 and
226/227. The overlap of this very goal, which signifies the protection of citizens from
violation of their cherished rights, running parallel through the domains of both the
laws establish a never-ending virtuous relationship between the two concepts.
(v) Constitutional Determination of the Scope of Administrative Function
The Indian Constitution is unanimously and rightly termed as the grund norm as
regards domestic legislations. The metaphor, however, is not used out of context and
there lies a simultaneous series of relevant reasons behind the statement. The
Constitution circumscribes the powers of the legislature and executive and limits their
authority in various ways. It distributes the governmental powers between the Centre
and the States. It guarantees the fundamental rights to the individuals and forbids the
State from abridging them by either legislative or executive action. It is the function of
the courts to interpret the Constitution and declare the acts of legislature as well as
executive as unconstitutional if they contravene the provisions of the Constitution.
However, it operates also against the legislature insofar as they cannot make a law
which delegates essential legislative powers or which vests unbridled discretionary
powers in the executive hands so as to make its arbitrary exercise possible.
The validity of an executive act is seen with reference to the power given to it by
the legislature. The Constitution has, however, in turn laid down the framework
defining the extent of laws made by Parliament and the State Legislatures.
Constitutional law therefore enjoys the status of the prime moderator monitoring
legislative actions and in turn installs a yardstick upon the extent of the rules made by
the executive while acting in the capacity of a delegate. It can be inferred unequivocally
that constitutional law plays the pivotal role of the principal channel from where flow
the guidelines determining the scope of administrative action thereby establishing a
unique relationship between the two distinct but intimate arenas of law.
(vi) The Principles of Natural Justice as Constitutional Parameters
The principles of natural justice act as a touchstone to administrative adjudication.
Fair hearing is the most fundamental principle of administration of justice. Although
the law of evidence and procedural laws ensure it and statutes also provide for it, the
principles of natural justice, which include the essentials of a fair hearing are invoked
wherever there are gaps in the statutory law. The decision in A.R. Antulay case where
one Bench of the Supreme Court decided the case without affording to the accused
an opportunity of being heard, is an authority for the preposition that even a decision
of the Supreme Court could be impugned on the ground of its alleged inconsistency
with the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution.
Constitutionally, the observance of the rules of natural justice may be one of the
criteria of reasonableness of restrictions upon any of the rights guaranteed by Article
19 of the Constitution. If the discretion is conferred on an administrative authority, the
fact that such an authority is not required to observe the rules of natural justice
persuades the courts to hold that such discretion could be exercised arbitrarily and
therefore in violation of Article 14 or Article 19 of the Constitution. The courts have
held that absolute discretion without any guidelines for its exercise and without having
to follow the rules of natural justice imposed unreasonable restrictions upon the
fundamental rights guaranteed by that article. In Workmen v. Meenakshi Mills Ltd. the
Supreme Court upheld Section 25-N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 which gave
power to the Government to permit retrenchment of workers in an industrial
establishment. This section, before its amendment, vested such powers in a Labour
Court but the amendment gave that power to the Government. The Supreme Court
held that the Government was bound to exercise such power quasi-judicially. Such an
obligation to act quasi-judicially saved the vesting of such power in the Government
from being unconstitutional on the ground of its alleged violation of the fundamental
right to carry on any trade or business guaranteed by Article 19(1)(g) of the
Constitution.
The administrative heritage clause fairness was also utilized to process the
constitutional divine premise procedure established by law. The Supreme Court has
given liberal construction to the words procedure established by law contained in
Article 21 of the Constitution in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Indi37a and now it means
processual fairness.
The Supreme Court has held that long detention as an undertrial prisoner, or denial of
legal aid, torture of prison inmate or handcuffing of an accused except in unusual
situations, are against the procedure established by law.
Thus we witness the role of rules of natural justice as important parameters of the
fairness of the procedure. Therefore, the rules of mandatory application in
administrative adjudication importantly act as a touchstone to the constitutional cases
liberalizing the interpretation of Part III clauses thereby establishing a firm relationship
between administrative principles and constitutional requirements.
(vii) Constitution Constituting Administrative Agencies
Besides the contribution towards the growth of administrative process, which is
possible through legislation and executive actions, the Constitution itself provides for
the establishment of some administrative agencies to regulate a particular field e.g.
Article 263, creation of Inter-State Council; Article 280, Finance Commission; Article
261, Inter-State Water Dispute Authority; Article 315, Public Service Commission; and
Article 324, Election Commission. The Constitution is thus the begetter of these
important administrative agencies which perform effectual administrative functions in
vivid imperative fields of governance in the nation. It is very interesting to note that the
constitution constructers, while establishing administrative bodies, have used the
words in a lavish fashion and have elaborately laid down guidelines in connection with
their functions and structure, etc. For instance, the whole of Chapter II of Part XIV of
the Constitution is devoted to the Public Service Commission of the Union and the
States. The Constitution inherits comprehensive provisions dealing with the
establishment, the functions and the expenses of Public Service Commission including
exact guidelines in the matters pertaining to appointment and term of office of
members including their removal and suspension. Apart from deciding the structure of
this administrative body, the Constitution governs its regulation by making the body
accountable to the administrative head i.e., the President of India by way of a
provision making submission of annual reports mandatory. Similarly, the Constitution
through Article 324 establishes the Election Commission and elaborates upon its
functions and constitution including the appointment and removal of the Chief
Election Commissioner, other Election Commissioners and Regional
Commissioners. While
these bodies are established by the Constitution, they perform functions fairly
administrative in nature. This distinctly depicts the weighty interference of
constitutional law into administrative environs and establishes a striking relation
between these laws.
(viii) Constitutional Impact on Administrative Adjudication
In order to provide speedy and inexpensive justice to employees aggrieved by
administrative decisions, the Government set up the Central Administrative Tribunal
(CAT) in 1985, which now deals with all cases relating to service matters which were
previously dealt with by courts up to and including the High Courts. Establishment of
the Central Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
(hereinafter also referred to as the Act is one of the important steps taken in the
direction of development of administrative law in India. This Act while stimulating the
development of administrative law, drew its legitimacy and substance from the
constitutional law and was passed by Parliament in pursuance of Article 323-A of the
Constitution. This article, is considered to be one of the plus points of the Forty second
Amendment and that is why even one of the critics of the Forty-second Amendment,
Dr. Rajeev Dhavan, said something positive about the new tribunal system, envisaged
under Article 323-A. He observed:
The Forty-second Amendment envisaged a tribunal structure and limited review
powers by the High Courts. In the long run, this could mean a streamlined system
of tribunal justice under the superintendence of the Supreme Court. Properly
worked out such a system is not a bad one. It would be both an Indian and a
common law adaptation of the French system of droit administratif.
Indeed, the Administrative Tribunals are welcomed with a great applause and are
performing supplementary function to the High Court with regular Benches of CAT
functioning in various parts of the country, including its principal Bench in Delhi.
6. CONCLUSION
Although the relationship between constitutional law and administrative law is not
very emboldened to be seen with naked eyes but the fact remains that concomitant
points are neither so blurred that one has to look through the cervices of the texts with
a magnifier to locate the relationship. The aforementioned veracities and illustrations
provide cogent evidence to establish an essential relationship between the
fundamentals of both the concepts. If doubts still persist, the very fact that each author,
without the exception of a single, tends to differentiate between the two branches of
law commands the hypothecation of a huge overlap.
According to Maitland, while constitutional law deals with structure and the broader
rules which regulate the functions, the details of the functions are left to the
administrative law. According to Philips, Constitutional law is concerned with the
organisations and functions of the Government at rest while administrative law is
concerned with that organisation and those functions in motion. The Australian jurists
note that the dividing line between constitutional law and administrative law is a matter
of convenience because every student of administrative law has to study some
constitutional law. Finally, Keith pragmatically remarks, It is logically impossible to
distinguish administrative law from constitutional law and all attempts to do so are
artificial. (Emphasis supplied)
The separate existence of administrative law is at no point of time disputed;
however, if one draws two circles of the two branches of law, at a certain place they
will overlap depicting their stern relationship and this area may be termed as
watershed in administrative law. In India, in the watershed one can include the whole
control mechanism provided in the Constitution for the control of administrative
authorities i.e. Articles 32, 136, 226, 227 300 and 311. It may include the directives to
the State under Part IV. It may also include the study of those administrative agencies
which are provided for by the Constitution itself under Articles 261, 263, 280, 315, 323-
A and 324. It may further include the study of constitutional limitations on delegation
of powers to the administrative authorities and also those provisions of the Constitution
which place fetters on administrative action i.e., fundamental rights.