Nature and Scope of Administrative Law

1.1 Meaning of Administrative Law

Administrative Law is that branch of law that deals

with powers, functions & responsibilities of various organs of the State. There is
no single universal definition of „administrative law‟ because it means different things
to different theorists.

Administrative law deals with the powers of administrative authorities the manner in
which the powers are exercised and the remedies which are available to the
aggrieved persons, when those powers are abused by these authorities.

Primary function of administrative law is to keep governmental powers within the

limits of law and to protect private rights and individual interests.

Rule-making power (delegated legislation) and an authority to

decide (Tribunal/Court) are described as effective and powerful weapons in the
armory of administration.

As Wade observed, all power have two inherent characteristics:

(i) They are not absolute or unfettered.

(ii) They are likely to be abused.

Administrative law attempts to control the power of the government, and its
instrumentalities and agencies. To achieve that objective, administrative law
provides an effective mechanism and adequate protection. It helps to strike between
two conflicting force:

(i) Individual rights

(ii) Public interest.

1.2 Scope of Administrative Law

Administrative law determines the organization, powers and duties of administrative

authorities. Emphasis of Administrative Law is on procedures for formal adjudication
based on the principles of Natural Justice and for rule making.

Concept of Administrative Law is founded on the following principles:

(a) Power is conferred on the administration by law.

(b) No power is absolute or uncontrolled howsoever broad the nature of the same
might be.

1
 (c) There should be reasonable restrictions on exercise of such powers depending
on the situation.

Though administrative law is as old as administration itself since they cannot exist
separately, in India the early signs/existence of administrative law could be found in
the treatises written during the reign of the Mauryas, Guptas, Mughals as well
as East India Company.

It is based on the concept of rule of law that supports Natural

Justice i.e. adjudication based on impartiality, unjustness and the prescribed laws
and legal methods instead of arbitrariness and abuse of official power. Natural
justice is basically applied in cases where there are no laws prescribed, here the
individual has to be given an opportunity to be heard and the judgment is to be
taken into consideration the particular facts and cases of the case and the judgment
should be free from bias. It is to prevent violation of people‟s rights by officials in
power.

Administrative law specifies the rights and liabilities of private individuals in their
dealings with public officials and also specifies the procedures by which those rights
and liabilities can be enforced by those private individuals. It provides accountability
and responsibility in the administrative functioning. Also there are specified laws and
rules and regulations that guide and direct the internal administration relations like
hierarchy, division of labour etc.

1.3 Need for Administrative Law

Modern state typically has three organs –

 Legislative
 Executive and
 Judiciary.

Traditionally, the legislature was tasked with the making of laws, the executive with
the implementation of the laws and judiciary with the administration of justice and
settlement of disputes. However, this traditional demarcation of role has been found
wanting in meeting the challenges of present era. The legislature is unable to come
up with the required quality and quantity of legislations because of limitations of
time, the technical nature of legislation and the rigidity of their enactments. The
traditional administration of justice through judiciary is technical, expensive and
dilatory. The states have empowered their executive (administrative) branch to fill in
the gaps of legislature and judiciary. This has led to an all pervasive presence of
administration in the life of a modern citizen. In such a context, a study of
administrative law assumes great significance.

The ambit of administration is wide and embraces following elements within its
ambit:

2

 It makes policies.
 It executes, administers and adjudicates the law.
 It exercises legislative powers and issues rules, bye laws and orders of a general
nature.

The ever-increasing administrative functions have created a vast new complex of

relations between the administration and the citizen. The modern administration is
present everywhere in the daily life of an individual and it has assumed a
tremendous capacity to affect their rights and liberties.

Since the whole purpose of bestowing the administration with larger powers is to
ensure a better life for the people, it is necessary to keep a check on the
administration, consistent with the efficiency, in such a way that it does not violate
the rights of the individual. There is an age-old conflict between individual liberty and
government control there must be a constant vigil to ensure that a proper balance
be evolved between private interest and government which represents public
interest. It is the demand of prudence that when large powers are conferred on
administrative organs, effective control-mechanism be also evolved so as to 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 and legal principles and rules of reason
and justice.

The goal of administrative law is to ensure that the individual is not at receiving end
of state‟s administrative power and in cases where the individual is aggrieved by any
action of the administration, he or she can get it redressed. There is no antithesis
between an effective 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 and the interests of people must be at the centre of any conferment of
administrative power. 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 on the exercise of
administrative powers.

2. Administrative Discretion

Discretion in layman‟s language means choosing from amongst the various

available alternatives without reference to any predetermined criterion, no matter
how fanciful that choice may be.

A person writing his will has such discretion to dispose of his property in any
manner, no matter how arbitrary or fanciful it may be. But the term “discretion” when
3
 qualified by the word “administrative” has somewhat different overtones. „Discretion‟
in this sense means choosing from amongst the various available alternatives, but
with reference to the rules of reason and justice and not according to personal
whims. Such exercise is not to be arbitrary, vague and fanciful but legal and regular.

Thus, in short, the decision is taken by the authority not only on the basis of the
evidence but in accordance with policy or expediency and in exercise of
discretionary powers conferred on that authority.

Conferment of discretion

Discretion is conferred in the area of rule-making or delegated legislation e.g. when

the statutory formula says that the government may makes rules which it thinks
expedient to carry out the purposes of the Act. In effect, a broad discretion and
choice are being conferred on the government to make rules. Similarly, discretion is
conferred on adjudicatory and administrative authorities on a liberal basis, that is,
the power is given to apply a vague statutory standards from case to case.

Rarely does the legislature enact a comprehensive legislation complete in all details.
More often the legislation is sketchy or skeleton, leaving many gaps and conferring
powers on the administration to act in a way it deems “necessary” or “reasonable” or
if it “is satisfied” or “is of opinion”.

Need of discretion

Because of the complexity of socio-economic conditions which the administration in

modern times has to contend with, it is realized that a government having only
ministerial duties with no discretionary functions will be extremely rigid and
unworkable and that, too some extent, officials must be allowed a choice as to
when, how, and whether they will act. The reason for this attitude is that, more often
than not, the administration is required to handle intricate problems which involve
investigation of facts, making of choices and exercise of discretion before deciding
upon what action to take. Thus, the modern tendency is to leave a large amount of
discretion with various authorities.

Judicial Review

 Biggest check over administrative action is the power of judicial review.
 Judicial review is the authority of Courts to declare void the acts of the legislature
and executive, if they are found in violation of provisions of the Constitution.
 Judicial Review is the power of the highest Court of a jurisdiction to invalidate on
Constitutional grounds, the acts of other Government agency within that jurisdiction.
 The doctrine of judicial review has been originated and developed by the American
Supreme Court, although there is no express provision in the American Constitution
for the judicial review. The judicial review is not an appeal from a decision but a

4
 review of the manner in which the decision has been made. The judicial review is
concerned not with the decision but with the decision making process.
 Power of judicial review controls not only the legislative but also the executive or
administrative act. The Court scrutinizes the executive act for determining the issue
as to whether it is within the scope of authority or power conferred on the authority
exercising the power. Where the act of executive or administration is found ultra
virus the Constitution or the relevant Act, it is declared void. The Courts attitude
appears to be stiffer in respect of discretionary powers of the executive or
administrative authorities.
 The Court is not against the vesting of discretionary power in the executive, but it
expects that there would be proper guidelines for the exercise of power. The Court
interferes when the uncontrolled and unguided discretion is vested in the executive
or administrative authorities or the repository of the power abuses its discretion.
 In Mansukhlal Vithaldas Chauhan v. State of Gujarat, the Supreme Court held that
while exercising the power of judicial review it does sit as a Court of appeal but
merely reviews the manner in which the decision was made, particularly as the
Court lacks the expertise to correct the administrative decision and if a review of the
administrative decision is permitted, it will be substituting its own decision which
itself may be fallible. The Court is to confine itself to the question of legality. Its
concern should be:

– Whether a decision making authority exceeding its power?

– Committed an error of law?
– Committed a breach of rules of natural justice?
– Reached a decision which no reasonable tribunal would have reached, or
– Abused its power?

Judicial review is exercised at two stages:

(i) At the stage of delegation of discretion: Any law can be challenged on the
ground that it is violative of the Constitution and therefore laws conferring
administrative discretion can thus also be challenged under the Constitution.

(ii) At the stage of exercise of administrative discretion: No law can clothe

administrative action with a complete finality. The Courts can always examine the
ambit and even the mode of its exercise discretion to check its conformity with
fundamental rights. The courts in India have developed various formulations to
control the exercise of administrative discretion, which can be grouped under two
broad heads, as under:

1.
1.
1. Authority has not exercised its discretion properly – ‘abuse of
discretion’.
2. Authority is deemed not to have exercised its discretion at all –
‘non-application of mind’.
5
Development of Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations in India
The Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation was firstly discussed in the Indian arena in
the case of State of Kerala v. K.G. Madhavan Pillai ((1988) 4 SCC 669). Herein a
sanction was issued for the respondents to open a new aided school and to upgrade
the existing schools, however, an Order was issued 15 days later to keep the
previous sanction in abeyance. This Order was challenged by the respondents in
lieu of violation of principles of natural justice. The Supreme Court ruled that the
sanction had entitled the respondents with legitimate expectation and the second
order violated principles of natural justice.

In Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation ((1993) 3 SCC 499), the

Supreme Court has dealt with the doctrine in great detail, starting with the
explanation of the scope of the doctrine in Halsbury's Laws of England, Fourth
Edition, Volume I (I) 151 which says that a person can have a legitimate expectation
of being treated in a certain fashion even though he doesn't have a legal right to
receive the same.

The Navjyoti Co-operative Group Housing Society Vs UOI took a similar decision,
wherein the Apex Court held that changing the criteria requirement for allotment of
land to co-operative societies was violating them of their legitimate expectation, their
benefit ascertained to them hence adversely affecting them, and are therefore
entitled to a fair hearing.

Types of Legitimate Expectations:

1. Procedural Legitimate Expectation:

Denotes the existence of some process right the applicant claims to possess
as a result of behavior by the public body that generates the expectation.

2. Substantive Legitimate Expectation:

Refers to the situation in which the applicant seeks a particular benefit or
commodity, such as a welfare benefit or license. The claim to such a benefit
will be founded upon governmental action which is said to justify the existence
of the relevant expectation. Some of the arguments in favor of substantive
legitimate expectations are: it creates fairness in public administration,
reliance, and trust in government, the principle of equality, upholds rule of law.

Article 14 And Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation

In India The Doctrine has been under Article 14 of the Constitution. Under this article
this states constitutional provision imposes the duty to act fairly on all public
authorities and therefore, people can have legitimate expectation that they will be
treated fairly by the states. Thus 'non-arbitrariness and unreasonableness' have
been made the necessary qualifiers for assessing as to whether there was a denia.
Of Legitimate Expectation or not.

6
The Supreme Court ruled in M.P. Oil Extraction v. State of M.P ((1997) 7 SCC
592) that the doctrine of legitimate expectations operates in the realm of public law
and is considered a substantive and enforceable right in appropriate cases. It was
held that the industries had a legitimate expectation with regards to past practice
and the renewal clause, that the agreements are renewed in a similar manner.

It was reiterated in the case of Bannari Amman Sugars Ltd. V. CTO ((2005) 1
SCC 625) that guarding legitimate expectation should not come at the cost of non-
fulfilment of an overriding public interest, so to say that in case a legitimate
expectation of a person is not fulfilled, the decision making body can hide behind the
veil of „overriding public interest‟.

Tortious Liability: Sovereign And Non Sovereign Functions of State

State is not a living entity but a legal entity which cannot function without human
agency. It is therefore, that the state has to act through its servants. The concepts of
Tortious liability of the state refers to situation when the state can be held vicariously
liable for the wrongs committed by its servants. There are numbers of constitutional
provisions relating to the tortious liability of the state. Under article 294 (b), the
liability of the union government or a state may arise out of any contract or
otherwise.

The word otherwise indicates that such liability may arise in respect of tortious acts
as well the extent of the said liability is defined in article 300 (l) which declares that
the government of India or of a state may sue or may be sued in relation to their
respective affairs in the like cases as the Dominion of India and corresponding
provinces or Indian states might have sued or been sued.

If the constitution had not been enacted, the liability of the Dominion and provinces
of India before the commencement of the constituted was described in sec. 176 of
the government of India act, 1935, referring back to see. 32 of the government of
India act, 1915 which is turn refers to sec. 65 of the act of 1858, sec. 65 of the act of
1858 provided that on the assumption of the government of India by the British
Crown, the secretary of state for India in council would be liable to the same extent
as the liability of the government whether prior to the constitution or under the
constitution is the same as that of east India before 1858.

The leading case arising under sec. 65 of the government of India 1858 is case: P &
0 steam Navigation co. v. Secretary of state (1861) {1} In this case the servant of
the plaintiff company was traveling in a horse-driven carriage belonging to the
company. While the carriage was passing near the government dockyard certain
workmen employed by the government negligently dropped an iron bar on the road.
The noise so created scared the horse of the carriage and injuries were sustained
by the horse and the servant of the company. The plaintiff company filed a suit for
7
the damage caused by the negligence of the government servants. Peacock CJ. (Of
the supreme court of Calcutta) held that the action against the defendant was
maintainable and the court classified the acts of secretary of state into two
categories:

a. Sovereign
b. Non-sovereign.

The secretary was liable for the acts but enjoyed immunity from former acts.
Case Secretary of state v. Hari Bhanji (1882). In this case a suit was filed to
recover the excess excise duty collected by the state on a consignment of salt.
Rejecting the pleas of immunity, the Madras High Courts held that no immunity
attaches to actions done under the colour of municipal laws as the immunity of east
India Company extended only to acts of state.

Case Kasturil Ial v. State of UP (1965). A certain quantity of gold and silver was
seized by police from Raila Ram on the suspicion that it was stolen property. It was
kept in government Malkhana which was in custody of a Head Constable. The
property was misappropriated by the head constable who fled to Pakistan. Raila
Ram was prosecuted but acquitted of charge. A suit for damaged was filed by Raila
Ram against the state for the loss caused to him by the negligence of police
authorities following the principle laid down in steam navigation co. case, the
supreme court ruled that the state was not liable as police officers were exercising
sovereign functions.

Case Satyawati v. Union of India (1967) Delhi. In this case the Delhi High Court
held that the carrying of a hockey team in a military truck to the Air force station to
play a match is not a sovereign function.

Case Union of India v. Sugrabai (1969) Bombay. In this case the Bombay High
Court held that the transporting of military equipments from the workshop of the
artillery school is not a sovereign function.

Case Union of India v. Harbans Singh (1959) Punjab. In this case the Punjab High
Court came to the conclusion that the state is not liable for compensation to a
person who is run over by a military truck carrying meals for military personnel on a
duty in the forward areas as it is a sovereign function.

Introduction

Before discussing vicarious liability of the state let‟s first

discuss what is vicarious liability. Vicarious liability is also known as No-Fault
Liability or Secondary Liability. it means to be held liable even when you have no

8
fault. Generally, people are liable for their own wrongful acts however in vicarious
liability one person is liable for the act done by another person.

 Vicarious liability is based on two principles:

1. “ qui facit per alium facit per se ” which means one who does act through
another deemed in law to do it himself
2. “respondent superior ” which means letting the principal be liable for the acts
of a subordinate.
 Things necessary for arising this type of liability :
1. There should be a legal relationship between the parties
2. The wrongful act must be, in a certain way connected with that relationship.
 Example of legal relationship:
1. Partners
2. Principal and agent
3. Master and servant/employer and employee.
So, in simple language two things are must:

1. The wrong must be done by the subordinate

2. And wrong must be done in the course of employment. then only a person will
be responsible for the wrongful acts of others.
Now let‟s discuss vicarious liability:

Position in India

Unlike the crown proceeding act 1947 in England, we do not have any statutory
provision mentioning the liability of the state in India. The position of the state liability
is stated in Article 300 of the constitution of India.

Article 300, thus provides that the union of India and the state are juristic persons for
the purpose of suit or proceeding although the UOI and state government can sue
and be sued the circumstances under which that can be done have not been
mentioned.

Section 65 of this act provides: “ the secretary of state in council shall and may sue
and be sued as well in India as in England by the name of the secretary of the state
in council as a body corporate and all the person and bodies politics shall and may
have and take the same suit, remedies and proceedings, legal and equitable against
the secretary of state in the council of India as they could have done against East
India Company”.

Therefore, to know whether the state is liable for the particular act or not we have to
find the position of the East India Company prior to 1858.

We have a leading case that clarified the position:-

Case law: Peninsular and Oriental Steam Navigation v. Secretary of State of

India
9
In this case, the plaintiff servant was traveling in a horse-driven carriage and was
passing by the kidderpore dockyard in Calcutta which is government property. Due
to negligence on the part of the defendant for the repair of the steamer fell and its
clang frightened the horse the horse rushed forward against the iron and was
injured. The plaintiff filed a suit against the secretary for the council for the damage
which was caused due to the servant employed by the government of India. The
court tried to look into the matter with reference to the liability of the east India
company.

So, vicarious liability of the state for the tort committed by its employee is
based upon:-

1. Sovereign functions – are those actions of a state for which the state is not
answerable in any court of law. These are the works that can lawfully be
exercised only by a sovereign or by the person to whom such power is
delegated. In layman‟s language, these are the works or functions which a
private individual or body cannot do and only the government has authority to
do these functions or work. For example, the Defence of the country, Raising
and Maintaining the armed forces, making peace or war, foreign affairs,
railways, retaining territory, and police.
2. Non–sovereign functions – non-sovereign functions are those which can be
performed or carried out by any private individuals without any delegation of
powers by the government. If a person commits a tort while performing a non-
sovereign function and that person is a government employee then the state
can be held liable for such an employee. In simple language, non-sovereign
functions include all the work which can be performed by any person. For
example, functions relating to trade, business, school, hospital, airport, and
welfare activity.
In short, we can say that if any work can be done by any private person it is non-
sovereign work and if work can‟t be performed by any private person but only by the
government, it is a sovereign function.

Case laws

Head Mistress Govt. Girls High School v. Mahalaxmi The ‛ aya‟ who is the
servant of a government school asked a girl student of 9th standard to bring water on
a cycle carrier for school children which was basically the duty of the aya herself.
While bringing the water the spring of the cycle came off and hit the right eye of the
girl and she lost her eye.

Judgment: The state will be liable as running the school is not a sovereign function.

H Khodwa v State of Maharashtra The doctor of the government hospital, while

performing a sterilization operation, left a mop inside the abdomen of the patient as
a consequence she developed peritonitis and died.

10
Judgment: Running a hospital is a non-sovereign function hence the state will be
held liable.

RELATION BETWEEN CONTITUTIONAL LAW AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Constitutional law and administrative law are closely interconnected, as they both
deal with the structure and functioning of government entities. Here's an overview of
the relationship between constitutional law and administrative law:

1. **Constitutional Foundation:** - Constitutional law serves as the foundation

for administrative law. The constitution of a country establishes the basic framework
of government, defining the powers and limitations of each branch.

2. **Separation of Powers:** - Constitutional law often establishes the principle of

separation of powers, dividing the government into legislative, executive, and judicial
branches. Administrative law operates within this framework, regulating the actions
of the executive branch, particularly administrative agencies.

3. **Grant of Powers:** - The constitution typically grants certain powers to the

executive branch, including the authority to create administrative agencies.
Administrative law then governs the exercise of these delegated powers by these
agencies.

4. **Checks and Balances:** - Constitutional law provides for checks and

balances to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful.
Administrative law ensures that administrative agencies operate within the bounds
set by the constitution and are subject to oversight and control.

5. **Judicial Review:** - Constitutional law allows for judicial review, where the
judiciary examines the constitutionality of laws and government actions.
Administrative law often involves judicial review of administrative decisions to
ensure they comply with constitutional principles and statutory authority.

6. **Delegation of Authority:** - Constitutional law may grant the legislature the

power to delegate certain functions to administrative agencies. Administrative law
then regulates the delegation of authority, ensuring that it is within constitutional
limits and that agencies act in accordance with the law.

7. **Due Process and Fairness:** - Constitutional law guarantees individuals

certain rights, including due process. Administrative law extends these principles to
administrative proceedings, ensuring fair and impartial decision-making within the
administrative context.
11
8. **Statutory Framework:** - Constitutional law sets the overall structure, but
administrative law often works in conjunction with statutes that establish and govern
administrative agencies. These statutes provide the legal framework within which
administrative agencies operate.

In summary, constitutional law provides the fundamental principles and structure of

government, while administrative law operates within this framework to regulate the
activities of administrative agencies, ensuring that they act within their delegated
authority and in compliance with constitutional principles. The relationship between
the two is integral to maintaining a balanced and accountable system of
governance.

DOCTRINE OF RULE OF LAW WITH REFERENCE TO INDIAN CONSTITUTION

The doctrine of the rule of law is a fundamental principle in constitutional law that
emphasizes the supremacy of law and equality before the law. In the context of the
Indian Constitution, the doctrine of the rule of law is implicit in various provisions and
has been emphasized by the judiciary as an essential feature of the Indian legal
system. Here are key aspects of the doctrine of the rule of law in reference to the
Indian Constitution:

1. **Supremacy of the Constitution:** - The Indian Constitution is the supreme

law of the land. All laws, including governmental actions and decisions, must
conform to the provisions of the Constitution. No person or entity, including the
government, is above the Constitution.

2. **Equality before the Law (Article 14):** - Article 14 of the Indian Constitution
enshrines the principle of equality before the law. It states that the state shall not
deny any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws. This
principle is a core component of the rule of law.

3. **Due Process and Fair Procedure (Article 21):** - Article 21 guarantees the
right to life and personal liberty and provides that no person shall be deprived of
these rights except according to the procedure established by law. This implies that
any deprivation of rights must follow fair and just procedures, contributing to the rule
of law.

4. **Limited Government Powers:** - The rule of law requires that governmental

powers be exercised within the limits set by law. The Constitution delineates the

12
powers of the various branches of government, and these powers must be
exercised in accordance with the law.

5. **Judicial Review:** - The judiciary in India has the power of judicial review to
ensure that actions of the government and other authorities are in conformity with
the Constitution. Judicial review is a crucial aspect of upholding the rule of law and
preventing arbitrary exercises of power.

6. **Legal Certainty:** - The rule of law promotes legal certainty by requiring laws
to be clear, certain, and accessible. It ensures that individuals are aware of the laws
that govern them and that laws are applied consistently.

7. **No Arbitrary Power (Article 14 and 21):** - Articles 14 and 21 also prohibit
arbitrariness. Governmental actions must be reasonable, non-arbitrary, and fair. The
rule of law seeks to prevent the misuse of power by ensuring that decisions are
based on established legal principles.

8. **Access to Justice:** - The rule of law implies access to justice for all. The
Indian Constitution, through various provisions, including Articles 32 and 226,
provides mechanisms for the enforcement of fundamental rights and access to
constitutional remedies.

In summary, the doctrine of the rule of law is inherent in the Indian constitutional
framework and is reflected in various provisions that ensure equality, due process,
limited government powers, and access to justice. The judiciary plays a pivotal role
in upholding the rule of law through judicial review and the protection of fundamental
rights.

WHAT IS DELEGATED LEGISLATION ? HOW DOES THE JUDICIARY

EXERCISE & CONTROL DELEGATED LEGISLATION

Delegated legislation refers to the process by which the legislature delegates its
lawmaking authority to another body, typically government agencies or
administrative authorities. It allows these bodies to make detailed rules, regulations,
or orders under the authority conferred upon them by an enabling Act of the
legislature. Delegated legislation is also known as subordinate or secondary
legislation.

Here's how the judiciary exercises and controls delegated legislation:

1. **Judicial Review:** - One of the primary mechanisms through which the

judiciary exercises control over delegated legislation is judicial review. The courts

13
have the authority to examine the legality, constitutionality, and procedural
correctness of delegated legislation. They can strike down any rule or regulation that
goes beyond the scope of the authority granted by the enabling Act or is
inconsistent with the constitution.

2. **Ultra Vires Doctrine:** - The judiciary applies the doctrine of ultra vires, which
means "beyond the powers." If delegated legislation exceeds the authority granted
by the enabling Act, the courts may declare it ultra vires and, therefore, invalid. The
delegated legislation must be within the scope of the powers conferred by the
legislature.

3. **Reasonableness and Proportionality:** - Courts may assess the

reasonableness and proportionality of delegated legislation. If a rule or regulation is
found to be arbitrary, unreasonable, or disproportionate, the judiciary may intervene
and declare it invalid.

4. **Constitutional Compliance:** - The judiciary ensures that delegated

legislation complies with the constitutional principles and fundamental rights. If a rule
infringes upon fundamental rights or violates other constitutional provisions, the
courts can strike it down.

5. **Procedural Fairness:** - Courts may review the procedural aspects of the

making of delegated legislation. If there are procedural irregularities, such as lack of
consultation or a failure to follow prescribed procedures, the courts may intervene.

6. **Implied Conditions and Safeguards:** - In some cases, the enabling Act may
include implied conditions or safeguards that the courts may enforce. If the
delegated authority does not adhere to these conditions, the courts can declare the
delegated legislation invalid.

7. **Express Restrictions in Enabling Act:** - The enabling Act may impose

specific limitations on the authority to make rules and regulations. If these
restrictions are violated, the courts can set aside the delegated legislation.

8. **Delegation Must Be Constrained:** - The principle that the legislature cannot

delegate its essential legislative functions is recognized. Courts ensure that the
delegation is not an abdication of legislative power and that the legislature has
provided sufficient guidance to the delegate.

In summary, the judiciary exercises control over delegated legislation through the
principles of judicial review, ensuring that such legislation stays within the
boundaries set by the enabling Act and the constitution. The courts play a crucial
14
role in safeguarding against arbitrary or excessive use of delegated legislative
powers.

What Is latches & DELAY in administration law with case laws?

Ans) Latches is a legal doctrine that bars a claimant from seeking relief if they have
unreasonably delayed in asserting their claim or right, and the delay has prejudiced
the opposing party. It is an equitable defense that is based on the principle that the
law helps the vigilant, not the negligent. Latches is often invoked in civil cases,
especially when the statute of limitation has expired or is not applicable12

Some of the elements of latches are:

The claimant must have knowledge of their claim or right

The claimant must have delayed in bringing their claim or right to the court

The delay must be unreasonable or unjustified

The opposing party must have suffered some disadvantage or harm due to the
delay

For example, if A encroaches on B‟s land and B knows about it but does not take
any action for several years, then B may be barred from suing A for trespassing by
the doctrine of latches. This is because B‟s delay in asserting their right has allowed
A to invest time and money on the land, and A would be unfairly harmed if B
suddenly claims the land back

Some of the case laws related to latches are:

In Raj Lakshmi Dasi v. Banamali Sen3, the Supreme Court held that latches is not a
rule of law but a rule of equity and it is a matter of discretion for the court to apply it
or not, depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.

In M. Meenakshi v. Metadin Agarwal, the Supreme Court observed that latches is

not merely a question of time but also a question of the nature of the claim, the
quality of the delay and the effect of the delay on the parties.

In S. Shanmugam Pillai v. K. Shanmugam Pillai, the Supreme Court ruled that

latches is not a mere matter of the length of time but also of the acquiescence of the
party during that time. If the party, with full knowledge of the facts, does not assert
his right and allows the other party to act as if he had abandoned his right, then he
cannot later complain of being prejudiced by the delay.

15
Administrative delay can be conceptualized as the amount of time taken to
complete core administrative tasks in an organization. The administrative tasks
investigated by this study have included purchasing equipment, contracting for
services, creating civil service positions, hiring and firing employees, and changing
program policies. An empirical test of the model of administrative delay was
conducted using a data set based on a survey of program managers and county
heads in the largest 450 counties in the U.S.
The empirical results indicate that the management of information resources does
matter in determining the amount of administrative delay in an organization.
However, the degrees to which information management affects administrative
delay vary depending on the nature of an administrative task. The results of path
analyses also suggest that the structure and management of information resources
are more important than the level of technology in determining administrative delay.
Meanwhile, organizational size, form of governance, and the degree of external
environmental influence consistently served as significant predictors for
administrative delay in county government.
Administrative delay in government is a complex and multidimensional
phenomenon, as affected by various cognitive, managerial, political, and legal
factors. The objective of operational efficiency is often in conflict with the values of
procedural integrity, accountability, and protection of individual rights in government.
This study uniquely sought to find in the management of information resources a
utilitarian common ground for the imperatives of fast and efficient operations, and
just and accountable governance.

The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013[edit]

The historic Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 was passed by Indian Parliament
paving the way for establishment of a Lokpal (Ombudsman) to fight corruption in
public offices and ensure accountability on the part of public officials, including
the Prime Minister, but with some safeguards.

Lokpal will consist of a chairperson and a maximum of eight members, [12] of which
50% will be judicial members 50% members of Lokpal shall be from SC/ST/OBCs,
minorities and women.[13] Selection of chairperson and members of Lokpal through a
selection committee consisting of PM, Speaker of Lok Sabha, leader of opposition in
Lok Sabha, Chief Justice of India or a sitting Supreme Court judge nominated by
CJI.[14] Eminent jurist to be nominated by President of India on basis of
recommendations of the first four members of the selection committee "through
consensus". Lokpal's jurisdiction will cover all categories of public servants. All
entities (NGOs) receiving donations from foreign source in the context of the Foreign
Contribution Regulation Act (FCRA) in excess of Rs 10 lakh per year are under the
jurisdiction of Lokpal. Centre will send Lokpal bill to states as a model bill. States
have to set up Lokayuktas through a state law within 365 days.

16
 Lokpal will have power of superintendence and direction over any central
investigation agency including CBI for cases referred to them by the
ombudsman.
 A high-powered committee chaired by the PM will recommend selection of CBI
director. The collegium will comprise PM, leader of opposition in Lok Sabha and
Chief Justice of India PM has been brought under purview of the Lokpal, so also
central ministers and senior officials.
 Directorate of prosecution will be under overall control of CBI director. At present,
it comes under the law ministry.
 Appointment of director of prosecution to be based on recommendation of
the Central Vigilance Commission.
 Director of prosecution will also have a fixed tenure of two years like CBI chief.
 Transfer of CBI officers investigating cases referred by Lokpal with the approval
of watchdog.
 Bill incorporates provisions for attachment and confiscation of property acquired
by corrupt means, even while prosecution is pending.
 Bill lays down clear timelines for preliminary enquiry and investigation and trial.
Provides for special courts Public servants will not present their view before
preliminary enquiry if the case requires 'element of surprise' like raids and
searches.
 Bill grants powers to Lokpal to sanction prosecution against public servants.
 CBI may appoint a panel of advocates with approval of Lokpal, CBI will not have
to depend on govt advocates.
On 15 May 2018, Mukul Rohtagi (Former Attorney General of India) has been
appointed as an eminent jurist in the selection panel of Lokpal.
Sub-delegation refers to the process where an individual or authority, originally
granted a delegation of powers, further delegates those powers to another person or
entity. In legal and administrative contexts, sub-delegation is subject to certain limits
and conditions to prevent an unchecked and excessive transfer of authority. Here's
a short note on sub-delegation:

**Nature of Sub-Delegation:**

Sub-delegation involves the passing on of delegated powers from one level to

another within an organization or administrative structure. The original delegation of
powers is typically granted by a higher authority to a lower one, and sub-delegation
occurs when the lower authority further transfers some or all of those powers to
another entity.

**Limits and Conditions:**While delegation of powers is a common administrative

practice, sub-delegation is often subject to explicit limits and conditions. These may

17
be specified in the original delegation instrument or in relevant legislation, ensuring
that sub-delegation is reasonable, controlled, and aligned with the original intent of
the delegating authority.

**Authority to Sub-Delegate:** The authority to sub-delegate must be expressly

conferred by the delegating entity. In the absence of explicit authorization, the
delegate may not sub-delegate its powers. The principle is to maintain accountability
and prevent an unauthorized dispersion of decision-making authority.

**Responsibility and Accountability:* *Even in cases where sub-delegation is

allowed, the original delegate usually retains responsibility for the actions taken
under the sub-delegated authority. This ensures accountability and transparency in
administrative processes. The original delegator remains answerable for the use of
the delegated powers, regardless of how many levels of sub-delegation may occur.

**Examples of Sub-Delegation:** - In a government department, a minister may

delegate the authority to make decisions to a senior official. If that official further
delegates specific tasks to subordinates within the department, it constitutes sub-
delegation.

- In corporate settings, a CEO might delegate certain responsibilities to a manager.

If the manager then assigns specific tasks to team members, it represents sub-
delegation within the organizational structure.

In conclusion, sub-delegation is a practical aspect of administrative functioning, but

it must be conducted within legal and organizational frameworks to ensure
accountability and prevent an undue concentration or diffusion of decision-making
authority. Legal constraints and judicial oversight help maintain the integrity of the
delegation process.

1. **Habeas Corpus:**

- *Definition:* Habeas Corpus is a writ that safeguards an individual's right to

personal liberty, ensuring protection against unlawful detention or imprisonment.

- *Case 1 - A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950):*

- In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of India clarified the scope of Habeas
Corpus. The court held that it is concerned only with the physical aspect of personal
liberty and does not address the conditions or circumstances of confinement. The
case emphasized the importance of the writ in preventing arbitrary arrests and
protecting individual freedom.

18
 - *Case 2 - Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla
(1976):*

- Also known as the 'Habeas Corpus case' during the Emergency in India, this
Supreme Court ruling was a significant setback to individual liberties. The court held
that during an emergency, the right to move the courts for Habeas Corpus is
suspended. This decision sparked considerable debate and led to a reevaluation of
the balance between personal liberty and state power during emergencies.

2. **Mandamus:**

- *Definition:* Mandamus is a writ that commands a public authority or official to

perform a duty that is legally required but has been neglected or refused.

- *Case 1 - State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh (1952):* - In this case, the

Supreme Court clarified the scope of Mandamus by emphasizing that the writ can
be issued not only against executive authorities but also against non-statutory
bodies or private individuals performing public duties. The ruling established that
Mandamus is a remedy to enforce legal obligations and ensure public authorities act
within their powers.

*Case 2 - State of Maharashtra v. Prabhakar Pandurang Sangzgiri (1972):*

- This case involved the issuance of Mandamus against the state government for
the reinstatement of a dismissed employee. The court held that Mandamus could be
granted when there is a failure to exercise discretion or when the exercise of
discretion is arbitrary or unreasonable. This reinforced the idea that Mandamus can
be a remedy for correcting administrative actions that violate legal principles.

1. **Certiorari:**

- *Definition:* Certiorari is a writ used by superior courts to quash the decisions of

inferior courts or administrative bodies.

- *Case 1 - Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai (2003):*

- In this case, the Supreme Court emphasized the role of Certiorari in correcting
jurisdictional errors. The court held that Certiorari can be issued when there is an
error of law apparent on the face of the record or when there is a violation of
principles of natural justice. The decision clarified that Certiorari is a remedy to
prevent miscarriage of justice due to errors of law.

- *Case 2 - State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih (2015):*

19
 - The Supreme Court, in this case, reiterated that Certiorari can be issued not
only for correcting errors of jurisdiction but also for correcting errors of law apparent
on the face of the record. The court emphasized that the writ is not limited to
jurisdictional errors but extends to ensure justice and fairness in administrative
decisions.

2. **Prohibition:** - *Definition:* Prohibition is a preventive writ that prohibits an

inferior court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting beyond its legal
authority.

- *Case 1 - A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak (1988):*

- In this case, the Supreme Court invoked the writ of Prohibition to prevent the
Commission of Inquiry from acting beyond its legal authority. The court held that
Prohibition can be issued to prevent a tribunal or authority from exceeding its
jurisdiction or acting in violation of the principles of natural justice.

- *Case 2 - A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1970):*

- This case is significant in highlighting the preventive nature of Prohibition. The

court held that Prohibition can be issued to prevent a quasi-judicial authority from
acting in excess of its jurisdiction or in violation of the principles of natural justice. It
emphasized the importance of preventing legal errors before they occur.

3. **Quo Warranto:**

- *Definition:* Quo Warranto is a writ used to question the legality of a person

holding a public office and to ensure that they have the legal authority to do so.

- *Case 1 - R. v. Electricity Commissioners, Ex parte London Electricity Joint

Committee Co. (1920):* - Although not a direct Indian case, this English case is
foundational for the principles of Quo Warranto. It established that Quo Warranto is
a remedy to inquire into the legality of holding a public office and to prevent
usurpation of public positions.

*Case 2 - B.R. Ambedkar v. R.K. Sidhwa (1952):* - In this Indian case, Quo
Warranto was sought against the appointment of R.K. Sidhwa as a member of the
Bar Council of Bombay. The court held that Quo Warranto is an appropriate remedy
to question the appointment of a person to a public office if the appointment is illegal
or in violation of the relevant laws.

20
### Speaking Order

**Introduction:**

A speaking order refers to a written decision or judgment by an administrative or

judicial authority that not only states the conclusion but also provides a detailed
rationale or reasoning behind the decision. This concept is integral to administrative
law as it ensures transparency, fairness, and accountability in the decision-making
process. A speaking order allows the affected parties to understand the basis of the
decision, seek legal remedies if necessary, and contributes to the overall rule of law.

**Importance of Speaking Order:**

1. **Transparency and Accountability:**

- A speaking order promotes transparency by revealing the thought process of the

decision-maker. This transparency is essential for accountability, as it allows
affected parties and the public to scrutinize the decision for compliance with legal
principles.

2. **Fairness and Natural Justice:**- Providing detailed reasons in a speaking

order is a fundamental aspect of natural justice. It enables affected parties to
comprehend the considerations that influenced the decision and ensures fairness in
the adjudicative process.

3. **Legal Scrutiny and Remedies:** - Speaking orders facilitate effective legal

scrutiny. If the decision is challenged, a well-documented order allows courts or
appellate bodies to review the decision more comprehensively. It provides a basis
for parties to appeal or seek judicial intervention.

4. **Guidance for Future Cases:** - Speaking orders serve as precedents and

guidance for future cases. The detailed reasoning provides a framework for
understanding how similar cases are likely to be decided, fostering consistency and
predictability in administrative decisions.

**Case Law - Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978):** - In the landmark case
of Maneka Gandhi, the Supreme Court emphasized the importance of a speaking
order in matters affecting personal liberty. The court held that a decision affecting a
person's fundamental rights must be supported by valid reasons, and the affected
party should be given an opportunity to be heard.

**Conclusion:**

In conclusion, the concept of a speaking order is a cornerstone of administrative

law, promoting fairness, transparency, and accountability. The obligation to provide
21
detailed reasons ensures that administrative decisions are made with careful
consideration of relevant facts and legal principles. This not only protects the rights
of individuals but also contributes to the overall integrity of the administrative
process.

### Estoppel in Administrative Law

**Introduction:**

Estoppel, a legal doctrine derived from equity, plays a significant role in

administrative law by preventing a party from asserting rights or facts that are
inconsistent with previous statements or conduct. It serves to promote fairness,
prevent injustice, and maintain the integrity of administrative proceedings. Estoppel
in administrative law operates as a shield to protect individuals from arbitrary or
unfair actions by public authorities.

**Forms of Estoppel:**

1. **Promissory Estoppel:**

- When a public authority makes a clear and unequivocal promise to an individual,

and that individual relies on the promise to their detriment, the doctrine of
promissory estoppel may prevent the authority from going back on its promise.

2. **Equitable Estoppel:** - Equitable estoppel may arise when a public authority,

through its words or conduct, induces a person to believe a certain state of affairs
and the person acts upon that belief to their detriment.

**Importance of Estoppel:**

1. **Fairness and Equity:** - Estoppel ensures fairness and equity in administrative

proceedings by preventing public authorities from acting in a manner that would be
unjust or inequitable, given the circumstances.

2. **Legal Certainty:** - The doctrine of estoppel contributes to legal certainty by

promoting consistency and predictability in the actions of public authorities.
Individuals can rely on the representations or promises made by administrative
bodies.

**Case Law - Union of India v. Anglo Afghan Agencies (1968):**

- In this case, the Supreme Court held that the government could be estopped
from acting in a manner that was inconsistent with its previous representations. The
court emphasized that the government should not be allowed to resile from its

22
promise if such resiling would operate to the prejudice of the person who has acted
on the representation.

**Conclusion:**

Estoppel is a vital doctrine in administrative law, serving as a safeguard against

arbitrary actions by public authorities. By preventing authorities from going back on
their promises or representations to the detriment of individuals, estoppel upholds
principles of fairness, justice, and legal certainty within the administrative framework.

### Res Judicata in Administrative Law

**Introduction:**

Res Judicata, a legal principle meaning "a thing adjudicated," is a doctrine that
prevents the same matter from being litigated again once a final decision has been
reached. In administrative law, the application of res judicata ensures the finality and
conclusiveness of administrative decisions, promoting efficiency, and preventing the
re-litigation of issues that have already been resolved.

**Elements of Res Judicata:**

1. **Identity of Parties:** - The parties involved in the subsequent proceeding must

be the same as those in the original proceeding for res judicata to apply.

2. **Identity of Cause of Action:** - There must be an identity between the cause

of action in the original proceeding and the subsequent proceeding for res judicata
to be invoked.

3. **Final Judgment:** - The original decision must be a final and conclusive

judgment, not subject to appeal or further review.

**Importance of Res Judicata:**

1. **Judicial Economy:** - Res judicata promotes judicial economy by avoiding the

wastage of resources and time on repeated litigation of the same issues.

2. **Legal Certainty:** - The doctrine contributes to legal certainty by ensuring that

once a matter has been adjudicated, parties can rely on the finality of the decision.

**Case Law - Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Smt. Deorajin Debi (1960):**

- In this case, the Supreme Court of India clarified that the principles of res
judicata are applicable to administrative decisions. The court held that if an
administrative decision is quasi-judicial in nature and satisfies the elements of res
judicata, the doctrine will apply.
23
2) Daryao v. State of Uttar PradeshIn this case, the Supreme Court held that the
doctrine of res judicata applies to writ petitions filed under Article 32 of the
Constitution, as well as to petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution. The
Court observed that the principle of res judicata is based on the need of giving
finality to judicial decisions and that it is in the interest of the public at large that a
final end should be put to litigation.

Devilal Modi v. Sales Tax Officer 3: In this case, the Supreme Court held that the
doctrine of res judicata does not apply to a petition challenging the validity of a tax
law on the ground of legislative incompetence, if the said ground was not taken or
decided in the earlier petition. The Court reasoned that the question of legislative
competence is a pure question of law and does not depend on the facts of the case.
Therefore, it cannot be said that the same issue was directly and substantially in
issue in the previous petition.

**Conclusion:**Res judicata is a vital legal principle in administrative law, serving the

interests of justice, efficiency, and legal certainty. By preventing the re-litigation of
matters that have already been adjudicated, it ensures the finality and
conclusiveness of administrative decisions, contributing to the overall effectiveness
and integrity of the administrative justice system.

### Ombudsman in Administrative Law

**Introduction:**

The Ombudsman, an institution originating from Scandinavian countries, has

become a crucial component of administrative law in various jurisdictions, including
India. The Ombudsman acts as an independent and impartial authority to investigate
complaints of maladministration, providing a mechanism for citizens to seek redress
against administrative injustice.

**Key Features of Ombudsman:**

1. **Independence:** - The Ombudsman operates independently of the

government and administrative authorities to ensure impartiality and objectivity in its
investigations.

2. **Informal Dispute Resolution:** - Ombudsman proceedings are generally

informal, providing a quick and accessible avenue for citizens to resolve grievances
without resorting to formal legal processes.

3. **Recommendatory Nature:** - Ombudsman recommendations are not binding

but carry significant moral and persuasive weight. Authorities often comply with
Ombudsman recommendations to maintain public trust.
24
**Importance of Ombudsman:**

. **Access to Justice:** - The Ombudsman provides a cost-effective and

accessible means for individuals to seek justice against administrative malpractices
without the need for formal legal proceedings.

2. **Public Accountability:** - By investigating complaints against public

authorities, the Ombudsman contributes to accountability and transparency in the
functioning of administrative bodies.

**Case Law - S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India (1987):** - In this case, the
Supreme Court recognized the significance of the Ombudsman in India. The court
emphasized that the Ombudsman institution acts as a vital check against
administrative arbitrariness and provides a mechanism for the resolution of public
grievances.

**Conclusion:** The Ombudsman plays a crucial role in administrative law by

providing a mechanism for citizens to address grievances, ensuring accountability,
and contributing to the overall efficiency and fairness of administrative processes. Its
importance lies in its ability to offer an alternative, informal avenue for seeking
redress against administrative maladministration. The Ombudsman serves as a
bridge between citizens and the government, promoting the ideals of justice,
transparency, and good governance in administrative practices.

**Natural Justice:**

Natural justice, often referred to as procedural fairness, is a fundamental legal

principle that governs the procedures followed by administrative bodies, tribunals,
and courts. The principles of natural justice ensure that individuals are treated fairly,
impartially, and without bias in the course of administrative decision-making. The
two main components of natural justice are the right to be heard (audi alteram
partem) and the rule against bias.

- **Right to Be Heard (Audi Alteram Partem):** - This principle requires that

individuals who may be adversely affected by an administrative decision have the
right to present their case, respond to the evidence against them, and be heard by
an impartial decision-maker.

- The right to a fair hearing is essential for ensuring that decisions are based on
complete and accurate information and that affected parties have an opportunity to
present their side of the story.

- **Rule Against Bias:* - The rule against bias ensures that the decision-maker is
impartial and unbiased. It prohibits decision-makers from having any personal or
25
financial interest in the outcome of a case and requires them to approach the matter
with an open mind.

- There are two types of bias: actual bias (where there is a direct conflict of
interest) and apparent bias (where a reasonable person might perceive bias).

**Rule of Law:** The rule of law is a foundational principle that emphasizes the
supremacy of the law and the equal application of laws to all individuals, regardless
of their status or power. It is a cornerstone of democratic societies and ensures that
governmental actions are subject to legal constraints. The rule of law is
characterized by certain key principles:

- **Equality before the Law:* - All individuals, including government officials, are
subject to the same laws. No one is above the law, and all individuals are entitled to
equal protection and treatment under the law.

- **Legal Certainty:** - The law should be clear, predictable, and applied

consistently. Individuals should be able to understand the legal rules that govern
their conduct and have confidence in the legal system.

- **Procedural Fairness:** - Legal procedures should be fair, transparent, and just.

This includes adherence to the principles of natural justice, providing individuals with
an opportunity to be heard and ensuring a fair and impartial decision-making
process.

- **Limited Government Powers:** - Governmental powers should be exercised

within the limits set by law. The rule of law prevents arbitrary or excessive use of
authority by ensuring that governmental actions are authorized by law.

**Connection between Natural Justice and Rule of Law:**

Natural justice and the rule of law are interconnected principles that work together to
safeguard individuals from arbitrary or unfair treatment by administrative bodies. The
principles of natural justice, such as the right to be heard and the rule against bias,
are essential components of ensuring fairness within the broader framework of the
rule of law. Together, they contribute to a legal system that is just, transparent, and
accountable, upholding the principles of democracy and justice.

1)Exception under RTI Act 2005.?

Ans)The Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI Act) is a law that empowers citizens
to access information held by public a studentuthorities in India. However, the RTI
Act also provides some exemptions from disclosure of information under certain
circumstances. These exemptions are:

26
Information that could affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, its security,
strategic, scientific, or economic interests, or its relations with foreign states, or that
could incite an offence [Section 8 (1) (a)].

Information that has been forbidden to be published by any court of law or tribunal,
or that could constitute contempt of court [Section 8 (1) (b)].

Information that would cause a breach of privilege of Parliament or the State

Legislature [Section 8 (1) ©].

Information that relates to personal information of a third party, which has no relation
to any public activity or interest, or which would cause unwarranted invasion of
privacy, unless the public authority or the Information Commission is satisfied that
the larger public interest justifies the disclosure [Section 8 (1) (j)].

Information that is available to a person in his fiduciary relationship, unless the

competent authority is satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure
[Section 8 (1) (e)].

Information that would endanger the life or physical safety of any person or identify
the source of information or assistance given in confidence for law enforcement or
security purposes [Section 8 (1) (g)].

Information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or

prosecution of offenders [Section 8 (1) (h)].

Information that relates to cabinet papers, including records of deliberations of the

Council of Ministers, Secretaries and other officers, except for the decisions and the
reasons thereof, and the material on the basis of which the decisions were taken,
after the decision has been taken and the matter is complete, or over [Section 8 (1)

Information that relates to trade secrets or commercial confidence, which would

harm the competitive position of a third party, unless the competent authority is
satisfied that the larger public interest warrants the disclosure [Section 8 (1) (d)].

Information that is protected by intellectual property rights, such as patents,

trademarks, designs, etc. [Section 9].

These exemptions are not absolute, and the public authority or the Information
Commission may decide to disclose the information if the larger public interest
outweighs the harm to the protected interests. However, some intelligence and
security agencies specified in the Second Schedule of the RTI Act are exempted
from the RTI Act, except for information pertaining to allegations of corruption and
human rights violations [Section 24].

27