Meaning and scope of Administrative Law
Meaning and Scope of Administrative Law
Meaning of Administrative Law
Administrative Law is the branch of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government.
It involves the creation, organization, powers, functions, and procedures of administrative agencies.
It ensures that administrative agencies act within the scope of their authority and comply with the principles of fairness, reasonableness, and legality.
Administrative law bridges the gap between the government and citizens by regulating how government decisions are made and challenged.
It covers rulemaking (legislative functions), adjudication (judicial functions), and enforcement (executive functions) of administrative bodies.
Scope of Administrative Law
The scope of administrative law includes:
Delegation of Powers
How legislative powers are delegated to administrative agencies.
Rulemaking
Procedures for making regulations or rules.
Adjudication
Administrative agencies’ power to decide disputes and impose sanctions.
Judicial Review
Courts’ power to review administrative actions for legality.
Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness
Principles ensuring fair hearing and unbiased decisions.
Control over Administrative Actions
Includes statutory control, judicial control, and political control.
Key Case Laws Explaining Meaning and Scope of Administrative Law
1. Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
Facts: The Wednesbury Corporation imposed conditions on a cinema license; the company challenged the decision.
Issue: Whether the administrative decision was unreasonable.
Holding: Established the “Wednesbury unreasonableness” standard — a decision is unreasonable if it is so irrational that no reasonable authority could have made it.
Significance: Defines judicial review scope; courts do not substitute their judgment but check for unreasonableness or illegality.
Scope: Limits court interference to extreme cases, respecting administrative discretion.
2. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969)
Facts: The applicant challenged the selection committee’s decision for a mining lease on grounds of bias.
Issue: Whether administrative officers involved in investigation and adjudication can be impartial.
Holding: The Supreme Court held the principle of natural justice applies; there must be no bias.
Significance: Broadened scope of natural justice to administrative adjudication, mandating fairness in administrative processes.
Scope: Ensures administrative authorities observe procedural fairness.
3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Facts: Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded without explanation.
Issue: Whether the procedure for depriving fundamental rights must be fair, just, and reasonable.
Holding: Expanded the concept of due process; any administrative action affecting rights must follow fair procedures.
Significance: Marked a shift towards judicial activism in administrative law and fundamental rights protection.
Scope: Administrative law extends to protecting individual rights from arbitrary state action.
4. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985)
Facts: Petitioners challenged eviction of pavement dwellers by the municipal corporation.
Issue: Whether right to livelihood is part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.
Holding: Court recognized that administrative actions affecting livelihood must be reasonable and just.
Significance: Expanded scope of administrative law to socio-economic rights and required accountability in administrative decisions affecting basic rights.
Scope: Reinforces need for proportionality and reasonableness in administrative decisions.
5. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015)
Facts: Challenge to Section 66A of the IT Act, which criminalized offensive online speech.
Issue: Whether vague statutory provisions gave arbitrary power to administrative agencies.
Holding: Court struck down the section for being vague and leading to arbitrary administrative action.
Significance: Emphasized rule of law and limits on administrative discretion, particularly in digital and modern contexts.
Scope: Administrative law requires clear statutory limits on agency power.
Summary Table
| Case | Issue | Holding & Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury | Standard of judicial review | Established “Wednesbury unreasonableness” test |
| A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India | Natural justice and bias in administrative adjudication | Natural justice applies to administrative decisions |
| Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India | Due process and procedural fairness | Administrative actions must be fair, just, and reasonable |
| Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corp. | Right to livelihood under Article 21 | Administrative decisions affecting livelihood must be reasonable |
| Shreya Singhal v. Union of India | Limits on administrative discretion | Vague laws causing arbitrary power struck down |
Conclusion
Administrative law is fundamental in regulating the exercise of public power through administrative agencies. Its meaning encompasses the legal principles governing administrative authorities, while its scope covers:
The creation of administrative rules,
Administrative adjudication,
Fairness and due process requirements,
Oversight and judicial review to prevent abuse of power.
The cases above underscore the importance of balancing agency discretion with legal safeguards, ensuring administrative actions are lawful, reasonable, and fair.
RELATED Blog
0 comments