Judicial Intervention In Administrative Discretion

Gupil V Pranaav, P. Hariharan & N. Sundar Kishore, BBA.LLB (Hons.) of Alliance University, Bangalore

ABSTRACT

The French scholar and philosopher Montesquieu formulated the theory of Separation of Powers which essentially divided the government into three organs namely the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary. He went on to say that to have efficiency in the functioning of the government these three organs should not encroach on the activities of each other. But this is not the case always. The judiciary is found encroach on the other organ’s functions regularly. And the worst hit organ is the administration. In many cases, the judiciary tries to overreach into the administrative actions and check the constitutionality of the job done by them by the power of their discretion. The judiciary showcases its arbitrariness by the weapon of the PIL and the authority provided by the Articles 13, 32, 226, 136, 140, 141, 142 and 144. Whether these acts done by the judiciary encroaching the functioning of the executive can be justified is the question to be addressed here.

The impending question is Whether the judiciary is justified in interfering in the discretionary functions of administrative authorities of the government. The answer to that is the Indian Administrative organ is a very complex system with significant amount of power vested in its hands. One such basic function is the discretionary function of these administrative authorities. With regard to the discretionary power the executive enjoys a lot of arbitrariness. This is subjected to a lot of controversies and concerns with time. Thus, these concerns are addressed in the courts of law under the respective jurisdiction which is authorised by the Constitution of India under the concept of Judicial Review. Thus, the Judiciary is justified in the discretionary functions of administrative authorities of the government.