A study on the need for discretionary power in administrative action
A Study on the Need for Discretionary Power in Administrative Action
1. Introduction: What is Discretionary Power?
Discretionary power in administrative law refers to the authority granted to administrative agencies or officials to make decisions within the framework of law, where they can choose among various options based on judgment, expertise, and situational factors.
Unlike mandatory powers, where officials must act in a prescribed manner, discretionary powers allow flexibility and adaptability in governance.
Discretion is essential in modern administration due to the complex and dynamic nature of public affairs.
2. Why is Discretionary Power Needed in Administrative Action?
a) Complexity and Diversity of Administrative Tasks
Administrative authorities deal with diverse issues—social, economic, environmental—that require context-sensitive decisions.
Uniform rules cannot cover every scenario; discretion allows tailoring decisions to specific circumstances.
b) Expertise and Specialized Knowledge
Administrative officials often possess technical expertise not available to legislatures or courts.
Discretion enables them to apply specialized knowledge effectively.
c) Flexibility and Efficiency
Rigidity in administrative action would lead to inefficiency and injustice.
Discretion allows flexibility to respond quickly and fairly to evolving situations.
d) Policy Implementation
Discretion allows administrative bodies to interpret and implement policies in line with legislative intent while adapting to ground realities.
e) Human Element in Governance
Discretion acknowledges that not all decisions can be mechanistic; human judgment and fairness are crucial.
3. Legal Framework: Discretion vs. Rule of Law
Discretion must be exercised within legal limits.
Abuse or arbitrary use of discretion violates principles of rule of law, fairness, and equality.
Courts intervene only when discretion is exercised illegally, arbitrarily, or unreasonably.
4. Important Case Laws on Discretionary Power
Case 1: Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950)
Issue: Government’s discretionary power to restrict publication.
Held: Discretion must conform to constitutional safeguards like freedom of speech.
Significance: Discretion is not absolute and is subject to constitutional limits.
Case 2: Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd. v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948)
Issue: Whether administrative discretion was exercised unreasonably.
Held: Court will intervene if discretion is “Wednesbury unreasonable” (so irrational no reasonable authority would do it).
Significance: Established limits on discretionary powers, emphasizing reasonableness.
Case 3: Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Issue: Passport impoundment without fair procedure.
Held: Discretionary power must be exercised following principles of natural justice and fairness.
Significance: Due process is mandatory in exercise of discretion affecting personal liberty.
Case 4: A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969)
Issue: Allegation of bias in discretionary appointment decisions.
Held: Discretion must be exercised impartially and not arbitrarily.
Significance: Reinforced that discretion must be free from bias and corruption.
Case 5: Brij Bhushan v. State of Delhi (1950)
Issue: Power to detain under discretionary preventive detention laws.
Held: Even in discretionary power, courts can review for abuse and violation of fundamental rights.
Significance: Shows judicial control over discretionary powers that affect fundamental rights.
5. Critical Analysis
Necessity: Discretion is indispensable for practical, effective governance in complex societies.
Risks: Potential misuse or abuse leading to arbitrariness and injustice.
Judicial Role: Courts provide a balance—protecting citizens from misuse while respecting administrative expertise.
Checks and Balances: Clear statutes, procedural safeguards, and transparent criteria reduce discretionary abuse.
Modern Challenges: Need to update frameworks for discretion in light of technological advancements and administrative reforms.
6. Conclusion
Discretionary power is a cornerstone of administrative governance, allowing flexibility, expertise, and humane decision-making. However, it must operate within legal boundaries and be subjected to judicial scrutiny to prevent arbitrariness. The synergy between administrative discretion and judicial oversight ensures effective and fair governance under the rule of law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments