Prohibition in administrative law
Prohibition in Administrative Law
What is Prohibition?
Prohibition is a writ issued by a higher court (usually the High Court or Supreme Court) to a lower court, tribunal, or administrative authority.
It prevents the lower authority from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to the law.
Essentially, it is a preventive remedy designed to stop unlawful or ultra vires (beyond power) actions before they cause harm.
It is a key tool in judicial review to keep administrative bodies within legal limits.
Purpose of Prohibition
To maintain the hierarchy and discipline of the judicial and administrative systems.
To protect individuals from illegitimate or unauthorized administrative acts.
To ensure rule of law by preventing arbitrary or illegal exercise of power.
To stop the abuse of power before the unlawful act causes damage.
When is Prohibition Issued?
When a lower authority or tribunal acts without jurisdiction.
When the authority acts in violation of natural justice or procedural fairness.
When the authority acts contrary to the statutory mandate.
When a quasi-judicial body exceeds its power or authority.
It cannot be issued if the lower authority acts within jurisdiction but makes a wrong decision (in such cases, appeal or review applies).
Distinction with Other Writs:
| Writ | Purpose | When Issued |
|---|---|---|
| Prohibition | Prevent unauthorized action | To stop lower authority acting without jurisdiction |
| Certiorari | Quash illegal decision after action | To annul an unlawful order already passed |
| Mandamus | Command performance of duty | To compel public duty performance |
| Habeas Corpus | Secure release from unlawful detention | To produce person detained unlawfully |
Important Indian Case Law on Prohibition
1. K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1962)
Citation: AIR 1962 SC 1161
Facts: A subordinate authority took action beyond its power.
Held: The Supreme Court issued prohibition to restrain the authority from acting outside jurisdiction.
Significance: Established that prohibition can be issued to prevent ultra vires acts.
2. D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries Ltd. (1993)
Citation: AIR 1993 SC 260
Facts: Arbitrator was alleged to act with bias and beyond jurisdiction.
Held: The Supreme Court held that prohibition is a valid remedy to prevent an authority from acting illegally or with bias.
Significance: Reinforced the use of prohibition to control quasi-judicial authorities.
3. Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950)
Citation: AIR 1950 SC 124
Context: Though primarily a freedom of speech case, the Supreme Court hinted at limits on administrative action.
Significance: It laid the foundation for restricting arbitrary administrative actions, indirectly supporting writs like prohibition.
4. Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram (1975)
Citation: AIR 1975 SC 1331
Facts: Illegal detention by lower authority.
Held: Prohibition was issued against the illegal detention order.
Significance: Demonstrated the writ’s preventive function against unlawful executive action.
5. State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati (1962)
Citation: AIR 1962 SC 933
Facts: The administrative authority exceeded its jurisdiction.
Held: The Supreme Court issued prohibition to stop the authority from proceeding.
Significance: Affirmed prohibition as a preventive measure to control jurisdictional errors.
6. T.C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa (1963)
Citation: AIR 1963 SC 1403
Facts: Subordinate tribunal acted beyond the scope of its authority.
Held: Prohibition issued to prevent unlawful action.
Significance: Reinforced the principle that prohibition is issued to maintain legal boundaries.
Summary Table
| Case | Principle Established | Importance |
|---|---|---|
| K.K. Verma v. Union of India | Prohibition to prevent ultra vires acts | Prevents unauthorized administrative action |
| D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries | Prohibition valid remedy against bias and excess jurisdiction | Controls quasi-judicial bodies |
| Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram | Prohibition against illegal detention | Protects individual liberty |
| State of Rajasthan v. Vidyawati | Prohibition for jurisdictional overreach | Keeps administrative authorities within limits |
| T.C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa | Prohibition stops subordinate tribunals acting beyond authority | Reinforces limits on tribunals |
Quick Recap:
Prohibition is a preventive writ stopping unlawful administrative actions before they happen.
It applies when an authority acts without jurisdiction or violates law.
Courts use it to maintain checks and balances in administrative governance.
Prohibition is distinct from other writs like certiorari, which quashes already-made decisions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments