Cheat Sheet: Administrative Discretion and Remedies

1. Administrative Discretion

1.1 Meaning and Nature

1.2 Types of Discretion

• Absolute Discretion: No statutory guidance provided; authority exercises complete freedom
• Qualified Discretion: Statutory conditions or guidelines prescribed for exercise of power
• Administrative Policy Discretion: Power to formulate policies within statutory framework
• Adjudicatory Discretion: Power to decide disputes or grant licenses/permits

1.3 Need for Discretion

• Legislature cannot foresee all circumstances requiring administrative action
• Enables flexible and practical administration
• Allows expert judgment in technical matters
• Facilitates quick decision-making in urgent situations
• Permits individualized justice rather than mechanical application

2. Judicial Control of Discretion

2.1 Grounds for Judicial Review

2.2 Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation

2.3 Limitations on Judicial Review

• Courts do not substitute their decision for administrative authority
• Courts do not review merits unless manifest arbitrariness
• Policy decisions receive judicial deference
• Expert opinion in technical matters not interfered except irrationality
• Alternative remedy available may bar judicial review

3. Abuse of Discretionary Power

3.1 Forms of Abuse

3.2 Key Judicial Pronouncements

4. Administrative Remedies

4.1 Constitutional Remedies

4.1.1 Writs under Article 226 and 227

4.1.2 Article 32 vs Article 226

4.2 Statutory Remedies

4.2.1 Appeal

• No inherent right to appeal; must be provided by statute
• Appeal lies to higher authority within department or external tribunal
• Appellate authority examines merits and legality
• Fresh evidence may be permitted if statute allows

4.2.2 Revision

• Review by superior authority of subordinate's decision
• Scope narrower than appeal; examines legality and procedural compliance
• Suo motu power if statute permits

4.2.3 Review

• Re-examination by same authority that passed order
• Limited grounds: error apparent on face of record, new evidence, or fraud
• Not rehearing; restricted scope

4.3 Tribunals

4.4 Alternate Dispute Resolution

• Ombudsman: Independent officer investigating maladministration complaints
• Lokpal and Lokayuktas: Statutory bodies for corruption complaints against public functionaries
• Grievance Redressal Mechanisms: Departmental mechanisms for citizen complaints
• Mediation and Conciliation: Voluntary resolution of administrative disputes

5. Principles of Natural Justice

5.1 Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the Other Side)

5.2 Nemo Judex In Causa Sua (No One Judge in Own Cause)

• Bias Doctrine: Adjudicator must be impartial and independent
• Pecuniary Bias: Financial interest in outcome disqualifies
• Personal Bias: Relationship with party or prior involvement disqualifies
• Subject-Matter Bias: Direct interest in subject matter
• Departmental Bias: Not automatic disqualification unless demonstrated prejudice
• Test: Real likelihood of bias or reasonable suspicion (A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, 1969)

5.3 Exceptions to Natural Justice

6. Reasoned Decisions

6.1 Requirement of Reasons

6.2 Exceptions to Duty to Give Reasons

• Confidential reports or assessments
• National security matters
• Legislative or policy decisions
• Routine administrative orders not affecting rights
• Where statute explicitly exempts

6.3 Adequacy of Reasons

• Reasons must be clear, intelligible and deal with substantial issues
• Brief reasons sufficient if convey rationale
• Cryptic or vague reasons equivalent to no reasons
• Reasons cannot be supplied later through affidavit

7. Doctrines of Legitimate Expectation and Promissory Estoppel

7.1 Legitimate Expectation

7.2 Promissory Estoppel

7.3 Key Cases

8. Res Judicata and Estoppel

8.1 Res Judicata

8.2 Constructive Res Judicata

• Extends to matters that could and should have been raised
• Applied strictly in administrative proceedings
• Does not bar subsequent proceedings on new cause of action

8.3 Estoppel Against Government

• General rule: estoppel does not bind government in exercise of statutory or executive functions
• Exception: promissory estoppel in limited circumstances
• Ultra vires acts never create estoppel
• Mistake of official not binding on government

9. Doctrine of Proportionality

9.1 Meaning and Evolution

9.2 Tests of Proportionality

• Suitability: Measure suitable to achieve legitimate objective
• Necessity: Least restrictive means available
• Balancing: Balance between harm caused and benefit achieved
• Rational Connection: Logical nexus between measure and objective

9.3 Application in India

10. Remedies Against Administrative Inaction

10.1 Types of Inaction

• Failure to Perform Statutory Duty: Non-performance of mandatory obligation
• Delay in Decision-making: Unreasonable delay in exercising discretion
• Non-consideration of Application: Failure to process or decide application
• Refusal to Perform Duty: Explicit refusal to act when duty exists

10.2 Available Remedies

10.3 Unreasonable Delay as Ground

• Delay defeats justice; renders remedy ineffective
• No fixed time limit; depends on facts and circumstances
• Explanation for delay required from authority
• Courts may impose time-bound directions
• State of Maharashtra v. Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak (1982) - delay violates Article 21

11. Important Legal Maxims and Concepts