COURSE MANUAL

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW & REGULATORY STATE

2019-20

Instructor/s:
Sayan Mukherjee
Pradyuman Purohit
Arpita Gupta
Aditi
Kriti Sharma
Sagnik Das

1
 CONTENTS

PART I
General
Information………………………………………………………………………………Page

PART II

a. Course
Description…………………………………………………………………………………Page

b. Course
Aims……………………………………………………………………………………..Page

c. Intended Leaning Outcomes ……………………………………………………...........Page

d. Grading of Student Achievement………………………………………………….......Page

PART III
a. Keyword
Syllabus……………………………………………………………………………Page
b. Course
Policies………………………………………………………………………………..Page

PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline ………………………………………………………….............Page

b. Readings…………………………………………………………………………………………
Page

2
 PART I

General Information

General Information on, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW & REGULATORY STATE, offered

by Jindal Global Law School
Semester B of the AY 2019-20

The information provided herein is by the Course Coordinator. The following information
contains the official record of the details of the course.

This information shall form part of the University database and may be uploaded to the
KOHA Library system and catalogued and may be distributed amongst third year Law
students for B.A.LL.B./B.B.A.LL.B.; LL.B.; LL.M. courses if necessary.

Course
Code:
Course
Duration: One Semester
No. of Credit
Units: 4
Level
: Undergraduate
Medium of
Instruction: English

3
 PART II

a. Course Description
The class will primarily analyze case laws, theoretical articles and the seminar style will be
followed in this class. The course will try to analyze contemporary issues in an attempt to make
the course topical. The course will also be comparative to an extent and it will compare Indian
case laws with English case laws and articles.

b. Course Aims
At the end of the course, it is hoped that the students will be able to: Comprehend the concepts in
administrative law and moreover would be able to analyze and critique these concepts. Students
will be expected to read case laws and/or theoretical articles before class and should be in a position
to discuss and debate the same in a thoughtful manner. They will be expected to apply these
concepts to topical cases and current events (for example the Changes in Environmental
Legislation, 2G scandal and so on) that have components of administrative law.

c. Intended Learning Outcomes

Course Intended Learning Teaching and Learning Assessment

Outcomes Activities Tasks/Activities
1. Understand different Reading of case law and End of course
administrative law theoretical material examination/research
concepts, the history of A. Students will acquire assignment (50% of
administrative law and its knowledge of the marks)
various components perspectives pertaining to Internal Assessment
the topics to be covered in (Assignments, Moots,
2. Ability to analyze and
the syllabus. Mid-Term
critique the administrative
examinations etc.)
law concepts, for example B. Preparation outside of the
(50% of marks)
ability to thoughtfully class
debate and critique the
Seminars
application of
C. Students will be expected
administrative law concepts
to debate the topics in

4
 in case laws. light of the readings. This
will give them a
3. Engaging with
perspective as to the
administrative law theory
readings and will also
4. Comparative analysis of allow them to develop
case law and theory their analytical skills and
creativity and critical
skills

Assignments
Students may have to do research
based assignments

d. Grading of Student Achievement

To pass this course, students must obtain a minimum of 50% in the cumulative aspects of
coursework, e.g. moot, and final examination. End of semester exam will carry 50 marks out
of which students have to obtain a minimum of 15 marks to fulfil the requirement of passing
the course.

The details of the grades as well as the criteria for awarding such grades are provided below.

Letter Percentage Grade Definitions

Grade Of marks
O 80% and above Outstanding Outstanding work
with strong
evidence of
knowledge of the
subject matter,
excellent
organizational
capacity, ability to
synthesize and
critically analyse
and originality in
thinking and
presentation.
A+ 75 to 79.75% Excellent Sound knowledge
of the subject

5
 matter, thorough
understanding of
issues; ability to
synthesize
critically and
analyse
A 70 to 74.75% Good Good
understanding of
the subject matter,
ability to identify
issues and provide
balanced solutions
to problems and
good critical and
analytical skills.
A- 65 to 69.75% Adequate Adequate
knowledge of the
subject matter to
go to the next level
of study and
reasonable critical
and analytical
skills.
B+ 60 to 64.75% Marginal Limited
knowledge of the
subject matter,
irrelevant use of
materials and poor
critical and
analytical skills.
B 55 to 59.75% Poor Poor
comprehension of
the subject matter;
poor critical and
analytical skills
and marginal use
of the relevant
materials.
B- 50 to 54.75% Pass “Pass” in a pass-
fail course. “P”
indicative of at
least the basic
understanding of
the subject matter.
F Below 50% Fail Fails in the subject

6
 PART III

a. Keyword Syllabus

Introduction, concepts in administrative law, separation of powers, history of administrative law,

delegated legislation, control of delegated legislation, substantive and procedural ultra vires,
natural justice, administrative discretion, proportionality doctrine, legitimate expectations,
tribunals, judicial review, External and Internal Audit.

b. Course Policies:

Academic Integrity and Plagiarism

Learning and knowledge production of any kind is a collaborative process. Collaboration demands
an ethical responsibility to acknowledge who we have learnt from, what we have learned, and how
reading and learning from others have helped us shape our own ideas. Even our own ideas demand
an acknowledgement of the sources and processes through which those ideas have emerged. Thus,
all ideas must be supported by citations. All ideas borrowed from articles, books, journals,
magazines, case laws, statutes, photographs, films, paintings, etc., in print or online, must be
credited with the original source. If the source or inspiration of your idea is a friend, a casual chat,
something that you overheard, or heard being discussed at a conference or in class, even they must
be duly credited. If you paraphrase or directly quote from a web source in the examination,
presentation or essays, the source must be acknowledged. The university has a framework to deal
with cases of plagiarism. All form of plagiarism will be taken seriously by the University and
prescribed sanctions will be imposed on those who commit plagiarism.

Disability Support and Accommodation Requirements

JGU endeavors to make all its courses accessible to students. All students with any known
disability needing academic accommodation are required to register with the Disability Support
Committee dsc@jgu.edu.in. The Committee has so far identified the following conditions that
could possibly hinder student’s overall well-being. These include: physical and mobility related
difficulties; visual impairment; hearing impairment; medical conditions; specific learning
difficulties e.g. dyslexia; mental health.

7
The Disability Support Committee maintains strict confidentiality of its discussions. Students
should preferably register with the Committee during the month of June/January as disability
accommodation requires early planning. DSC will approve of and coordinate all disability related
services such as appointment of academic mentors, arranging infrastructural facilities, and course
related requirements such as special lectures, tutorials and examinations.

All faculty members are requested to refer students with any of the above-mentioned conditions
to the Disability Support Committee for addressing disability-related accommodation
requirements.

Safe Space Pledge

This course may discuss a range of issues and events that might result in distress for some students.
Discussions in the course might also provoke strong emotional responses. To make sure that all
students collectively benefit from the course, and do not feel disturbed due to either the content of
the course or the conduct of the discussions. Therefore, it is incumbent upon all within the
classroom to pledge to maintain respect towards our peers. This does not mean that you need to
feel restrained about what you feel and what you want to say. Conversely, this is about creating a
safe space where everyone can speak and learn without inhibitions and fear. This responsibility
lies not only with students, but also with the instructor.

PART IV

a. Weekly Course Outline

Development of Administrative Law, Scope of Administrative Law,

Relationship between Administrative Law and Constitutional Law. Scope
of Separation of Power and Rule of Law under Indian Constitution: Impact
on Administrative Law
Week 1-2

Week 3-4 Executive Law Making and Administrative Directions

Control on Executive Law Making

Week 5-6

Week 7-8 Judicial review and Administrative Discretion

8
 Classification of Administrative Actions, Principles of Natural Justice:
Week 9-12 Fair Hearing & Exceptions, Rule against Bias

Week 13 Promissory Estoppel and Legitimate Expectation

Week 14 Administrative Adjudication

Week 15 Audit Systems

b. Readings [* marked cases are only recommendatory, and not essential]

WEEK 1-2:
Essential readings:
• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter 1
• Paul Craig, Administrative Law, Sweet & Maxwell, 7th edn: Part 1(Chapter 1 & 2)
• Martin Loughlin, The Functionalist Style in Public Law, University of Toronto Law
Journal, vol. 55, 2005, p.361
• Montesquieu, Spirit of the laws, Book XI (Separation of Power)
• Joseph Raz, Rule of Law and its virtue, The Authority of Law, OUP, 1979, p. 21
• J Finnis, Natural Law and Natural Rights, Clarendon Law Series, 2nd edn: chapter X at p.
260
• TRS Allan, The Sovereignty of Law, OUP, 2013: chapters 3 and 5
• Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab AIR 1955 SC 549
• ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) 2 SCC 521
Recommended readings:

• Philip Hamburger, Is Administrative Law Unlawful? University of Chicago Press, 2014,

pp. 1-21 (the model of criticism may be used at the end of the course, once the students are
aware of the principles of administrative law or may be used side by side with each
module).
• TV Somanathan, The Administrative & Regulatory State, The Oxford Handbook of Indian
Constitution, OUP, 2016.
• J. Madison, The Federalist Papers, Nos 47-49
• J. Ruma Pal, Separation of Powers, The Oxford Handbook of Indian Constitution, OUP,
2016.
• Dicey, An Introduction to the study of the Constitution, Universal Law Publishing Co., 10th
ed., p. 183-205

WEEK 3-4: Executive law making

9
Essential readings:
American position:

• Field v. Clark, 143 U.S. 649 (1892)

• Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935)
• *L. A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States, 295 U.S. 495 (1935)
• National Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. United States, 319 U.S. 190 (1943)

Indian position:

• In re Delhi Laws Act, AIR 1951 SC 332 (mainly Kania, C.J. and Fazl Ali, Mukherjee
J.J.)
• Hamdard Dawakhana v. UOI AIR 1960 SC 554
• Gwalior Rayon Co v. Asst Commr of Sales Tax AIR 1974 SC 1660
• Raj Narain Singh v Chairman, Patna AIR 1954 SC 569
• Lachmi Narain v. Union of India, AIR 1976 SC 714
• Harishankar Bagla v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1954 SC 465
• *Shama Rao v. UT of Pondicherry AIR 1967 SC 1480
• Jalan Trading Co. v. Mill Mazdoor Union, AIR 1967 SC 691
• *Gammon India Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1974 SC 960

Recommended readings:

• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter 3
(sub chapters: 1-5 &7)
• S. P. Sathe, Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 7th edn: Chapter 2
• Paul Craig, Administrative Law, Sweet & Maxwell, 7th edn: Chapter 15

WEEK 5-6: Control on executive law making (Judicial control and legislative control)

Essential readings:

Doctrine of Ultra Vires:

• Atlas Cycles v. State of Haryana, AIR 1979 SC 1149

• Dwarka Nath v. Municipal Corporation of Delhi, AIR 1971 SC 1844
• V. Sudeer v. Bar Council of India, AIR 1999 SC 1167
• Harla v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1951 SC 467
• Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. v. Municipal Board, Rampur, AIR 1965 SC 895
• *Govindlal Patel v. The Agricultural Produce Market, AIR 1976 SC 263
• Banwarilal v. State of Bihar, AIR 1961 SC 849
• Naraindas v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1974 SC 1232
• *Pankaj Jain v. Union of India, AIR 1995 SC 360 & CCE v. New Tobacco Co. (1998)8

10
 SCC 250 (Read Together)

Retrospective Application:

• State of Madhya Pradesh v. Tikamdas AIR 1975 SC 1429

• B. S. Yadav v. State of Haryana, AIR 1981 SC 561
• A. V. Nachane v. Union of India AIR 1982 SC 1126
• Miss Raj Soni v. Air Officer In-Charge AIR 1990 SC 1305
• *Union of India v. V. D. Dubey, AIR 2010 SC 425

Unconstitutionality:

• Air India v. Nargesh Meerza AIR 1981 SC 1829

• Chintaman Rao v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1951 SC 118
• *M/S Dwarka Prasad v. State of UP AIR 1954 SC 224
• *Himmat Lal v. Commissioner of Police AIR 1973 SC 87
• *Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Kerala AIR 1987 SC 748

Administrative Directions:

• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter 7
(sub chapters 1 & 3)
• Kumari Regina v. St. AHF School AIR 1971 SC 1920
• K. M. Shanmugham v. SRVS AIR 1963 SC 1626
• Union of India v. K. P. Joseph AIR 1973 SC 303
• B. S. Minhas v. Indian Statistical Institute AIR 1984 SC 363
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Chandra Mohan AIR 1977 SC 2411

Recommended readings:

• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter 4
• C.K. Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, EBC, 4th edn: Chapter V

Week 7-8: Review of Administrative Action & Administrative Discretion

Essential readings:

Discretion:

• Hukum Chand v. Union of India AIR 1975 SC 789

• Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar AIR 1976 SC
• Asha Devi v. Shiv Raj (1979) 1 SCC 222

11
 • Commissioner of Police v. Govardhandas Bhanji AIR 1952 SC 16
• Kesavan Bhaskaran v. State of Kerala AIR 1961 SC 23
Recommended Readings:
• Craig PP, Administrative Law (6th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2008): Chapter 18 &19

Standard of Review:

• Craig PP, Administrative Law (6th edition, Sweet & Maxwell 2008): Chapter 21
• Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948) 1 KB 223
• Om Kumar v. UOI 2000 (7) SCALE 524
• Khosla M, ‘Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights? A Reply’ (2010) 8
International Journal of Constitutional Law 298
• Tsakyrakis S, ‘Proportionality: An Assault on Human Rights?’ (2009) 7 International
Journal of Constitutional Law 468

Week 9-12: Principles of Natural Justice

Essential readings:
Classification of Executive Actions:
• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter 2
• C.K. Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, EBC, 4th edn: Chapter III
• *Indian National Congress v. Institute of Social Workers (2002) 5 SCC 685
Fair Hearing & Exceptions:

• S. P. Sathe, Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 7th edn: Chapter 5

• Paul Craig, Administrative Law, Sweet & Maxwell, 7th edn: Part 1(Chapter 12)
• State of Orissa v. Dr. Binapani, AIR 1967 SC 1269
• G. Kondala Rao v. Registrar, Shri Venkateswara University, AIR 1995 AP 338
• Suresh Koshy v. University of Kerala, AIR 1969 SC 198
• *Managing Director, ECL v. B. Karunakar, AIR 1994 SC 1074
• Ravi S Nayak v. Union of India, AIR 1994 SC 1558
• State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Bakshi Gulam Muhammad, AIR 1967 SC 122
• Hira Nath Mishra v. Rajendra Medical College, AIR 1973SC 1260
• J. K. Agarwal v. Haryana Seeds Development Corporation, (1991) 2 SCC 283
• S. N. Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248 (restrict yourselves only to the law
on post-decisional hearing)
• *Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. Union of India, (1981) 1 SCC 664
• K. I. Shepherd v. Union of India, (1987) 4 SCC 431
• Canara Bank v. V. K. Awasthy, (2005) 6 SCC 321
• Charanlal Sahu v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 148

12
 • Bihar School Education Board v. Subhash Chandra, AIR 1970 SC 1269
• *Maharashtra S.B.O.S. v. Paritosh AIR 1984 SC 1548

Rule against Bias:

• Paul Craig, Administrative Law, Sweet & Maxwell, 7th edn: Chapter 14
• A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 150
• Mohapatra and Co v State of Orissa AIR 1984 SC 1572
• D. K. Khanna v. Union of India AIR 1973 HP 30
• Maneklal v. Premchand AIR 1957 SC 425
• Mineral Development limited v. State of Bihar AIR 1960 SC 468
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Mohammad Nooh AIR 1958 SC 86
• Partha Sarathy v. State of Andhra Pradesh AIR 1973 SC 2701
• Ashok Kumar Yadav v. State of Haryana, AIR 1987 SC 454.
• *G.N. Nayak v. Goa University, AIR 2002 SC 790
• Gullapalli Nageswara Rao cases I (only the parts of the judgment that relate to bias): AIR
1959 SC 308
• Gullapalli Nageswara Rao case II AIR 1959 SC 1376
• Tata Cellular v. Union of India AIR 1996 SC 30
• Election Commission v. Dr. Subramanian Swamy AIR 1996 SC 1810

Week 13: Legitimate Expectations and Promissory Estoppel

Essential readings:
• M. P. Jain & S. N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, LexisNexis, 6th edn: Chapter
22
• Paul Craig, Administrative Law, Sweet & Maxwell, 7th edn: Chapter 22
• M/S Motilal Padampat Sugar Mills v. State of U. P. AIR 1979 SC 621
• *M. R. F. Ltd., Kottayam Ltd. Assistant Commissioner Sales Tax (2006) 8 SCC 702
• Navjyoti Co-Operative Housing Society v. Union of India AIR 1993 SC 155
• Punjab Communications Ltd. v. Union of India (1999) 2 SCR 1033

Recommended readings:

• P. Sales and K. Steyn, ‘Legitimate Expectations in English Public Law: An Analysis’

[2004] PL 564, 569.
• Y. Dotan, ‘Why Administrators should be Bound by their Policies’ (1977) 17 OJLS 2
• Chandrachud, The Fictitious doctrine of substantive Legitimate expectations in India
available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2738799

Week 14: Administrative Adjudication:

• L Chandra Kumar [(1997) 3 SCC 261

13
 • Madras Bar Association v. Union of India http://indiankanoon.org/doc/181443842/
• Asimow M, ‘Five Models of Administrative Adjudication’ (Social Science Research
Network 2014) SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 2502210
<http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2502210> accessed 3 December 2015
• Alok Kumar and Faiza Rahman, Halting Tribunalisation, Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy.
• Reforming Tribunal System: An Interim report, Vidhi centre for Legal Policy.
• Law commission report 215

Week 15: Audit Systems

Comptroller and Auditor General; CVC; and CBI

• SK Das, Institutions of Internal Accountability in Kapur D and Mehta PB, Public
Institutions in India: Performance and Design (Oxford 2007) p. 128-156
• Centre for PIL vs. Union of India 2011 http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/310431/
Lok Pal and Lokayuktas
• The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013
• Sushant Chandra, Indian Lokpal (Ombudsman) Act: A Prototype of law devoid of
‘Political Will’ Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2446788
Right to Information

• Amended RTI v. Participatory Democracy: EPW editorial Vol. 54, Issue No. 30, 27 Jul,
2019
• Tremor of Unwelcome Amendments:https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/the-tremor-
of-unwelcome-amendments/article28628537.ece
• The RTI Story” by Nikhil Dey and Aruna Roy (selected chapters).

14