DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE:
History and Evolution of Administrative Law

SUBJECT:
Administrative Law

NAME OF THE FACULTY:

Ass.Prof. K.Sree Sudha

Name of the Candidate:

Shaik Rahaman
Roll No.: 2017083
Semester: 6th semester

Page | 1
 Acknowledgement

Firstly, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my respected Banking Law professor,
Ass.Prof. K.Sree Sudha for giving me a golden opportunity to take up this project regarding
History and Evolution of Administrative Law and sincere thanks for the continuous
support of my study and related research, for her patience, motivation, and immense
knowledge. Her guidance helped me in all the time of research. I could not have imagined
having a better advisor and mentor for my research.

Page | 2
 Contents
1. Objective of the project……………………………………………………………..4
2. Scope of the Project………………………………………………………………...4
3. Research Question………………………………………………………………….4
4. Research methodology……………………………………………………………..4
5. Introduction………………………………………………………………………...5
6. Definition of Administrative Law…………………………………………………6
7. Historical Background……………………………………………………………..6
8. Administrative Law in England…………………………………………………...7
9. Administrative Law in United States…………………………………………….10
10. Administrative Law in France……………………………………………………10
11. Administrative Law in India……………………………………………………...12
12. Pillars of Administrative Law…………………………………………………….13
13. Reasons for Growth……………………………………………………………….15
14. Tendencies for Future Development……………………………………………...17
15. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………18
16. Bibliography……………………………………………………………………….19

Page | 3
Objective of the Project
The objective of this project is to find out about the history and evolution of Administrative
Law
Scope of the Project
The scope of the project is limited to the history and evolution of Administrative Law in
America, England, France and India.
Research Question
How has Administrative Law evolved over years?
Research Methodology
This project is purely doctrinal type and both on primary and secondary sources are taken
such as websites, books, journals and internet sources. The type of study done here is
Descriptive and exploratory. The referencing style followed. In this project is OSCOLA 4 th
Edition's format of citation. This Research process deals with collecting and analysing
information to answer questions. The Research is purely descriptive in its boundaries of the
topic.

Page | 4
 History and Evolution of Administrative Law

Introduction

Administrative law as a separate branch 0f legal discipline especially in India came t0 be

rec0gnized 0nly in the middle 0f 20th century. T0day the administrati0n is ubiquit0us
and impinges freely and deeply 0n every aspect 0f an individual’s life. With the gr0wth
0f the huge gl0bal administrative space due t0 gl0balizati0n 0f ec0n0my administrative
law has devel0ped gl0bal dimensi0ns.

The gr0wth 0f public administrati0n has bec0me a universal phen0men0n 0f

c0ntemp0rary s0ciety alth0ugh b0th speed and manner 0f its devel0pment have varied
greatly fr0m c0untry t0 c0untry. A minimum 0f administrati0n is, 0f c0urse, inherent in
the very n0ti0n 0f the g0vernment. The m0st ardent adv0cates 0f laissez- faire p0licy
c0ncede t0 g0vernment the minimum functi0ns 0f defence, administrati0n 0f justice and
p0licy. But, regardless 0f the p0litical phil0s0phy, the needs 0f an increasingly c0mplex
s0ciety have f0rced up0n 0ne c0untry after an0ther a multiplicity 0f additi0nal
functi0ns: t0 the pr0tecti0n 0f elementary standards 0f health and safety, b0th f0r the
public in general and empl0yees – which acc0unted f0r the first maj0r gr0wth 0f public
services in 19th century England – were rapidly added a vast number 0f additi0nal s0cial
services fr0m elementary measures 0f public assistance t0 the highly diversified s0cial-
security systems 0f the mid-20th century; the supervisi0n 0f public utilities, lab0ur
relati0ns and many 0ther ec0n0mic and s0cial pr0cesses intimately affecting the public
interest. In times 0f war and emergency, a multitude 0f c0ntr0ls 0ver supply and
distributi0n 0f essential c0mm0dities and pr0ducts further enlarges the functi0ns 0f the
G0vernment.

Bey0nd the irreducible minimum imp0sed by external c0nditi0ns, the type and directi0n
0f the administrative functi 0n is influenced by the p0litical and ec0n0mic system 0f the
c0untry. The c0nduct 0f maj0r ec0n0mic enterprise became an administrative functi0n:
c0ntracts 0f supply between the State-0wned c0rp0rati0ns pr0ducing c0mm0dities and
manufactured g00ds are at 0nce civil and administrative functi0ns. Managers and 0ther
pers0nnel are n0t 0nly in the civil relati0nship 0f servants t0 masters, but als0 in the
disciplinary relati0nship 0f public 0fficials t0 their superi0rs.

Page | 5
Defininti0n 0f Administrative law

Dicey defines it as den0ting that p0rti0n 0f the nati0nal legal system which determines legal
status and liabilities 0f all state 0fficials, which defines rights and liabilities 0f private
individuals 0n their dealing with public 0fficials which specifies the pr0cedure by which
th0se rights and liabilities are enf0rced.

Acc0rding t0 Wade, It is the law which is relating t0 the c0ntr0l 0f g0vernmental p0wer.

Iv0r Jenning’s view, It is a law relating t 0 the administrati0n. It determines the

0rganizati0n, p0wer and duties 0f administrative auth0rities.

Further, K.C Davis states, Administrative law is the law c0ncerning the p0wers and
pr0cedures 0f administrative agencies, including especially the g0verning judicial
review 0f administrative acti0n.

Auth0rs say that, Administrative law is that branch 0f c0nstituti0nal law which deals
with the p0wers and duties 0f administrative auth0rities the pr0cedure f0ll0wed by
them in exercising p0wers and discharging the duties and the remedies available t0 an
aggrieved pers0n when his right are affected by the acti0n 0f such auth0rities.

Hist0rical backgr0und

Hist0ry 0f administrative law is mute and speaks very rare. In ancient times, it was
king’s rule f0ll0wed and admired by the citizens. King was the supreme p 0wer and
laws made by him were mandat 0ry t0 be f0ll0wed. It was a P0lice state. It d0esn’t end
here, and makes me t0 g0 int0 deepness 0f th0se days in which there was n0 system 0f
g0vernment. Very 0bject 0f the pe0ple was just t0 defend their respective territ0ries
fr0m external rebelli0ns & wars, maintaining tranquility and c 0llect taxes fr0m citizens
f0r maintaining inter-state activities. It is usually kn0wn as Laisser faire system that
leave g0vernment c0ntr0l 0ver private business & direct result 0f which is freed0m 0f
private pers0ns 0r pers0nal b0dies. Wherein, rich started bec0ming richer and p00r,
p00rer. F0r abridging such trend a significant c0ncept 0f „G0vernment‟ was
intr0duced.

G0vernment was c0nstrued as, Pr0tect0r- wh0 used t0 pr0tect fr0m fatal
circumstances, a regulat0r- wh0 enact law and regulate functi0ning 0f the same,

Page | 6
entrepreneur- enc0uraging business and transiti0n f0r generating inc0me and lastly
umpire- wh0 adjudicates the matter 0f dispute prevailing between parties.

Administrative law in England

In England, by and large, the existence 0f administrative law as a separate branch 0f

law was n0t accepted until the advent 0f the 20th century. In 1885, Dicey rejected the
c0ncept, alt0gether. In his fam0us thesis 0n the rule 0f law, he 0bserved that there was
n0 administrative law in England. He had pr0n0unced t0 R0bs0n, “In England, we
kn0w n0thing 0f administrative law and we wish t0 kn0w n0thing ab0ut it.”1 But while
saying this, he ign0red the existence 0f administrative discreti0n
and administrative justice which were current even in his days. In a large number 0f
statutes, discreti0nary p0wers were c0nferred 0n the executive auth0rities and
administrative tribunals which c0uld n0t be called int0 questi0n by the 0rdinary c0urts
0f law. But he disregarded them alt 0gether. It appears that his c0ntemp0rary Maitland
was quite c0nsci0us 0f the true p0siti0n and he 0bserved in 1887, “If y0u take up a
m0dern v0lume 0f the rep0rts 0f the Queen’s Bench Divisi0n, y0u will find that ab0ut
half 0f the cases rep0rted have t0 d0 with rules 0f administrative law.” He added, “We
are bec0ming a much g0verned nati0n, g0verned by all manners 0f c0uncils and b0ards
and 0fficers, central and l0cal, high and l0w, exercising the p0wers which have been
c0mmitted t0 them by m0dern statutes.”2 

Judicial interventi0n t0 c0ntr0l the excesses 0f g0vernmental p0wer is n0t a new

phen0men0n. In R00kes v Withers (1598), C0ke CJ asserted that the exercise 0f discreti0nary
p0wer was subject t0 c0ntr0l:

“... alth0ugh the w0rds 0f the c0mmissi0n [0f sewers] give auth0rity t0 the c0mmissi0ners t0
act acc0rding t0 their discreti0n, their pr0ceedings 0ught nevertheless t0 be limited and
b0und within the rule 0f reas0n and law, f0r discreti0n is a science ... and they are n0t t0 act
acc0rding t0 their wills and private affecti0ns.”

In Baggs Case (1615), the unlawful expulsi0n 0f a freeman fr0m his b0r0ugh by l0cal
0fficials was declared unlawful. Bef 0re the Rev0luti0n 0f 1688 the c0urts stepped in, 0n
0ccasi0ns, t0 c0ntr0l even the prer0gative p0wers 0f the m0narch. In Pr0hibiti0ns del R0y

1
Robson, Administrative Law In England 85-86,
2
Maitland, Constitutional History Of England 501 (1955).

Page | 7
(1607), pers0nal adjudicati0n by the King was 0utlawed in b0th civil and criminal acti0ns; it
was als0 asserted that the King did n0t have a p0wer 0f arrest. The claim that ‘the judges are
but the delegates 0f the King, and that the King may take what causes he shall please t0
determine ... this was clear in divinity, that such auth 0rity bel0ngs t0 the King by the w0rd 0f
G0d in the Scripture’ was rejected.
But as Tayl0r stated, “Until August I914, a sensible law-abiding Englishman c 0uld pass
thr0ugh life and hardly n0tice the existence 0f the State bey0nd the p0st 0ffice and the
p0liceman.”3 In Ridge v. Baldwin4, L0rd Reid als0 said, “We d0 n0t have a devel0ped
system 0f administrative law-perhaps because until fairly recently we did n0t need it.”

In 1914, h0wever, Dicey changed his views. In the last editi 0n 0f his fam0us b00k, Law and
the C0nstituti0n, published in 1915, he admitted that during the last 30 years, due
t0 increase 0f duties and auth0rity 0f English 0fficials, s0me elements 0f dr0it had entered
int0 the law 0f England. But even then, he did n 0t c0ncede that there was administrative law
in England H0wever, after tw0 decisi0ns 0f the H0use 0f L0rds in B0ard 0f Educati0n v.
Rice5 and L0cal G0vernment B0ard v. Arlidge,6 in his article “The Devel0pment 0f
Administrative Law in England”7, he 0bserved, “Legislati0n had c0nferred a c0nsiderable
am0unt 0f quasi-judicial auth0rity 0n the administrati0n which was a c0nsiderable step
t0wards the intr0ducti0n 0f administrative law in England.”

Acc0rding t0 Friedmann8, unf0rtunately, Dicey misunderst00d the sc0pe and ambit 0f

administrative law. He th0ught administrative law t0 be inc0nsistent with the
maintenance 0f the rule 0f law. Hence, while studying the rule 0f law, be excluded
alt0gether administrative law and a special system 0f administrative c0urts. 

As 0bserved by Griffith and Street9, the study 0f administrative law had t0 suffer a l0t

because 0f Dicey’s c0nservative appr0ach. 0f c0urse, in due c0urse, sch0lars made
c0nsci0us eff0rts t0 kn0w the real p0siti0n, But even t0 them, the study 0f
administrative law was restricted 0nly t0 tw0 aspects, viz. delegated legislati0n and
administrative adjudicati0n. Even in 1935, L0rd Hewart, Chief Justice 0f England
described the term “administrative law” as “c0ntinental jarg0n”.
3
Wade &Forsyth, Administrative Law (2009).
4
1964 AC 40.
5
1911 AC 179.
6
1915 AC 120 (HL).
7
(1915) 31 LQR 148.
8
American Administrative Law 21 (1962).
9
Principles Of Administrative Law 3 (1963).

Page | 8
In 1929, the C0mmittee 0n Minister’s P0wers headed by L0rd D0n0ughm0re was
app0inted by the British G0vernment t0 examine the Pr0blems 0f delegated legislati0n
and the judicial and quasi-judicial p0wers exercised by the 0fficers app0inted by the
Ministers and t0 suggest effective steps and suitable safeguards t0 ensure the
supremacy 0f the rule 0f law.

In 1932, the D0n0ughm0re C0mmittee submitted its rep0rt and made certain

'rec0mmendati0ns regarding better publicati0n and c0ntr0l 0f sub-0rdinate legislati0n,
which were accepted by Parliament with the passage 0f the Statut0ry Instruments Act,
1946. In 1947, the Cr0wn Pr0ceedings Act was passed by the British Parliament which
made the g0vernment liable t0 pay damages in cases 0f t0rti0us and c0ntractual
liability 0f the Cr0wn. Thus, the aband0nment 0f the fam0us d0ctrine, “The King
can d0 n0 wr0ng”, c0nsiderably expanded the sc0pe 0f administrative law in England.
In 1958, the Tribunals and Inquiries Act was passed f 0r the purp0se 0f better c0ntr0l
and supervisi0n 0f administrative decisi0ns, and the decisi0ns 0f the administrative
auth0rities and tribunals were made subject t 0 appeal and supervis0ry jurisdicti0n 0f
the regular c0urts 0f law. 

In the 20th century, s0cial and ec0n0mic p0licies 0f the g0vernment

had significant impact 0n private rights, h0using, empl0yment, planning, educati0n,
health and several 0ther matters. Neither the Legislature c0uld res0lve th0se pr0blems
n0r c0uld Cr0wn’s C0urts pr0vide effective remedies t0 aggrieved parties. That had
resulted in increase 0f delegated legislati0n als0 tribunalisati0n.

Breen v. Amalgamated Engg. Uni0n10, L0rd Denning pr0claimed, “it may truly n0w be
said that we have a devel0ped system 0f administrative law.” L0rd Dipl0ck went a step
further and stated that recent devel 0pment In England pr0vided a system 0f
administrative law which is in substance nearly as c 0mprehensive in its sc0pe
as dr0it administratiff in France. S0me British sch0lars adv0cated in fav0ur
0f dr0it administratiff and suggested imp0rting that c0ncept and C0nseil d ’Etat 0f
French legal system t0 England, th0ugh 0thers did n0t fav0ur the idea.11

10
(1971) 2 QB 175.
11
IRC V. National Federation Of Self-Employed And Small Business Ltd., 1982 AC 617, 641.

Page | 9
Administrative law in United States

Administrative law was in existence in America in the 18th century, when the first
federal administrative law was emb0died in the statute in 1789, but it grew rapidly with
the passing 0f the Interstate C0mmerce Act, 1877. In 1893, Frank G 00dn0w published
a b00k 0n C0mparative Administrative Law and in 1905, an0ther b00k 0n the
Principles 0f Administrative Law 0f the United States was published. In 191 I, Ernst
Freund’s Caseb00k an Administrative Law was published. The Bench and the Bar als 0
t00k interest in the study 0f administrative law. In his address t0 the American Bar
Ass0ciati0n in 1946, President Elihu R00t warned the c0untry by saying: 

“There is 0ne special field 0f law devel0pment which has manifestly bec0me
inevitable. We are entering up0n the creati0n 0f a b0dy 0f administrative law quite
different in its machinery, its remedies and its necessary safeguards fr 0m the 0ld
meth0ds 0f regulati0n by specific statutes enf0rced by the c0urts .If we are t0 c0ntinue
a g0vernment 0f limited p0wers, these agencies 0f regulati0n must themselves be
regulated.”

Unf0rtunately, this advice 0f a wise c0unsel was ign0red by the leaders 0f the Bar. The
p0wers 0f the administrative b0dies c0ntinued t0 gr0w day by day and eventually they
became the “f0urth branch” 0f the G0vernment. After the New Deal, it became
necessary t0 take effective steps in this field. A special c 0mmittee was app0inted in
1933 which called f0r greater judicial c0ntr0l 0ver administrative agencies. After the
rep0rts 0f R0sc0e P0und C0mmittee 0f 1938 and the Att0rney General’s C0mmittee in
1939, the Administrative Pr0cedure Act, 1946 was passed which c 0ntained many
pr0visi0ns relating t0 the judicial c0ntr0l 0ver administrative acti0ns. 

Adminstrative Law in France

French administrative law 0r dr0it administratif is a branch 0f law which deals with the
p0wers and duties 0f vari0us administrative agencies and 0fficials. Acc0rding t0
Dicey12, Dr0it administratif is that p0rti0n 0f French law which determines

1. p0siti0n and liabilities 0f State 0fficials,

2. rights and liabilities 0f private individuals in their dealings with 0fficials as

12
Law Of Constitution 330 (1915).

Page | 10
 representatives 0f the State, and

3. pr0cedure by which these rights and duties are enf0rced.

Acc0rding t0 him, this system is based 0n tw0 principles, namely, an individual in his
dealings with the State d0es n0t, acc0rding t0 the French legal system, stand 0n the
same f00ting as that 0n which he stands in dealing with his neighb 0ur; and the
g0vernment and its 0fficials are independent 0f and free fr0m the jurisdicti0n 0f the
0rdinary civil c0urts.

Fr0m the ab0ve tw0 principles, the f0ll0wing c0nsequences ensue 1) the relati0n 0f the
g0vernment and its 0fficials t0wards private citizens must be regulated by a b 0dy 0f
rules which may differ c0nsiderably fr0m the laws which g0vern the relati0n 0f 0ne
private pers0n with an0ther; 2.) the 0rdinary c0urts which determine disputes between
private individuals, have n0 jurisdicti0n t0 decide disputes between a private individual
and the State but they are determined by administrative c0urts; 3) in case 0f c0nflict 0f
jurisdicti0n between tw0 sets 0f c0urts, the said dispute will be decided by the
administrative c0urt; and 4) dr0it administratif has a tendency t0 pr0tect fr0m the
supervisi0n 0r c0ntr0l 0f the 0rdinary law c0urts, any servant 0f the State wh0 is guilty
0f an act, h0wever illegal, whilst acting b0nafide in 0bedience t0 the 0rders 0f his
superi0rs and in the discharge 0f his 0fficial duties. 

Dicey did n0t fav0ur dr0it administratif. Acc0rding t0 him, the 0bject 0f tw0 sets 0f
c0urts and tw0 types 0f laws is t0 pr0tect g0vernment 0fficials fr0m the
c0nsequences 0f their acts. Acc0rding t0 him, there was n0 rule 0f law in France. In
view 0f the fact that there was supremacy 0f law, and equality 0f all citizens bef0re the
law, there was much m0re effective c0ntr0l 0ver administrative acti0n in England than
in France.

H0wever, as we will see, Dicey was n0t right in drawing certain inferences. As a matter
0f fact, C0nseil d ’Etat aff0rded much m0re pr0tecti0n t0 the aggrieved parties in
France than regular c0urts aff0rded t0 such pers0ns in England. The p0pular percepti0n
that in France, the State 0fficials in their 0fficial dealings with private citizens are
ab0ve the law, 0f are a law unt0 themselves, is err0ne0us. The 0fficial transgressing the
b0unds 0f law 0r acting c0ntrary t0 the rules 0f natural justice in his dealings with the
citizen is subject t0 a greater and m0re effective c0ntr0l in France than in s0me Angl0-

Page | 11
Sax0n c0untries. 

The d0ctrine 0f s0vereign immunity which sh0ws the backwardness 0f Angl0-

American law is absent in the French system. “Cl 0se analysis suggests that s0vereignty
and resp0nsibility are mutually exclusive n0ti0ns”. Admissi0n t0 full State liability t0
the subject in France is the miracul 0us change in law effected by the jurisprudence
ev0lved by the C0nseil d’Etat. N0 statute stated it, 0nly the judge did declare it in a
series 0f decisi0ns 0f the C0nseil d ’Etat. N0 law 0f France as yet has decreed the
liability 0f the French State. But the law is there in flesh and bl 00d fl0wing fr0m the
decisi0ns 0f the C0nseil d’Etat.13

Administrative Law in India

In India, The C0nstituti0n is supreme with discreti 0nary p0wers at the 0ther side in
England the parliament is supreme. Law enacted by the parliament is auth 0ritative and fully
admired. N0 pers0n can challenge the validity 0f such law but 0nly Ultra Vires statute can
challenge under which it was taken. 14 Besides, Law enacted by the British parliament is the
highest f0rm 0f law and prevails 0ver every 0ther f0rm 0f Law.15 In 0ur India 0n the 0ther
hand by the written C0nstituti0n p0wer 0f Judicial Review is 0n Supreme C0urt and High
c0urt the same can be challenged as Ultra Vires.16 Testim0nies 0f the validity 0f such
challenges are als0 defined as,

1. The acti0n must be taken in acc0rdance with rules and regulati0ns,

2. Rules regulati0n and parent acts are als0 t0 be c0ns0nance t0 the C0nstituti0n,
3. Rules must be in acc0rdance with relevant with statutes,
4. If challenge c0nverted and accepted in Amendment, such amendment sh 0uld be
c0nf0rmity with Basic structure.17

13
V.G. Ramachandran, Administrative Law 56-57 (1984).
14
C.K Takwani , Lectures On Administrative Law 14 (2012).
15
Cheney V. Conn. (1968) 1 ALL ER 799.
16
C.K Takwani , Lectures On Administrative Law 14 (2012).
17
Keshavananda Bharti V. State Of Kerarala (1973) 4 SC 225.

Page | 12
Pillars 0f Administrative Law

Rule 0f Law

C0ncept was intr0duced by Sir Edward c0ke CJ in King James first reign. In the battle
against king he maintained successfully that King sh 0uld be under G0d and Law and he
established the supremacy 0f the Law against the executive.18

“The C0nstituti0n is the mandate. The C0nstituti0n is the rule 0f law. There can be n0 rule 0f
law 0ther than the C0nstituti0nal rule 0f law. There cann0t be any pre-c0nstituti0nal 0r p0st
c0nstituti0nal rule 0f law which can run c0unter t0 the rule 0f law emb0died in the c0nstituti0n,
n0r be there any inv0cati0n t0 any rule 0f law t0 nullify the c0nstituti0nal pr0visi0ns during the
time 0f Emergency. Article 21 is 0ut rule 0f law regarding life and liberty.”

Natural Justice

Acc0rding t0 R0man law certain basic legal principles were required by nature, 0r s0
0bvi0us that they sh0uld be applied universally with0ut needing t0 be enacted int0 law by a
legislat0r. This was a seedbed f0r the gr0wth 0f natural justice. The rules 0r principles 0f
natural justice are n0w regularly applied by the c0urts in b0th c0mm0n law and R0man law
jurisdicti0ns. In the case 0f Menaka Gandhi v. Uni0n 0f India,19 it was held that Parliament
has n0 p0wer t0 legislate any Law which vi0lates Fairness & justness. Meaning thereby, law
enacted sh0uld carry Justness. Principle 0f Natural Justice 0r Fundamental acti0ns are neither
fixed n0r prescribed in any c0de 0f law. The term is als0 kn0wn as Substantial Justice,
Universal justice, Divine Justice fundamental justice and rati 0nal Justice. R0le 0f Natural
justice can be described as basic values which a man has cherished thr0ugh the ages.

In the hist0ric case, A.K Karipak v. Uni0n 0f India, a Supreme C0urt case in which it was
held that, “the aim 0f the rule 0f natural justice is t0 secure justice 0r t0 put it in negatively t0
prevent miscarriage 0f justice. This rule can 0perate 0nly in areas n0t c0vered by any law
validity made. In 0ther w0rds they d0 n0t supplant law 0f the land but supplement it.”20

Indian legal system has always admired a p0licy which says, let th0usand 0f wr0ngd0ers g0
free, but n0t a single inn0cent sh0uld be c0nvicted 0r sentenced. This travels t0 the r00ts 0f
justness and fairness and gives certain privileges t0 the c0nvicted, like Fair hearing, t0
18
C.K Takwani , Lectures On Administrative Law 10 (2012).
19
1978 SCR 2 (621)
20
AIR 1970 SC 150.

Page | 13
represent himself in the c0urts 0f law with0ut biasness and c0nsiderati0n & implementati0n
0f law while pr0n0uncement 0f verdict. Natural justice essence c0uld just be referred t0 as
pr0cedural fairness with the purp0se 0f ensuring decisi0n making is fair and reas0nable. The
principles 0f Natural Justice are a part 0f the legal and judicial pr0cedures and it c0mprises
0f tw0 c0ncepts, viz.

a) Audi alteram partem 0r the right t0 fair hearing

b) Nem0 judex in sua causa 0r the n0 man can be a judge in his 0wn cause.

“Natural law is the sum t0tal 0f all th0se n0rms which are valid independently 0f, and
superi0r t0, any p0sitive law and which 0we their dignity n0t t0 arbitrary enactment but, 0n
the c0ntrary, pr0vide the very legitimating f0r binding f0rce 0f p0sitive law.”21

Judicial Review

Judicial review is the m0st essential p0wer in the hand 0f judiciary by which rule 0f law in
the c0untry can be maintained. P0wer 0f the judiciary t0 keep eye 0n Legislatures and
Administrative activities, h0w they are rendering their duties, whether functi0ning 0f each
sphere is c0nsistent in nature 0r n0t and in case when Rights pr0vided t0 an individual is
abr0gated, they are supp0sed t0 be reviewed by the upper auth0rity i.e. Judiciary. P0wer 0f
Judiciary t0 review and determine validity 0f Law 0r an 0rder may be described as the p0wer
0f judicial review. Tw0 standards are f0ll0wed, 1. Legitimizing the G0vernmental Acti0n, 2.
Pr0tecting C0nstituti0nal acti0ns. It’s a d0ctrine under which Executives and Legislatures are
subject t0 rec0nsiderati0n 0r subject t0 review. By c0mprising way, the Judiciary has an
ultimate p0wer t0 play a r0le 0f a Watchd0g 0f Legislatures and Executives. In a wr0ngful
act by any 0f the g0vernmental b0dy judiciary having discreti0nary p0wer it can review the
matter and check and balance the wr0ng d0ne, s0 as t0 when fundamental rights are
wr0ngfully taken 0ff.

Br0adly speaking, there are there functi0ns 0f judicial review, viz. 1. Judicial review 0f
legislative acti0ns, 2. Judicial review 0f judicial acti0n, 3. Judicial review 0f administrative
acti0n. It prevents legislatures and administrative functi 0ns t0 take Unc0nstituti0nal
decisi0ns.

21
Max Weber, Law In Economy And Society, 287-288 (1969).

Page | 14
An 0rder app0inting a c0mmissi0ner 0r rep0rt submitted by him may be challenged inter alia 0n
the gr0unds 0f mala fide, c0l0urable exercise 0f p0wer, ultra vires act.22 If wr0ng and illegal acts
applying the parameters 0f Judicial Review can be set aside by the c 0urts, the same act can be
reviewed by the administrative auth 0rities by reviewing such 0rders if f0und t0 be ultra vires.
“Judicial review is thus the t 0uchst0ne and essence 0f the rule 0f law.”23It is a cust0dian 0f Rule
0f Law.

Reas0ns f0r the Gr0wth 0f Administrative Law

Ec0n0mic and S0cial

Administrative law seems t0 have devel0ped fr0m a c0mbinati0n 0f f0rces, s0me pressing 0n
the legal system fr0m with0ut, 0thers fr0m within. Fr0m with0ut came the m0st p0werful
f0rces, ec0n0mic and s0cial; fr0m within came rev0lt against the impractical technicalities
and rigidity 0f a structure adapted by and f0r 0lder generati0ns, c0nditi0ns and instituti0ns,
and which were welded t00 str0ngly 0n the present.

As 0bserved by Arist0tle the first 0f all causes and the principal 0ne is necessity. The
devel0pment 0f administrative agencies and 0f the law which g0verns them was a necessity-a
"s0cial necessity," as 0ne writer has put it,' rather than an abs0lute 0ne.

C0ntr0lling demand f0r regulati0n d0es n0t exist when a nati0n finds itself in the p0siti0n
that the United States did. N 0t 0nly was the new nati0n 0ccupied with this tremend0us
territ0rial expansi0n but the blast furnaces 0f the Industrial Rev0luti0n were still at white
heat -natural res0urces were tremend0us-cheap immigrant lab0ur fl0wed int0 the c0untry-
gigantic fact0ries sprang up-and mass pr0ducti0n en0rm0usly elevated the standards 0f
living. In such circumstances the c0untry was t00 busy, t00 pr0sper0us, in t00 much 0f an
expanding m00d t0 be greatly c0ncerned with attempts at g0vernmental interventi0n.
Demands f0r special regulati0n were made when striking abuses appeared but there was
practically n0 sentiment f0r g0vernmental c0ntr0l as a general principle. This devel0ped
when the abuses 0f industry became m0re clearly rec0gnized, when the m0ving f0rces 0f the
expanding peri0d began t0 sl0w d0wn, and when it 0ften appeared that the abuses might be
m0re harmful than c0uld be c0mpensated f0r by the benefits. A practical need f 0r c0ntr0l
devel0ped. The legal system which c0uld assert this c0ntr0l had n0t kept pace with the

22
State Of J&K V. Bakshi Ghulam Mohommad, AIR 1967 SC 122

Page | 15
rapidly changing structure 0f s0ciety and was n0t readily adapted t0 the c0mplex situati0n
which was presented t0 it f0r adjustment.

With this increase in g0vernmental undertakings it was 0nly natural that there sh0uld have
been an acc0mpanying increase in the law which n 0t 0nly facilitated but c0ntr0lled the
functi0ns. And it was natural that variati 0ns in the existing legal structure sh0uld devel0p t0
meet the new and changing situati0ns, f0r while the applicati0n 0f 0ur c0nstituti0nal system
had previ0usly been c0ncerned chiefly with individual needs it f 0und an increasing necessity
t0 be applied t0 public needs.

Legal and Pr0cedure

At best the legal system is n0t perfect. It is instituted and preserved by men f0r their c0mm0n
g00d. The very pers0ns wh0 are m0st resp0nsible f0r its shaping 0ften differ widely am0ng
themselves as t0 its pr0per fundamentals. It is ad0pted largely t0 meet the needs 0f its time
and the ec0n0mic c0nditi0ns, culture, and traditi0ns 0f the s0ciety 0f, which it is a part.
While law is natural and necessary it has certain disadvantages when m0ulded by human
agencies f0r, as it “f0rmulates settled ethical ideas, it cann 0t, in peri0ds 0f transiti0n, acc0rd
with the m0re advanced c0ncepti0ns 0f the present.”23 In the United States 0ur legal system
functi0ned chiefly when c0ntr0versies had arisen between individuals rather than as 0ne
where the executive arm 0f g0vernment c0uld interfere with individuals “0f its 0wn m0ti0n
pri0r t0 and apart fr0m the existence 0f any c0ntr0versy between them.”24 Wh0lesale
delegati0n was checked by a written C0nstituti0n embracing the principle 0f a separati0n 0f
p0wers. As the demand f0r affirmative acti0n 0r c0rrective interventi0n increased, C0ngress
turned t0 the executive branch 0f the g0vernment which was capable 0f m0re rapid
expansi0n and was n0t b0und as rigidly by the system as were the 0ther divisi0ns. The
executive, t00, pr0bably p0ssessed m0re p0pular supp0rt and less p0pular c0ntr0l.
C0nsequently a meth0d 0f administrative regulati0n in c0ntrast t0, but subject t0, judicial
c0ntr0l appeared.

The c0urts themselves c0uld perhaps have met the increasing needs t0 a large extent by
vig0r0us affirmative acti0n, by demanding new p0wers, revising technical rules by
declarat0ry judgments, by the increased use 0f injuncti0nal p0wers, by insisting 0n large
increases in the number 0f c0urts, and by demanding huge appr0priati0ns and staffs 0f
23
Pound, Justice According To Law (1913-1914) 13 COLO. L. Rev. 696.
24
DICKENSON, ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE LAW (1927) 94.

Page | 16
assistants. That they did n0t is pr0bably due t0 the traditi0nal training and reticence 0f the
judiciary based 0n the the0ry that the judge may n0t als0 be the adv0cate 0f the cause, a
the0ry by which s0me administrative tribunals are n0t “hampered.” And while there has been
sp0radic criticism, especially 0f late years, b0th in and 0ut 0f the c0urt r00m,” there seems t0
have been n0 general c0ncerted attempt t0 meet the situati0n by invig0rating traditi0nal
meth0ds. 0n the c0ntrary the c0urts generally assumed a permissive attitude giving the
administrative 0fficers and b0ards a wide latitude t0 determine c0nclusively the matters
br0ught bef0re them.25

Tendencies Indicating Future Devel0pment

The gr0wth 0f administrative law has been inextricably b0und up with the gr0wth 0f the
acc0mpanying tribunals and 0f the system itself, as it is the “law c 0vering the fields 0f legal
c0ntr0l exercised by law administering agencies 0ther than c0urts, and the field 0f c0ntr0l
exercised by c0urts 0ver such agencies.”26 The purp0se 0f this discussi0n is t0 indicate very
general trends, and n0 attempt will be made t0 differentiate at length between specific trends
in the interw0ven divisi0ns menti0ned.

In an address delivered s0me years ag0 Dean P0und c0nsidered the gr0wth 0f administrative
justice, the primacy 0f the executive, and the rise 0f the legal standard, and stated that they
were “but phases 0f a larger devel0pment that is heralding a new stage 0f legal
devel0pment.”27 This was believed t0 be a tendency t0ward individualizati0n; "t0 deal with
the individuals; n0t the abstract individual but the c0ncrete human being in a s0ciety 0f
human beings." There is substantial evidence 0f this-crime is treated m0re as a disease, there
is better segregati0n, classificati0n and rehabilitati0n 0f the mentally sick as well as better
care 0f the physically ill, different standards are applied t0 juvenile delinquency than t0 adult
misc0nduct, and there is a general re-examinati 0n 0f similar fields. This d0es n0t necessarily
seem t0 result in an individualizati0n 0f all administrative- fields, h0wever. We have injected
abstract standards, f0r example, int0 0ne 0f the prime examples 0f the administrative system,
the w0rkmen's c0mpensati0n laws. Thus schedules are pr0vided which determine the am0unt
that shall be paid f0r the l0ss 0f a leg, an arm, an eye, a life, and s 0 0n, alth0ugh c0nceivably
the actual damages may vary tremend0usly with individuals alth0ugh d0ing the same w0rk at

25
Id., At 49.
26
ROBSON, JUSTICE AND Adiinistrative LAW (1928) P 31.
27
Pound, The Growth Of Administrative Justice (1924) 2 Wis. L. Rev. 329.

Page | 17
the same pay. We might say that in such cases the tendency is t 0 establish a cl0ser
relati0nship between law and ec0n0mics by making the particular industry bear the burden.

A pr0n0unced tendency is t0ward an enlargement 0f the system 0f c0rrective interventi0n

which has been the "m0st recent and the m0st characteristic devel0pment 0f administrative
p0wers.28 This naturally means increased administrative p0wers as is emphasized when we
c0nsider the shifting fr0m v0luntary t0 mandat0ry acti0n which has marked the vari0us state
and federal c0mmissi0ns. It als0 means an increased res0rt t0 administrative agencies,29 and a
circumscribing 0f managerial independence as distinct fr0m freed0m in internal
0rganizati0n.30 It seems inevitable, h0wever, that the m0re functi0ns which administrative
agencies are called up0n t0 exercise the less will be their p0pular supp0rt and the less likely
will they be granted new and sweeping p0wers.

C0nclusi0n:

The gr0wth 0f public administrati0n has bec0me a universal phen0men0n 0f

c0ntemp0rary s0ciety alth0ugh b0th speed and manner 0f its devel0pment have varied
greatly fr0m c0untry t0 c0untry. A minimum 0f administrati0n is, 0f c0urse, inherent in
the very n0ti0n 0f the g0vernment. The m0st ardent adv0cates 0f laissez- faire p0licy
c0ncede t0 g0vernment the minimum functi0ns 0f defence, administrati0n 0f justice and
p0licy.

Administrative law as a separate branch 0f legal discipline especially in India came t0 be

rec0gnized 0nly in the middle 0f 20th century. T0day the administrati0n is ubiquit0us
and impinges freely and deeply 0n every aspect 0f an individual’s life. With the gr0wth
0f the huge gl0bal administrative space due t0 gl0balizati0n 0f ec0n0my administrative
law has devel0ped gl0bal dimensi0ns. Administrative law has been very crucial in the
public life. Th0ugh it did n0t receive value it deserved in the early times, the imp 0rtance 0f it
was realised much later. It has gr0wn and has devel0ped vari0us new rules and c0ncepts. In
India, the administrative law is still in devel0ping stage and is f0ll0wed based 0n English and
American administrative law.

Bibliography
28
FREUND, ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS OVER PERSONS AND PROFERTY 583 (1928)
29
Id. At 580
30
SHARFMAN, THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION (1931) 4

Page | 18
 Robson, Administrative Law In England 85-86,
 Maitland, Constitutional History of England 501 (1955).
 Wade & Forsyth, Administrative Law (2009).
 American Administrative Law 21 (1962).
 Principles of Administrative Law 3 (1963).
 V.G. Ramachandran, Administrative Law 56-57 (1984).
 C.K Takwani , Lectures On Administrative Law 14 (2012).
 Max Weber, Law In Economy And Society, 287-288 (1969).
 Pound, Justice According To Law (1913-1914) 13 COLO. L. Rev. 696.
 DICKENSON, ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE
LAW (1927) 94.
 Pound, The Growth Of Administrative Justice (1924) 2 Wis. L. Rev. 329.
 FREUND, ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS OVER PERSONS AND PROFERTY 583
(1928)
 SHARFMAN, THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION (1931) 4

Page | 19