The abuse of administrative discretion

Discretion in layman’s dialect implies choosing from among the different available choices
without reference to any foreordained degree, no matter how unconventional that choice may
be. A person composing his will has such caution to organize his property in any way, no
matter how subjective or unusual it may be. But the term ‘discretion’ when qualified by the
word ‘administrative’ has diverse clues. ‘Discretion’ in this sense implies choosing from
among the different accessible choices but concerning the rules of reason and equity and not
concurring to individual impulses. Such work out is not to be arbitrary, hazy, and unusual,
but lawful and standard.

The misusing of administrative propriety takes a few shapes, for occurrence, acting on mala
fide grounds, neglecting related considerations, and acting on unessential ones, making
choices without powerful material, and misconstruing the control allowed by law. In fact,
though the courts have set up those obstacles in these choices is permitted on certain grounds,
it still respects the method of choice making that the authorities appreciate within. Because it
was check courts force is that way of making the choice reasonable. This tool was associated
to the case of Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India where an armed force official was court-
martialled in response to a minor rashness committed by him. He challenged the order within
the Supreme Court and quashed it communicating that the run the show of proportionality
asked that the teach given incorporates a nexus with the act committed and is corresponding
to the same. The court defended its impedances on the ground that the choice in question was
horribly India has formulated a parameter for the exercise of discretion, the concept of
judicial behaviour still halting, variegated, and lacks the activism of the American courts.
Judicial control of administrative discretion is exercised at two stages:

1. The administrative authority ceased to function the authority vested in it.

2. The authorities exercised discretion incorrectly with mala side, improper.

Abuse of discretion– The definition has been developed by courts in India to control the work
out of discretion by the administrative authority. Improper work out of discretion includes
such things as mala fide, improper reason, unessential or significant considerations, no
material, misdirection of law and fact, unreasonableness.
1.Mala Fide: - It means with bad intention, not in good faith. In the procedure of decision-
making, mala fide is allowed. Malice may be either a fact or the law. The case that motives
behind an administrative action are personal animosity, spite, personal benefit to the authority
itself or friends.

Major case law that implied was G. Sadanadan v State of Kerala,” The DSP (Civil Supplies
Cell) passed a detention order against those kerosene dealers who will operate without a
license and dealing in kerosene illegally. It was alleged that DSP was acting mala fide
because his brother was a competitor in the same business. The DSP did not file a counter
declaration of facts in court against his charges. The court quashed the action.”

2.Improper Purpose: - The statutes confer power for one reason, which is utilized for
different purposes and will not be respected as a valid exercise of powers that will be
suppressed. In present-day times, the cases have been expanded since the conferment of
broad discretion power has gotten to be a normal tendency.

Conclusion

The freedom given to administrative authorities to decide matters, using their best judgment
countered with the overarching judicial control is a sign of the balance maintained in Indian
jurisprudence. This balance makes all the difference: on the one side lies unfettered power
and on the other, judicial supremacy. The middle ground is the best place to be.
REFRENCES: -

1.Administrative law synopsis - copy.docx - title of the project. Sadananda v. state of kerala
air 1966 SC 1925 Objective Administrative Law has: Course hero. administrative law
synopsis - Copy.docx - TITLE OF THE PROJECTG.SADANANDAN V. STATE OF
KERALA AIR 1966 SC 1925 OBJECTIVE Administrative Law has | Course Hero. (n.d.).
Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.coursehero.com/file/72951885/administrative-law-
synopsis-Copydocx/

2. Teacher, Law. (November 2013). The Abuse of Administrative Discretion. Retrieved from
https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/the-abuse-of-administrative-
discretion-administrative-law-essay.php?vref=1

3.Keroche Industries Ltd v Kenya revenue authority and others that legitimate: Course hero.
Keroche Industries Ltd v Kenya Revenue Authority and others that Legitimate | Course Hero.
(n.d.). Retrieved May 3, 2022, from https://www.coursehero.com/file/p21ubap/The-High-
Court-of-Kenya-has-summarized-the-justification-underlying-the/

4.Abuse of Administrative Discretion| Lex peeps, https://lexpeeps.in/abuse-of-administrative-

discretion/.