1. Admin Law- nature, scope, reasons for growth.

Administrative law is a branch of law that governs the powers,

procedures, and duties of administrative agencies of the government. It
provides the framework for the exercise of administrative power and
regulates the relationship between the government and its citizens. The
scope of administrative law includes the following areas:

Administrative agencies and their powers: Administrative law defines the

powers and functions of administrative agencies and the limits within
which they can exercise those powers.

Administrative procedures: It sets out the rules and procedures that must
be followed by administrative agencies in making decisions and in
conducting their operations.

Judicial review: It establishes the process by which the decisions of

administrative agencies can be challenged and reviewed by the courts.

Administrative liability: It outlines the legal responsibility of

administrative agencies for their actions and decisions.

Administrative remedies: It provides for remedies that are available to

individuals and organizations that are affected by the actions of
administrative agencies.

There are several reasons for the growth of administrative law in modern
times, including:

The increasing complexity of modern society: As society has become

more complex, the government has had to create more administrative
agencies to deal with the complex issues of modern life.

The growth of the welfare state: The expansion of government programs

to address social problems has led to the creation of more administrative
agencies to administer those programs.

The need for expertise: The government has increasingly relied on

administrative agencies to provide expertise in specialized areas such as
health care, environmental regulation, and financial markets.
The demand for accountability: As administrative agencies have grown in
size and power, there has been a corresponding demand for greater
accountability and transparency in their decision-making processes.

The need for flexibility: Administrative law provides a flexible

framework for the government to adapt to changing circumstances and
respond to emerging issues.

2. Delegated legislation- reasons for growth and restrictions

Delegated legislation refers to laws made by administrative agencies,

rather than by the legislature. These laws can take many forms, such as
regulations, orders, and bylaws. There are several reasons why delegated
legislation has grown in recent times, including:

Expertise: Delegated legislation allows administrative agencies to use

their specialized knowledge and expertise to create laws that are more
targeted and effective.

Efficiency: The legislative process can be slow and cumbersome, while

delegated legislation can be created more quickly and efficiently.

Flexibility: Delegated legislation can be more easily adapted to changing

circumstances, allowing the government to respond more quickly to
emerging issues.

Accountability: Administrative agencies can be held accountable for their

decisions through the process of judicial review, which provides a check
on their powers.

However, delegated legislation is subject to several restrictions,

including:

Limits on agency power: Delegated legislation must be within the scope

of the powers granted to administrative agencies by the legislature.

Procedural requirements: Administrative agencies must follow procedural

requirements, such as providing notice and opportunity for public
comment, before enacting delegated legislation.
Compatibility with higher laws: Delegated legislation must be compatible
with higher laws, such as the constitution, statutes, and international
treaties.

Judicial review: Delegated legislation is subject to review by the courts,

which can strike down laws that are unconstitutional, illegal, or
unreasonable.

Sunset clauses: Some laws may have a sunset clause, which requires the
legislature to reauthorize the delegated legislation after a certain period of
time to ensure that it remains relevant and necessary.

3. Judicial control (ultra vires)

In the context of administrative law, the term "ultra vires" means "beyond
the powers." Judicial control of administrative action focuses on ensuring
that administrative agencies stay within the scope of their powers and do
not act beyond what the law permits them to do.

When an administrative agency exceeds its powers or acts outside the

law, the court can declare the action ultra vires and strike it down. The
principle of ultra vires is essential to maintain the rule of law, prevent the
abuse of power, and uphold the separation of powers between the
legislature, executive, and judiciary.

The courts exercise ultra vires control over administrative action through
the process of judicial review. Judicial review is a legal process that
allows courts to review the decisions of administrative agencies and to
ensure that they are acting within their powers and in compliance with the
law.

Judicial review can take several forms, including:

Review of legality: This involves examining the legality of the

administrative action to determine whether it is consistent with the law.

Review of procedural fairness: This involves examining the procedural

fairness of the administrative action to determine whether the decision-
making process was fair and transparent.
Review of reasonableness: This involves examining the reasonableness of
the administrative action to determine whether it is a reasonable exercise
of the agency's powers.

If the court finds that the administrative action is ultra vires, it can declare
the action null and void, and the agency will be required to take
corrective action. Judicial control of administrative action through ultra
vires review is an essential check on the powers of administrative
agencies, ensuring that they operate within the limits set by law and the
constitution.

4. Natural Justice and 2 principles (fair hearing and rule against bias) and
exceptions

Natural justice is a fundamental principle of administrative law that

requires decision-making processes to be fair, just, and unbiased. It is also
known as procedural fairness and is based on the principles of fair
hearing and the rule against bias.

The two main principles of natural justice are:

The principle of fair hearing: This principle requires that individuals have
the right to be heard before a decision is made that affects their rights,
interests, or legitimate expectations. This means that administrative
agencies must provide notice of the decision to be made and an
opportunity for affected individuals to make representations, present
evidence, and respond to the evidence presented against them.

The rule against bias: This principle requires that decision-makers be

impartial and free from bias or preconceived notions that could affect
their judgment. This means that decision-makers must not have a
personal or financial interest in the outcome of the decision, and they
must not have made prejudicial comments or acted in a way that suggests
that they have already made up their minds about the outcome.

However, there are exceptions to the principles of natural justice. These

include:

Emergency situations: In certain emergency situations, such as natural

disasters or public health emergencies, administrative agencies may need
to act quickly to protect public safety or prevent harm. In these cases, the
usual procedures of natural justice may not be followed, but the decision
must still be reasonable and based on the available evidence.

Legislative intent: In some cases, the legislature may specifically exclude

the application of natural justice principles in the legislation that creates
an administrative agency or confers powers on it. In these cases, the
administrative agency may not be required to follow the usual principles
of natural justice.

Executive privilege: In certain cases, the government may assert

executive privilege to protect national security, diplomatic relations, or
other vital interests. This may limit the application of natural justice
principles, but the government must still act reasonably and
proportionately in asserting this privilege.

Overall, the principles of natural justice are an essential aspect of

administrative law, providing an important safeguard against the abuse of
administrative power and ensuring that decision-making processes are
fair, just, and unbiased.

5. Judicial review of administrative actions and writs (mandumus, haebus

corpus, quo warranto, certiorari)

Judicial review is a process that allows courts to review the decisions of

administrative agencies to ensure that they have acted within the scope of
their powers and in compliance with the law. This process is an essential
check on the power of administrative agencies and ensures that they
operate within the limits set by law and the constitution.

In the context of judicial review, there are four main types of writs that
can be issued by the court. These writs are:

Mandamus: This writ is issued by the court to compel an administrative

agency to perform a specific duty that it is required to perform but has
failed to do so.

Habeas Corpus: This writ is issued by the court to challenge the legality
of a person's detention or imprisonment. It is usually used to protect the
rights of individuals who have been detained without trial or in violation
of their legal rights.
Quo Warranto: This writ is issued by the court to challenge the authority
of an administrative agency or an individual holding a public office. It is
used to determine whether the person or agency has the legal right to hold
the position.

Certiorari: This writ is issued by the court to review the decision of an

administrative agency to ensure that it has acted within its powers and in
compliance with the law. It is used to correct errors of law, jurisdictional
errors, or procedural errors made by the administrative agency.

Overall, these writs are an essential tool for the court in reviewing
administrative actions and ensuring that administrative agencies operate
within the limits set by law and the constitution. They provide a way for
individuals and organizations to challenge the decisions of administrative
agencies and ensure that their rights are protected.

6. Various control over public undertakings- their functions

Public undertakings are entities that are owned and controlled by the
government and are established to provide essential goods and services to
the public. These entities may include utilities, transportation services,
and other public services. Various forms of control are exercised over
public undertakings to ensure that they operate efficiently and effectively,
and to protect the public interest.

Here are some of the main forms of control over public undertakings:

Legislative control: The government exercises control over public

undertakings through legislation that establishes them and defines their
powers and functions. The legislature may also pass laws that require
public undertakings to report to the government on their operations and
financial performance.

Executive control: The government exercises control over public

undertakings through the appointment of board members and senior
executives, who are responsible for managing the operations of the
undertaking. The government may also issue directives to the
undertaking, setting out its policy objectives and priorities.

Financial control: The government exercises control over public

undertakings through the allocation of funds and other financial
resources. The government may provide funding to the undertaking or
may require the undertaking to generate revenue through user fees or
other means.

Regulatory control: Public undertakings are subject to regulatory control

by government agencies that oversee their operations and ensure that they
comply with relevant laws and regulations. This may include regulatory
agencies that oversee safety standards, environmental regulations, or
other aspects of the undertaking's operations.

Judicial control: Public undertakings are subject to judicial control, which

allows individuals or organizations to challenge their decisions and
actions in court. This may include challenges to the undertaking's pricing
policies, service levels, or other aspects of its operations.

Overall, the various forms of control over public undertakings are

designed to ensure that they operate efficiently and effectively, and that
they serve the public interest. By exercising control over public
undertakings, the government can ensure that they provide essential
goods and services to the public in a fair and equitable manner.

7. Seperation of powers (Admin Law)

The concept of separation of powers is a fundamental principle of

administrative law that is designed to ensure that the government operates
in a manner that is fair, efficient, and accountable. The principle is based
on the idea that power should be divided between different branches of
government, so that no single branch has too much power or influence
over the others.

In administrative law, the separation of powers typically involves the

following three branches of government:

The Executive: This branch of government is responsible for the day-to-

day operations of the government and the implementation of laws and
policies. This includes administrative agencies and departments, which
are responsible for regulating various aspects of society.

The Legislature: This branch of government is responsible for making

laws and setting policy objectives. The legislature typically has the power
to create or abolish administrative agencies, as well as to provide funding
for their operations.

The Judiciary: This branch of government is responsible for interpreting

and enforcing the law. The judiciary has the power to review the
decisions of administrative agencies to ensure that they are made within
the scope of their authority and in compliance with the law.

The separation of powers is designed to ensure that each branch of

government operates independently of the others, and that no branch has
too much power or influence over the others. This helps to ensure that the
government operates in a manner that is fair and accountable, and that the
rights and interests of individuals and organizations are protected.

Overall, the separation of powers is a crucial principle of administrative

law that helps to ensure that the government operates in a manner that is
fair, efficient, and accountable. By dividing power between different
branches of government, the principle helps to prevent abuses of power
and ensure that the government operates in the public interest.

8. Rule of Law

The rule of law is a fundamental principle of administrative law that

holds that all individuals and organizations are subject to the law and that
the law is supreme over government officials and other powerful entities.
The rule of law is based on the principle that everyone, including
government officials, is subject to and accountable under the law.

There are several key elements of the rule of law, including:

Equality before the law: All individuals and organizations are subject to
the law and are entitled to equal protection of the law. No one is above
the law, including government officials, and everyone is entitled to a fair
and impartial hearing.

Transparency: Laws must be clear, accessible, and transparent so that

everyone can understand them and know how they will be applied.

Predictability: The application of the law must be predictable and

consistent, so that individuals and organizations can plan their actions and
make informed decisions.
Accountability: Government officials and other powerful entities must be
accountable for their actions and decisions, and must be subject to review
and oversight to ensure that they comply with the law.

The rule of law is a crucial principle of administrative law, as it ensures

that the government operates in a manner that is fair, transparent, and
accountable. By upholding the rule of law, administrative law helps to
ensure that the government serves the public interest and protects the
rights and interests of individuals and organizations.

9. Droit Administraitiff

"Droit administratif" is a term used in French law to refer to the body of

law that governs the operations of administrative agencies and
departments. It is a branch of public law that is concerned with the legal
framework and procedures that regulate the actions of the administrative
state.

The origins of droit administratif can be traced back to the French

Revolution in the late 18th century, when the administrative state was
first established. Since then, the body of law has evolved and expanded to
cover a wide range of issues, including public procurement,
administrative liability, public service law, and administrative justice.

One of the key features of droit administratif is its focus on the

administrative decision-making process. Administrative agencies and
departments are subject to specific procedures and principles that ensure
that their decisions are made in a fair and impartial manner, and that the
rights and interests of individuals and organizations are protected.

Droit administratif also includes provisions for judicial review of

administrative decisions. Administrative courts have the power to review
the decisions of administrative agencies and departments to ensure that
they are made within the scope of their authority and in compliance with
the law. This helps to ensure that the administrative state operates in a
manner that is fair, efficient, and accountable.

Overall, droit administratif is a crucial branch of law in France that helps

to ensure that the administrative state operates in a manner that is fair,
efficient, and accountable. By establishing clear legal frameworks and
procedures for administrative agencies and departments, the body of law
helps to protect the rights and interests of individuals and organizations
and ensures that the government serves the public interest.

10. Sub delegation

Sub-delegation is the practice of an administrative agency or official

delegating their delegated authority to another person or entity. In other
words, it is the transfer of authority from a delegated person to another
person, often within the same administrative agency or organization.

Sub-delegation is a common practice in administrative law, as it allows

administrative agencies to effectively carry out their functions by
delegating tasks to qualified individuals or entities. However, sub-
delegation can also raise concerns about accountability, as it can create a
complex web of authority and decision-making that can be difficult to
track and oversee.

To address these concerns, many administrative laws and regulations

include provisions that limit or restrict sub-delegation. For example, some
laws require that the original delegated person remain responsible for the
decisions made by the sub-delegate, while others require that sub-
delegation be explicitly authorized in writing and subject to specific
conditions and limitations.

Overall, sub-delegation is a useful tool for administrative agencies to

effectively carry out their functions, but it must be done in a manner that
is consistent with legal requirements and that ensures accountability and
transparency.

11. Conditional delegation.

Conditional delegation is a type of delegation of authority in which the

delegated person or entity is required to meet specific conditions or
criteria in order to exercise the delegated authority. In other words, the
delegated authority is contingent upon certain conditions being met.

For example, a government agency may delegate authority to a private

company to perform a specific task, but require that the company meet
certain safety standards or environmental regulations before the delegated
authority can be exercised. This type of delegation ensures that the
delegated authority is only exercised in a manner that is consistent with
the goals and objectives of the delegating agency or organization.

Conditional delegation is often used in administrative law to ensure that

delegated authority is exercised in a responsible and accountable manner.
By placing conditions on the exercise of delegated authority,
administrative agencies can ensure that the authority is only exercised in
a manner that is consistent with legal requirements and that promotes the
public interest.

Overall, conditional delegation is an important tool in administrative law

that helps to ensure that delegated authority is exercised in a responsible
and accountable manner. By placing conditions on delegated authority,
administrative agencies can ensure that the authority is used in a manner
that is consistent with legal requirements and that promotes the public
interest.

12. Administrative discretion

Administrative discretion refers to the power or authority that

administrative agencies have to make decisions within their areas of
responsibility. This discretionary power is granted to agencies by law and
allows them to make decisions based on their judgment and expertise.

Administrative discretion is a key feature of administrative law, as it

allows agencies to carry out their functions effectively and efficiently.
For example, an agency responsible for regulating the safety of food
products may have discretion to determine what level of contamination is
acceptable in a particular food product. This discretion allows the agency
to take into account scientific and technical information in making its
decisions.

However, administrative discretion can also raise concerns about

accountability, as it gives agencies significant power to make decisions
that can have important consequences for individuals and organizations.
To address these concerns, administrative law often includes provisions
that limit or guide administrative discretion, such as requirements for
public notice and comment or requirements for agencies to consider
specific factors in making their decisions.
Overall, administrative discretion is a crucial tool for administrative
agencies to carry out their functions effectively, but it must be balanced
with accountability and transparency to ensure that agencies make
decisions that are consistent with legal requirements and that promote the
public interest.

13. Right to Information (Admin law)

The Right to Information (RTI) is a legal principle that allows citizens to

access information held by government agencies and other public bodies.
The RTI is an important part of administrative law, as it promotes
transparency and accountability in government decision-making.

Under the RTI, individuals have the right to request access to any
information held by a government agency, subject to certain exemptions
for privacy, national security, and other reasons. The agency is required
to respond to the request within a specified time period and provide the
requested information or explain why the information is exempt from
disclosure.

The RTI promotes good governance by allowing citizens to hold

government officials accountable for their actions and decisions. It
enables citizens to participate more fully in the democratic process and to
monitor the actions of government officials.

In many countries, the RTI is enshrined in law and is protected by

constitutional provisions. The right to access information is recognized as
a fundamental human right, and failure to provide access to information
can be challenged in court.

Overall, the Right to Information is an important aspect of administrative

law that promotes transparency and accountability in government
decision-making. It enables citizens to access information that is
necessary to make informed decisions and participate fully in the
democratic process.

14. Lokpal and Lokayupta

Lokpal and Lokayukta are two institutions established in India to
investigate and address complaints of corruption against public officials.

The Lokpal is an ombudsman institution at the national level, established

by the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013. It has the power to investigate
allegations of corruption against public officials at the national level,
including the Prime Minister, Members of Parliament, and other public
officials.

The Lokayukta is a similar institution established at the state level in

India. It investigates complaints of corruption against public officials at
the state level, including the Chief Minister and other officials.

Both the Lokpal and Lokayukta are designed to be independent bodies

with extensive investigative powers. They are intended to be a
mechanism for holding public officials accountable for their actions and
promoting transparency and accountability in government.

Overall, the Lokpal and Lokayukta are important institutions in India's

administrative law framework, providing citizens with a mechanism for
reporting corruption and holding public officials accountable for their
actions. However, their effectiveness depends on adequate resources and
political will to implement their recommendations and ensure that corrupt
officials are brought to justice.

15. Central vigilance commission

The Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) is an independent

constitutional body in India that is responsible for addressing corruption
in the public sector. It was established in 1964 on the recommendations
of the Santhanam Committee.

The CVC is responsible for preventing corruption in government

departments and public sector undertakings, and for conducting
investigations into allegations of corruption. It has the power to
recommend prosecution against corrupt officials, and can also make
recommendations for improving the functioning of public sector
organizations to prevent corruption.

The CVC is headed by a Central Vigilance Commissioner, who is

appointed by the President of India on the recommendation of a
committee comprising the Prime Minister, the Minister of Home Affairs,
and the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha.

The CVC has the power to monitor the functioning of the Central Bureau
of Investigation (CBI), India's premier investigating agency, in matters
related to corruption. It also advises the government on policies and
programs to prevent corruption.

Overall, the Central Vigilance Commission is an important institution in

India's administrative law framework, working to prevent corruption in
the public sector and holding officials accountable for their actions. Its
effectiveness depends on adequate resources, political will, and the ability
to work independently of political influence.

16. Kinds of bias (Admin Law)

In administrative law, bias refers to a situation where an administrative

decision-maker has a predisposition or inclination that could affect their
ability to make an impartial decision. There are various types of bias that
can affect administrative decision-making, including:

Actual bias: This occurs when a decision-maker has a personal interest or

relationship that could affect their ability to make an impartial decision.

Apparent bias: This occurs when there is a reasonable apprehension that a

decision-maker is biased, even if they do not actually have a personal
interest or relationship that could affect their decision.

Institutional bias: This occurs when a system or organization has policies,

practices, or procedures that create a predisposition or inclination in favor
of one group or against another.

Cultural bias: This occurs when a decision-maker's background or

cultural assumptions affect their ability to make an impartial decision.

Cognitive bias: This occurs when a decision-maker has a mental shortcut

or heuristic that influences their decision-making, such as a reliance on
stereotypes or an overemphasis on recent events.

Overall, bias is an important consideration in administrative decision-

making, as it can affect the fairness and legitimacy of decisions.
Administrative decision-makers must strive to make impartial and
unbiased decisions, and procedures should be in place to prevent bias
from affecting the decision-making process.