Meaning

Administrative Law is that branch of public law which deals with the organisation, powers, duties and functions of administrative authorities, the procedure they must follow, and the remedies available to persons whose rights are affected by administrative action. It regulates the relationship between the citizen and the State in its administrative capacity.

Nature

• Branch of Public Law — governs the exercise of public power.
• Judge-made in origin but increasingly supplemented by statute.
• Dynamic and evolving — reflects the changing role of the State.
• Interdisciplinary — interacts with constitutional law, political theory and public administration.

Scope

1. Organisation and composition of administrative authorities.
2. Powers (legislative, judicial, quasi-judicial, discretionary).
3. Duties and functions.
4. Procedure to be followed — natural justice, reasoned orders.
5. Delegated legislation.
6. Judicial review of administrative action — grounds & remedies.
7. Liability of the State in tort and contract.
8. Public corporations, tribunals, services.
9. Mechanisms of accountability — Lokpal, CVC, RTI, PIL.

Reasons for the Growth of Administrative Law

1. Transformation from laissez-faire to Welfare State — the State now undertakes economic planning, social security, education, health, redistributive justice.
2. Industrial Revolution and Urbanisation — necessitated regulation of factories, labour, transport, housing, public utilities.
3. Inadequacy of Judicial System — ordinary courts are slow, expensive and ill-equipped for mass adjudication — hence specialised tribunals.
4. Inadequacy of Legislative Procedure — Parliament has limited time and expertise; broad standards + delegated legislation become necessary.
5. Technical & Scientific Complexity — telecom, atomic energy, environment, aviation, medicines require expert administration.
6. Need for Flexibility & Experimentation — subordinate legislation can be modified quickly.
7. Preventive Justice — licensing, inspection, planning permissions prevent harm before it occurs.
8. Wars & Emergencies — the two World Wars and public-health emergencies accelerated executive rule-making.
9. Rise of Public Services and Public Corporations — railways, airlines, insurance, oil, banking, etc.
10. Human Rights & Social Justice — implementation of FR and DPSP demands active administration.

Important Definitions

1. Sir Ivor Jennings (The Law and the Constitution, 1959): “Administrative law is the law relating to the administration. It determines the organisation, powers and duties of administrative authorities.” Criticism: too wide; silent on remedies.
2. K.C. Davis: “Administrative law is the law concerning the powers and procedures of administrative agencies, including especially the law governing judicial review of administrative action.” Best modern definition.
3. Prof. H.W.R. Wade: “Administrative law is the law relating to the control of governmental power.”
4. Dicey (Law of the Constitution, 1885): Denied the existence of a distinct administrative law in England, equating it with the French Droit Administratif. His view is now regarded as outdated.
5. Prof. Garner: “Administrative law is that branch of public law dealing with the composition, powers, duties, rights and liabilities of the various organs of government engaged in administration.”
6. M.P. Jain & S.N. Jain: It deals with the structure, powers and functions of the organs of administration, the limits of their powers, the methods and procedures followed by them, and the remedies available to a person aggrieved.

Sources of Administrative Law in India

1. Constitution of India — Articles 32, 136, 226, 227, 300, 309–311, 323A, 323B. The Constitution is the paramount source.
2. Statutes — Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, RTI Act 2005, Lokpal & Lokayuktas Act 2013, CVC Act 2003, General Clauses Act 1897.
3. Delegated / Subordinate Legislation — rules, regulations, bye-laws, notifications.
4. Judicial Decisions / Precedents — Article 141; doctrines of natural justice, Wednesbury unreasonableness, proportionality.
5. Reports of Commissions & Committees — Law Commission Reports, Franks Committee (UK), Donoughmore Committee (UK), Second ARC.
6. Conventions, Customs and Usages — administrative practice.

Both are branches of public law; the distinction is one of degree, scope and focus, not of water-tight separation. Prof. Holland called constitutional law the law that regulates the organs of the State while at rest, and administrative law the law that regulates them while in motion.

Overlap: Articles 32, 226, 300, 311, 323A/B, 309 are provisions of constitutional law that are also fundamental to administrative law. Thus administrative law is now considered a sub-branch or specialised offshoot of constitutional law.

Origin & Meaning

“Be you ever so high, the law is above you” — Thomas Fuller. The Rule of Law (la principe de légalité) is the ancient principle, traceable to Aristotle and Bracton, that government must be conducted according to law, not according to the arbitrary will of men. Its classical modern exposition is by A.V. Dicey in Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885).

Dicey’s Three Postulates

1. Supremacy of Law — absence of arbitrary power: No one shall be punished or made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts.
2. Equality before the Law: Every person, whatever his rank or status, is subject to the ordinary law of the realm and amenable to the jurisdiction of the ordinary tribunals. No special courts, no special privileges for officials.
3. Predominance of the Legal Spirit (Constitution is result of ordinary law): General principles of the Constitution (e.g. right to personal liberty, right of public meeting) are the result of judicial decisions in particular cases, not of a priori constitutional declarations.

Criticisms of Dicey

• His third postulate is England-specific and does not apply to countries with written constitutions.
• He misunderstood Droit Administratif — the Conseil d’État is in fact a strong protector of citizens’ rights.
• His absolute equality is impracticable in the modern welfare State — where differential treatment for public servants (e.g. protection under Article 311), women, Scheduled Castes/Tribes is often justified.
• He failed to foresee the inevitable growth of delegated legislation and administrative discretion.

Modern Concept — International Commission of Jurists (Delhi Declaration, 1959)

The Rule of Law should encompass:

1. Representative, democratic government.
2. Economic, social and cultural rights, not just civil-political rights.
3. Independent judiciary.
4. Freedom of thought, expression and the press.
5. Fair criminal process.

Rule of Law in India

The Indian Constitution gives Rule of Law a constitutional status:

• Article 14 — equality before law and equal protection of laws.
• Article 21 — procedure established by law; now “just, fair and reasonable” procedure (Maneka Gandhi).
• Articles 32 & 226 — writ jurisdiction for enforcement.
• Article 311 — protection of civil servants.
• Articles 50, 136, 227 — judicial independence & review.

Leading Cases

Rule of Law and Administrative Law

Administrative law is often described as a technique for enforcing the Rule of Law in the administrative sphere — through judicial review, natural justice, reasoned decisions, and remedies against the State.

Origin

The idea is traceable to Aristotle (Politics), Cicero and John Locke, but its classical modern exposition is by Baron de Montesquieu in De L’Esprit des Lois (The Spirit of the Laws, 1748). Observing the English Constitution, Montesquieu argued: “When the legislative and executive powers are united in the same person, or in the same body of magistrates, there can be no liberty.”

Three Postulates

1. The same person should not form part of more than one organ.
2. One organ should not interfere with / control another.
3. One organ should not perform the functions of another.

Rationale

• Prevents concentration of power and tyranny.
• Enables each organ to specialise.
• Provides mutual checks and balances.
• Safeguards individual liberty and Rule of Law.

Separation of Powers in Different Constitutions

The Indian Constitutional Scheme

India adopts a functional, not rigid, separation. Illustrative provisions:

• Articles 53 & 154 — executive power vested in President / Governor.
• Article 50 (DPSP) — separation of judiciary from executive.
• Articles 121 & 211 — no discussion in legislature on judges’ conduct.
• Articles 122 & 212 — courts not to inquire into legislative proceedings.
• Article 361 — immunity of President / Governor.
• Articles 123 & 213 — ordinance-making power of the Executive.
• Articles 323A & 323B — adjudicatory functions by tribunals.
• Article 142 — Supreme Court can do complete justice.

Judicial Pronouncements

Erosion in Modern Times

• Rise of delegated legislation (executive makes rules).
• Rise of administrative adjudication (executive adjudicates).
• Expansive judicial review by courts (judicial encroachment on executive policy — Vineet Narain, Vishaka).
• PIL / Continuing mandamus — courts enter policy sphere.

Conclusion

In India, separation of powers works as a functional separation with mutual checks and balances, forming part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Absolute separation is impossible in a modern welfare State, but the doctrine survives as the constitutional guarantor of liberty and good governance.

Meaning

Droit Administratif (French: “administrative law”) is the body of rules governing the French administration, developed through decisions of the Conseil d’État and enforced by a separate hierarchy of administrative courts (Tribunaux Administratifs and Cours Administratives d’Appel) distinct from the ordinary civil courts.

Origin

Instituted by Napoleon in 1799, the Conseil d’État was originally an advisory body to the executive; by the mid-19th century it developed independent adjudicatory jurisdiction over administrative matters. The French Revolution’s distrust of the parlements (ordinary courts) explains why administrative disputes were kept out of their hands.

Three Distinctive Features

1. Separate system of administrative courts — disputes between citizen and the State decided by the Conseil d’État and tribunals administratifs, not ordinary courts.
2. Distinct body of principles — the State and its agents are governed by principles different from the civil / commercial law.
3. Juge-Administrateur system — many members have an administrative background and bring expertise to adjudication.

Dicey’s Criticism and its Refutation

Dicey in 1885 contended that Droit Administratif violated the Rule of Law because it placed State officials outside the ordinary courts and gave them special privileges. His criticism is now regarded as outdated and misconceived:

• The Conseil d’État is in fact a strong protector of individual rights, often more plaintiff-friendly than ordinary courts.
• It has developed advanced doctrines of recours pour excès de pouvoir (annulment for excess of power), détournement de pouvoir (misuse of power) and responsabilité sans faute (strict State liability).
• Many of these doctrines (Wednesbury, proportionality, legitimate expectation) have influenced the English common law via European jurisprudence.
• In Hooper v. Rogers, Dicey himself conceded that the French system “compares advantageously with ours”.

Comparison — India / UK vs France

Relevance to India

India has not adopted Droit Administratif. However, specialised tribunals under Articles 323A/B (CAT, SAT, ITAT, etc.) represent a limited functional analogue. The Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. UOI, (1997) 3 SCC 261 however held that these tribunals cannot be a complete substitute for the High Courts.

Theoretical Framework

In Law and Administration (1984), Carol Harlow & Richard Rawlings famously classified competing philosophies of administrative law into Red Light, Green Light and later Amber Light theories.

Red Light Theory

• Core idea: Administrative power is a potential danger to individual liberty; the proper role of administrative law is to control and restrain it.
• Emphasises external control through strict judicial review by the ordinary courts.
• Associated with Dicey and the common-law tradition.
• Views administrative law as a brake on administration.
• Favours the Rule of Law conception of equality before the ordinary law.

Green Light Theory

• Core idea: Administrative power is a positive instrument of social welfare; administrative law should facilitate good administration.
• Emphasises internal mechanisms, political accountability and good procedures.
• Judicial review is a last resort.
• Associated with the welfare-State tradition, Fabianism, Jennings & Robson.
• Views administrative law as a catalyst of good governance.

Amber Light Theory

• Modern intermediate position — recognises both control and facilitation.
• Emphasises procedural fairness, participation, transparency.
• Judicial review is a partner rather than an obstacle.

Comparison Table

Position in India

Indian administrative law has oscillated between the two. The post-independence welfare-State era (1950s–70s) was predominantly green-light. The emergency period and its aftermath (post-1977, with Maneka Gandhi) brought red-light sensibilities. Modern India combines both — expansive judicial review (red) with recognition of administrative expertise (green) — essentially an amber-light approach.

Why Classify?

Classification is not an end in itself but is important because the procedural safeguards, the standard of judicial review and the availability of remedies depend on the nature of the function involved.

Three-Fold Classification

1. Legislative Functions — making of rules, regulations, bye-laws, orders of general application (e.g. rules framed under the Factories Act, 1948).
2. Judicial / Quasi-Judicial Functions — adjudication of disputes between two or more parties by applying law to facts (e.g. order of a Collector determining compensation; order of IT Appellate Tribunal).
3. Administrative Functions — executive implementation of policy; day-to-day administration; residual category (e.g. grant of licence, allocation of quotas, posting / transfer orders).

Judicial vs Quasi-Judicial

Quasi-Judicial vs Administrative — the Classical Five-Fold Test

Province of Bombay v. Khushaldas S. Advani, AIR 1950 SC 222 laid down five pre-requisites of a quasi-judicial function:

1. A lis or dispute between two or more parties.
2. Presentation of case / evidence by the parties.
3. Ascertainment of facts by the authority.
4. Application of law to those facts.
5. Decision disposing of the dispute — duty to act judicially.

Modern Position after A.K. Kraipak

Why the Classification Still Matters

• Determines whether writ of certiorari / prohibition is available (classical view requires quasi-judicial function).
• Determines intensity of judicial review (judicial action attracts closer scrutiny).
• Determines need for a reasoned order.

Non-Classification Theory

Prof. H.W.R. Wade and S.A. de Smith favour abandoning the classification altogether in favour of a uniform duty of fairness. Indian courts post-Kraipak are moving in this direction.