The Analytical Approach Of Administrative Law

Author: LawSphereX

Category: Administrative & Regulatory Law

Published: 2026-08-23T21:13:37.290422+00:00

Updated: 2026-08-26T17:06:01.78+00:00

THE ANALYTICAL APPROACH OF ADMINISTRATIVE

LAW

Anushka Kaushik, LLM (Specialisation in Constitutional Law), Shobhit University, Meerut

ABSTRACT

Administrative law is regarded as a branch of law that governs the actions of government agencies. It includes the implementation of laws, the resolution of disputes, and the formulation of regulations by the executive branch. Additionally, it is classified as a segment of public law. Administrative law relates to the decision-making processes of governmental administrative bodies. Administrative law is the legal field that regulates the structure, authority, responsibilities, and operations of public entities and administrative agencies, along with their relationships with individuals and other organizations. It sets the legal parameters within which public administration functions, with the goal of ensuring that government actions are effective, equitable, and just.

Administrative law deals with the establishment and functioning of regulatory agencies, the processes they are required to follow (including rulemaking and adjudication), and the avenues for judicial review of administrative actions. Its primary goals are to uphold good governance, safeguard individual rights, enhance transparency, and prevent the misuse of power by administrative bodies. As the roles of government expand and change—particularly in light of globalization and technological progress—administrative law continues to evolve in response to new challenges in public administration and regulatory oversight. K. C. Davis defines” Administrative Law is the law concerning the powers

and procedures of administrative agencies, including especially the law governing the judicial review of administrative action.”1 1Taxmann.comhttps://cdn.taxmann.com/BookshopFiles/bookfiles/9789356226500_sampleNew705dacad3b31,( Last Visited 08. June.2025)

Introduction of Administrative Law In addition to their traditional roles of upholding law and order, delivering justice, and safeguarding citizens from threats, states have assumed a range of new responsibilities in contemporary society that were not part of their original scope. They have introduced numerous development, planning, and welfare initiatives that influence every facet of human existence. To facilitate this, significant authority had to be granted to the government, as the goals of the welfare state could not have been achieved otherwise. Consequently, administrative law emerges as a result of the state's broadened socioeconomic roles and enhanced powers. Concept and Definition of Administrative Law Administrative law represents a branch of public law that addresses the various powers, duties, rights, and obligations of government entities engaged in public administration.

While there have been several efforts to establish a clear definition, none have proven entirely satisfactory. According to Austin, "Administrative law is concerned with determining the purposes for which sovereign powers are to be exercised and the methods by which those powers are to be executed. ” They will be exercised in the following manners: ● Directly by the monarch of the sovereign member ● Directly by subordinate political superiors to whom parts of those are entrusted or delegated in trust. ● According to Jennings, administrative law is defined as "A law concerning the administration, powers, and responsibilities of administrative authorities. " Nature of Administrative Law Administrative law is fundamentally a form of law. However, it differs from traditional categories such as "property law," "land laws," and "labour laws.

" It encompasses the examination of elements that are not strictly laws, including administrative circulars, policy statements, resolutions, and memorandums. Additionally, it incorporates the concept of "higher law; natural justice" within its scope of study. Unlike private law, which focuses on

relationships between individuals, administrative law is classified as a branch of public law. Consequently, it primarily addresses the interactions between individuals and organized authority. Furthermore, administrative law encompasses the framework and authority of administrative and quasi-administrative bodies. This focus on organizational structure is pertinent only to the extent that it relates to the powers, nature of actions, procedures for exercising those powers, and the control mechanisms established within. Therefore, the study is not limited to administrative agencies alone. The significance of examining organizations is highlighted only insofar as it aids in understanding the powers and control mechanisms they possess. Thus, it includes not only administrative agencies such as corporations but also boards, universities, and various other institutions in its analysis.

Scope of Administrative Law Administrative law primarily focuses on official actions, which include: ● The creation of rules as an action. ● Adjudicatory actions or decisions regarding rules. ● The application of rules in practice. In addition to these primary actions, the field also examines actions that are secondary to the main actions, such as investigative, supervisory, advisory, and declaratory actions. Furthermore, administrative law includes the mechanisms that ensure administrative agencies operate within their limits and effectively serve the public. This control mechanism is technically referred to as the review process. ● Courts utilize writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, and prohibition to assert jurisdiction. ● Courts exercise their ordinary judicial powers through suits, injunctions, and declaratory actions. ● Higher-level administrative authorities.

In the twentieth century, public opinion and media emerged as significant checks on any

administration, which could not be overlooked. Access to justice serves as a deterrent against bureaucratic overreach in the exercise of public authority. The objective of administrative law is to harmonize democratic safeguards and standards of fairness with the effective conduct of government in the realm of administrative actions. General Principles of Administrative Law The initial phase in administrative law involves assessing the legal validity or authority of a government official's actions. This process requires an examination of the legal foundation that grants the authority to act, specifically the law that empowers the administrator. Constitutional law primarily addresses who possesses the authority to create laws. In contrast, administrative law focuses on the actions of government officials who have been authorized by these laws.

Consequently, constitutional and administrative law are closely interconnected. If the law that authorized the government official's actions is deemed unconstitutional and therefore invalid, any actions taken by that official under such a law will also be invalid. Consequently, an individual who has suffered due to this action may have the right to pursue legal remedies. The Concept of Rule of Law The foundation of this concept lies in the rule of law, which upholds Natural Justice. This means that judgments should be made based on fairness, justice, and established laws and legal procedures, rather than on arbitrary government actions or the misuse of official authority while serving the public and adjudicating cases presented to its Tribunals, among other things.

Natural justice applies in scenarios where no specific laws exist; in such instances, individuals must be afforded the chance to present their case, and decisions should be made based on the relevant facts and circumstances, ensuring impartiality. The aim is to safeguard individuals' rights from infringement by those in power. The court's capacity to oversee and mitigate abuses of administrative authority is essential to Dicey’s interpretation of the Rule of Law. The reality that not all administrative actions are defined by statutes that can be judicially interpreted indicates that courts may struggle to fulfill this oversight role. The scope of administrative functions is expanding rapidly, especially with the ongoing trend of privatization.

In this context, as well as in various other governmental scenarios, certain functions are executed through contracts that fall under private contract law instead of public administrative law.

Delegation of Authority Given the significance of government operations, it is essential to delegate powers from legislators to administrators. Parliament is unable to address every issue within a country due to the vast number of decisions that need to be made. Another crucial reason for this delegation is that laws must inherently be broad, as their language cannot cover all specific and often changing situations that may arise. Consequently, the enforcement of the law may require some degree of discretion to apply to particular circumstances, and the laws themselves must outline criteria for exercising such discretion to ensure fairness and consistency. Nearly every law enacted by Parliament delineates the powers and responsibilities of various government bodies or officials, including the cabinet, a designated minister or civil servant, or a judge.

Given the critical nature of power delegation, Parliament has established control guidelines for its own delegation of authority to administrators. Important Case Laws of Administrative Law

1. Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. vs. The State of Haryana2

The Supreme Court determined that Sub-section (6) of Section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, is of a directory nature rather than mandatory. Therefore, failure to comply with it does not render the Iron and Steel (Control) Order, 1956, invalid. Consequently, the omission to present the notification that establishes the maximum selling prices of iron and steel to both Houses of Parliament does not invalidate the notification itself. The Court dismissed the appellants' assertion of absence of mens rea, citing evidence that indicated the appellants aimed to enhance production and profits. Furthermore, the Court found no breach of Article 14, explaining that the non-prosecution of the suppliers was attributed to insufficient evidence against them.

The Court recognized two primary factors for classifying a provision as directory: (1) the absence of repercussions for non-compliance, and (2) the possible public disruption that could arise if government actions were rendered invalid. It highlighted that directory provisions are intended to facilitate legislative oversight, and their particular formats may differ according to

2 AIR 1979 SC 1149

the intended degree of control. The procedural stipulations considered directory do not nullify actions performed by subordinate authorities.

2. Lachmi Narain and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors.3

The court noted that the learned single Judge of the High Court was correct in determining that the contested notification exceeded the authority granted to the Central Government as a delegate under Section 2 of the Laws Act. The notification in question, dated December 7, 1957, which aimed to replace the phrase "such previous notice as it considers reasonable" with "not less than three months' notice" in Section 6(2) of the Bengal Act, is beyond the powers assigned to the Central Government by Section 2 of the Laws Act.

Consequently, the notifications issued on April 1, 1958, September 19, 1959, June 29, 1966, and July 31, 1970, which retracted the tax exemptions for durries, pure silk, country liquor, kirayana articles, and others, without adhering to the obligatory requirement of providing not less than three months' notice as mandated by Section 6(2) of the Bengal Act, are also deemed invalid and ineffective. Therefore, the judgment of the Appellate Bench of the High Court was overturned, and the notification dated December 7, 1957, along with the subsequent notifications concerning the withdrawal of tax exemptions, was declared unconstitutional.

3. Ashok Kumar Yadav and Ors. vs. State of Haryana and Ors.4

Condemning members: The Division Bench of the High Court expressed serious doubts regarding all members of the Commission, including the Chairman. It noted that they failed to meet the rigorous criteria of being "individuals of high integrity, caliber, and qualification" since these critical remarks were made without including Chairman Shri B. S. Lather and another member, Shri Gurmesh Parkash Bishnoi, as parties in the writ petitions. This clearly contravened the principles of natural justice. Additionally, it was stated that the Division Bench of the High Court acted unjustly by addressing whether the Chairman and members of the Commission lacked integrity, caliber, or qualification, given that the legitimacy of their appointments was not contested in the writ petitions, nor was any request made to annul their appointments.

31975 INSC 290

4 1985 INSC 137

Vitiated selection: This Court highlighted that it was unnecessary to prove bias; it was sufficient to invalidate the selection process if a reasonable likelihood of bias could be demonstrated. The Division Bench incorrectly annulled the Commission's selections on the basis that they were tainted by arbitrariness or a reasonable likelihood of bias. Allocation of high percent in Viva: The allocation of 22. 2 percent of marks for the viva voce test is likely to foster greater potential for arbitrariness. The court noted that the percentage of marks assigned for the viva voce test in these instances is excessive, yet it refrained from nullifying the selections made by the Commission after nearly two years, as the selected candidates have already been appointed to various positions and have been serving in these roles for approximately two years.

Furthermore, the court mandated that any future selections made by the Commission must ensure that the marks allocated for the viva voce test do not exceed 12. 2 percent for candidates in the general category and 25 percent for ex-service officers.

4. Om Kumar and Ors. vs. Union of India5

The court determined that the administrator had taken into account the report from the Justice Chinnappa Reddy Commission, the conclusions of the Inquiry Officer, the opinions provided by the UPSC on two occasions, and the perspectives of the Committee of Secretaries. The court refused to forward the case to the Vigilance Commissioner for an increase in the severity of the punishment.

5. In Re: Delhi Laws Act, 19126

The Court, in a majority ruling, confirmed the legitimacy of the Delhi Laws Act of 1912, the Ajmer-Merwara Act of 1947, and the Part C States (Laws) Act of 1950, while also placing restrictions on the extent of permissible delegation. The Court indicated that although the legislature is permitted to delegate certain functions to the executive, it cannot delegate essential legislative functions, such as law-making or policy determination. The court reiterated that the primary restrictions and limitations on the legislative authority of Parliament or the States are those outlined in Part III of the Constitution concerning Fundamental Rights. It was determined that the authority to broaden the jurisdiction of laws or to apply existing laws with

5 2000 INSC 532

61951 AIR 332

necessary modifications falls within constitutional boundaries; however, the executive is not permitted to repeal or create new laws. The legislature is required to establish sufficient guidelines to ensure that the delegation of powers does not contravene constitutional norms or governance principles.

6. Shri Rama Sugar Industries Ltd. and Ors. vs. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.7

The Supreme Court determined that the word "may" in Section 21(3)(b) grants discretionary authority to the government, but it mandates that such discretion be applied reasonably and in accordance with the intent of the legislation. The court concluded that the policy, which limited tax exemptions solely to cooperative sugar factories while explicitly excluding new or significantly expanded industries from this benefit, is arbitrary and disconnected from the purpose of Section 21(3)(b). This provision was designed to promote the growth of sugar production across all sectors. Consequently, the policy was annulled, and a mandamus was issued to the government, instructing them to reassess the applications of the petitioners and the appellant without following the invalid policy.

7. State of Bombay vs. K.P. Krishnan & Ors8

The government's discretion as outlined in Section 10(1) and Section 12(5) must be applied fairly, grounded in pertinent facts rather than in a punitive manner. The justifications for denying a referral of a dispute for adjudication must directly relate to the industrial dispute in question. Section 12(5) does not grant the government the authority to initiate a reference independently, without the support of Section 10(1).

8. Rojer Mathew vs. South Indian Bank Ltd. and Ors.9

The Supreme Court ruled that although the Lok Sabha Speaker’s certification of a Money Bill is typically honored, it is still open to judicial review if it clearly contravenes the Constitution. The question of whether Part XIV of the Finance Act qualifies as a Money Bill should be escalated to a larger bench. Regarding the constitutionality of Section 184, the court deemed it valid as it is consistent with previous rulings on tribunal systems. The Court determined that while there are guidelines for establishing qualifications and service conditions for tribunal

7 1974 AIR 1745, 1974 SCC

8 AIR 1960 SC 1223

9 AIRONLINE 2018 SC 1508

members, these powers should not be exclusively assigned to the Legislature. Furthermore, the Court stated that the potential for executive misuse of Section 184 does not warrant the annulment of the provision; however, courts are permitted to examine delegated legislation to ensure it conforms to the parent law. The Court unanimously invalidated the Appellate Tribunal and Other Authorities Rules 2017, citing violations of judicial independence due to undue government influence and the absence of essential qualifications for technical members. Finally, the Court urged the implementation of measures to streamline tribunal operations, which include conducting judicial impact assessments and establishing a National Tribunal Commission.

9. Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai and Ors.10

The court determined that the 1999 amendments to Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) impacted the jurisdiction of the High Court under Articles 226 and 227. Additionally, it was clarified that while interlocutory orders from subordinate courts are generally not subject to revision under the CPC, they can still be challenged under the High Court’s writ jurisdiction (certiorari) and its supervisory jurisdiction. It was noted that certiorari is employed to rectify jurisdictional errors made by subordinate courts that act outside their authority or violate the principles of natural justice. Supervisory jurisdiction ensures that subordinate courts operate within their designated authority. The High Court is not permitted to function as an appellate court when issuing a writ of certiorari or exercising its supervisory jurisdiction.

These powers are discretionary and should be exercised judiciously, only in appropriate cases where immediate correction is essential to prevent a miscarriage of justice. Ultimately, the Supreme Court found that the High Court made an error in deeming the petition non-maintainable. The petition was reinstated for a new hearing by the High Court, along with costs.

10. REGINA vs. Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly11

The policy significantly hampers Mr. Daly's ability to exercise his rights under Article 8.1 of the European Convention, exceeding what is necessary. Following the incorporation of the convention through the Human Rights Act 1998, domestic courts are required to assess whether a convention right has been violated and to provide an effective remedy. The restriction of this

10 2003 INSC 374

11UKHL 26; 2 AC 532

right was deemed necessary in a democratic society to address social needs, raising the question of whether the interference was truly proportionate to the legitimate objective being pursued. Consequently, the differing methodologies between traditional grounds of review and the proportionality approach may sometimes lead to varying outcomes.

11. K.I. Shephard and Ors. vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.12

The choice to remove employees from service at the transferee banks without their representation strips them of their means of support and leads to negative civil repercussions. The principles of natural justice are applicable to administrative actions, and in these particular cases, the decision to exclude a group of employees without adhering to the principles of natural justice was flawed. The court ordered that each of the three transferee banks must reinstate the excluded employees under the same terms and conditions of employment that were in place with the respective banking companies before the amalgamation. This includes all employees, even those who did not submit a petition, who will be entitled to the benefits of continuous service for all purposes, including salary and benefits, for the entire duration.

12. Dwarka Prasad Laxmi Narain vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors.13

The pricing is determined by the landed costs of coke and coal delivered to the depot, as detailed in Schedule III, with an additional profit margin of 10 percent. The entire issue revolves around the incidental charges outlined in item 5 and the allowance for shortages specified in item 7. Rates certainly fluctuate based on local circumstances, and some degree of discretion should be afforded to local authorities. The discretion granted to the licensing authority in setting these rates must be applied with consideration of the conditions existing in the area, which local officials are expected to understand. The discretion held by public officials is not without limits; no unfair discrimination has emerged from its application, and any order or declaration issued by such an official is not deemed illegal.

Clauses (7) and (8) of the Control Order do not impose excessive limitations on the trade freedoms of the petitioners, and therefore, the declaration made on July 16, 1953, cannot be considered invalid.

12 1988 AIR 686 1988 SCR

13 1954 INSC 1

13. REGINA vs. Secretary of State For The Home Department, Ex Parte Daly14

The policy encroaches upon Mr. Daly's ability to exercise his rights under Article 8.1 of the European Convention to a degree that exceeds what is necessary. Following the incorporation of the convention through the Human Rights Act 1998, domestic courts are required to assess whether a convention right has been violated and to provide an effective remedy. The restriction of this right was deemed necessary within a democratic society to address social needs, raising the question of whether the interference was truly proportionate to the legitimate objective being pursued. Consequently, the differences in methodology between the traditional grounds for review and the proportionality approach may sometimes lead to varying outcomes.

14. J.K. Aggarwal vs. Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Ltd. and Ors.15

The refusal to allow a lawyer's service during the inquiry was not a proper use of discretion according to the rules, leading to a breach of natural justice; especially considering that the Presenting Officer possessed legal knowledge and experience. The rule itself acknowledges that when the charges are severe enough to warrant dismissal from service, the inquiry authority may authorize the involvement of a lawyer. This rule grants discretion. In exercising this discretion, one important factor to consider is whether there is a risk of an unequal contest that could result in a miscarriage or failure of justice, as well as a denial of a genuine and fair opportunity for defense due to the appellant facing a presenting officer who is legally trained.

The terms Legal Adviser and lawyer are interpreted somewhat broadly for this purpose, encompassing anyone who assists or provides advice on factual and legal matters, thereby being regarded as a legal adviser.

15. Divisional Manager, Aravali Golf Club and Ors. vs. Chander Hass and Ors.16

Among the three branches of the State—the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary—only the judiciary possesses the authority to define the jurisdictional boundaries of all three branches. This significant power must be wielded with care and should never be misused; it is essential that the judiciary exercises this authority with the highest degree of humility and selfdiscipline. The constitutional compromise for maintaining independence requires judges to

14 UKHL 26; 2 AC 532.

15 1990 INSC 268

16 2007 INSC 1240

refrain from encroaching upon the domains reserved for the other distinct branches. Consequently, judicial restraint serves to uphold the fundamental principles of judicial independence and the separation of powers. Should the judiciary fail to practice restraint and exceed its boundaries, it is likely to provoke a response from politicians and other stakeholders. Therefore, the judiciary must limit its actions to its designated domain. Both the High Court and the First Appellate Court exceeded their jurisdiction by ordering the establishment of positions for tractor drivers to accommodate the respondents. Administrative Tribunals in India Administrative tribunals are specialized entities created outside the conventional court system to adjudicate disputes concerning administrative actions and decisions.

These quasi-judicial institutions offer a platform for resolving conflicts related to administration, encompassing issues such as recruitment, transfers, service conditions, and various other administrative matters. 17 Administrative Tribunals The Administrative Tribunals were established through the Administrative Tribunals Act of 1985, enacted by Parliament. Its foundation is rooted in Article 323 A of the Constitution. This body resolves disputes and grievances related to the recruitment and service conditions of individuals appointed to public service roles and positions associated with the governance of the Union and the States.

18 Central Administrative Tribunal: It holds the authority to address service issues related to employees of the Central Government, those in any Union Territory, or local and other governments under the supervision of the Government of India, as well as employees of corporations that are owned or managed by the 17DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025) 18DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025)

Central Government. 19 State Administrative Tribunal Article 323 B grants authority to state legislatures to establish tribunals for a range of issues, including the levy, assessment, collection, and enforcement of tax matters related to land reforms as outlined in Article 31A. 20 Water Disputes Tribunal The Parliament has passed the Inter-State River Water Disputes (ISRWD) Act of 1956, which has established several Water Disputes Tribunals to adjudicate disputes concerning the waters of inter-State rivers and their associated river valleys. 21 Armed Forces Tribunal The institution in question is a military tribunal located in India. It was founded in accordance with the Armed Forces Tribunal Act of 2007.

This tribunal has been granted the authority to adjudicate or conduct trials regarding disputes and complaints related to commissions, appointments, enrollments, and service conditions for individuals governed by the Army Act of 1950, the Navy Act of 1957, and the Air Force Act of 1950. 22 National Green Tribunal The National Environment Tribunal Act of 1995 and the National Environment Appellate Authority Act of 1997 were deemed insufficient, leading to a call for the establishment of an institution capable of handling environmental cases with greater efficiency and effectiveness. 23 19DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025) 20DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias.

com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025) 21DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025) 22DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025) 23DrishtiIAS,https://www. drishtiias. com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05. June. 2025)

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Section 252 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 stipulates that the Central Government shall establish an Appellate Tribunal composed of various Judicial Members and Accountant Members as deemed appropriate to perform the powers and functions assigned to the Tribunal by the Act. 24 Relation between Administrative Law and Constitutional Law The relationship between Constitutional Law and Administrative Law is quite intricate. The foundation of Administrative Law is rooted in Constitutional Law. Upon gaining independence in 1947, the populace was endowed with various Articles within our Constitution, which serves as a legal framework and a basis for the effective operation of administrative authorities.

In nations such as India, which possesses a written Constitution, there exists an additional oversight of administrative actions by Constitutional Law, which places restrictions on the functions of the administrative body. Therefore, in a country with a written Constitution that allows for judicial review, it is unfeasible to entirely dissociate Administrative Law from Constitutional Law. 25 Interconnectedness and Hierarchy

1. Constitutional law serves as the highest legal authority, defining the structure, powers,

and limitations of government, along with the essential rights of citizens. Within this context, administrative law functions, concentrating on the organization, powers, and responsibilities of administrative bodies.

2. Administrative law is subordinate to constitutional law and derives its authority from

it. Any administrative action or regulation that contradicts constitutional provisions is rendered null and void. Distinct Roles but Overlapping Functions

1. Constitutional law outlines the principles and framework governing the state, while

administrative law addresses the practical operations and procedures of the executive 24DrishtiIAS,https://www.drishtiias.com/important-institutions/drishti-specials-important-institutions-nationalinstitutions/tribunals-1,(Last Visited 05.June.2025) 25Scribd.com,https://www.scribd.com/document/505158448/416607663-Relationship-Between-Administrative- Law-and-Constitutional-Law?, (08.June.2025)

branch and its agencies.

2. Constitutional law delineates government entities in a static state (their structure and

powers), whereas administrative law illustrates them in action (how they operate and exercise their authority). Both branches strive to ensure accountability, safeguard individual rights, and avert the misuse of power; however, constitutional law lays the groundwork, while administrative law supplies the enforcement mechanisms. Judicial Review and Accountability

1. In jurisdictions that possess a written constitution, such as India, constitutional law

facilitates judicial review, enabling courts to verify that administrative actions and regulations adhere to constitutional criteria.

2. Administrative law establishes frameworks to guarantee that the executive branch does

not overstep its authority or infringe upon constitutional rights. Conclusion Administrative law plays a crucial role in contemporary governance by overseeing the powers, functions, and procedures of government agencies, ensuring their operations remain within legal limits and uphold individual rights. It creates a structure for rule-making, enforcement, and adjudication, promoting principles of fairness, accountability, and the rule of law. Through mechanisms such as judicial review and administrative tribunals, administrative law safeguards citizens against arbitrary or unlawful actions by authorities and provides remedies for grievances. In essence, it strikes a balance between the necessity for effective administration and the safeguarding of individual liberties, thereby fostering a fair and just society.

REFERENCES

1. DrishtiIAS,https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/to-the-point/ttp-constitution-ofindia/prevalence-of-the-rule-of-law,(Last Visited 02.June.2025) 2. Manupatraacademy,https://www.manupatracademy.com/home/subject-wise-caseguide,(Last Visited 02.June.2025) 3. DrishtiIAS,https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/delegatedlegislation, (Last Visited 05.June.2025)

4. Scibd.com,https://www.scribd.com/document/505158448/416607663-Relationship-

Between-Administrative-Law-and-Constitutional-Law, (08.June.2025)

5. Taxmann.comhttps://cdn.taxmann.com/BookshopFiles/bookfiles/9789356226500_sa

mpleNew705dacad3b31,(Last Visited 08. June.2025)