Discretionary Powers

-Discretion not to be in conflict with general public interest.

-Administrative decisions exercised under discretionary authority are open to judicial review, which ultimately safeguards that discretionary authority exercises are only in a fair and just manner.

Role:

-It allows the authorities to exercise their discretion in deciding upon the choice of facts and situations.

-They are better able to adapt to singular or unexpected situations.

-The discretionary power is guided by many factors, including public interest, the rights of individuals, and policy aims.

Limits:

-Statutory Limitations: The discretion should adhere to the statute and the rules, which lay down the amplitude of power.

-Reasonableness: The discretion must be exercised in a reasonable manner, not arbitrary or capricious, but founded on rational evidence and considerations.

-Fairness: The exercise of discretion is to uphold principles of natural justice, not discriminating or causing undue harm.

-Transparency and Accountability: Officials are required to ensure transparency and accountability for the decisions.

-Judicial Review: Courts may examine discretionary decisions, intervening only when they are exercised improperly or in violation of legal principles.

Types

Discretionary power in Indian administrative law can be broadly categorized into the following types:

1. Administrative Discretion

The discretionary power vested in administrative authorities or agencies to decide matters on individual judgment not by stringent adherence to any set of rules is called administrative discretion. Such discretion makes an authority mould his decision to the facts and circumstances of the case for which provision has not been made in the statute or rule explicitly.

Purpose and Significance:

-Discretionary power permits administrative bodies to make and modify decisions according to the facts and circumstances of each case in a more nuanced and hence, context-apt manner.

-Through the exercise of discretion, officials are better placed to simplify administration and avoid delay and inflexibility, which can result from a strict application of rules.

-Discretion permits decisions to be tailored to meet the needs and conditions of each situation, not adopting a one-size-fits-all approach.

Types of Administrative Discretion:

1. Rule-Making Discretion

2. Enforcement Discretion

3. Licensing and Permit Discretion

4. Policy Implementation Discretion

Key Points:

1. Legal Bounds:

- Discretion has to be exercised subject to the limits imposed by legislation and regulations. Any discretionary action that goes beyond these limits can be successfully challenged as ultra vires.

- Most agencies have internal guidelines that clarify the contours and limits of discretionary power.

2. Reasonableness and Fairness:

- Discretionary decisions shall be based on rational considerations and evidence to avoid arbitrary or capricious outcomes.

- The exercise of discretion should accord with principles of natural justice so that decisions are fair and non-discriminatory.

3. Transparency and Accountability:

- Officials should take decisions in a transparent manner; reasons should be given wherever appropriate.

- It includes mechanisms of scrutiny and accountability for administrative decisions, in that officials are held responsible for actions taken.

4. Judicial Review:

-The exercise of discretionary power is open to judicial review. The intervention of courts can be expected against discretionary decisions proved unreasonable, unjust, or contrary to principles of law.

-Procedural irregularity, abuse of discretion, or failure to take into account a relevant factor.

2. Quasi-Judicial Discretion:

Quasi-judicial discretion is the type of authority exercised by an administrative body or official vested with powers much like those discharged by a judicial tribunal. In contrast to purely administrative functions, which are the quasi-judicial functions involving the application of legal principles to resolve a dispute or adjudicate the rights of those appearing before the administrative agency, based on evidence and legal standards. This type of discretion is adjudicative in nature, affecting the rights and obligations of private persons.

Features:

-Quasi-judicial bodies undertake tasks related to settling disputes or ascertainment of rights and liabilities, much like judicial tasks.

-Decisions are based upon legal norms, principles of natural justice, and procedural rules which generally follow a defined procedure.

-The discretion consists of evaluating evidence, listening to parties concerned, and making decisions on the basis of available facts.

Purpose and Importance:

-Fairness and Justice: Quasi-judicial discretion ensures that decisions affecting persons' rights are taken in a manner that ensures fairness and adherence to the yardsticks provided by the law.

-Specialized Adjudication: This enables specialist bodies to deal with particular disputes or regulatory matters, making use of their specialist expertise to take informed decisions.

-Procedural Fairness: Such discretion incorporates principles of natural justice, including the right to a fair hearing, and enhances the legitimacy and acceptance of decisions.

Types of Quasi-Judicial Discretion:

1. Adjudicative Discretion

2. Licensing and Regulatory Discretion

3. Administrative Tribunal Discretion

Key Points

1. Adherence to Legal Principles:

- Quasi-judicial discretion should be exercised within the four corners of principles of law and statutory requirements. The decisions should therefore be in compliance with existing laws and rules.

- The discretion is to be exercised in tune with principles of natural justice comprising the right of a fair hearing, decision-making free from bias, and reasoned judgments.

2. Procedural Fairness:

- The right to a hearing to state one's case and to answer evidence or argument presented against each affected party.

- Each decision must be accompanied by clear reasons referring to the admissible evidence and legal standards that were applied, promoting transparency and accountability.

- Quasi-judicial decisions can always be subjected to judicial review, which helps courts to ensure that such decisions adhere to the principles of law and procedure.

- These are the grounds of review: procedural irregularity, bias, failure to consider relevant factors, or decisions made beyond the conferred authority.

4. Transparency and Accountability:

- The working of the quasi-judicial bodies has to be transparent, giving full reasons and documentation for the decisions arrived at.

- The Bodies are responsible for the decisions taken and due compliance with legal and procedural norms should be ensured.

3. Legislative Discretion

Legislative discretion may be considered to be the discretionary power entrusted with such legislative bodies as the Parliament of India and various state legislatures in making, amending, or repealing any laws over which they may hold jurisdiction. This discretionary power enables lawmakers to redress the changing needs and circumstances of society under broad principles and not detailed rules. It is different from administrative or quasi-judicial discretionary power on the ground that the former has to do with law-making and policy formulation, while the latter concerns execution or adjudication of the same.

Legislative discretion incorporates authority to enact, amend, or even repeal any legislation which shapes the legal framework through which wide areas of society are regulated.

That discretion is exercised within a general framework laid down by the Constitution or the enabling statutes and permits legislators flexibility to respond to new issues and societal needs.

The capability of delineating broad policy directions and priorities through legislation that reflect the values and needs of society.

Purpose and Importance:

-Legislative discretion ensures that, on account of altering social, economic, and political situations, changes to the concerned laws may be made to ensure they are relevant and effective.

-It opens an avenue for legislators to introduce new policies and solutions to deal with contemporary challenges or gaps in existing laws.

-This discretion is useful in tailing the laws to the needs and values of the electorate, bringing democratic governance into being.

Types:

1. Law-Making Discretion

2. Policy Direction Discretion

3. Delegation Discretion

Key Points:

1. Constitutional Restraints:

- Legislative discretion is to be exercised within the four corners of the Constitution of India, in a way that the laws enacted do not violate fundamental rights and constitutional provisions.

-The Legislature must enact all laws in a manner that respects and abides by the basic rights provided under the Constitution.

2. Legislative Process:

-The legislative discretion is exercised through established processes in the form of debate, scrutiny, and approval by both Houses of Parliament or state legislatures.

-Public discussions, consultations, and committee reviews are part of the process of legislation making to ensure transparency and accountability.

3. Judicial Review:

-The legislative actions are open to judicial review, which tests them with reference to the constitution and the law.

-Where it involves judicial review on grounds of unconstitutionality, violation of fundamental rights, and procedural irregularity.

4. Accountability:

-Legislators are accountable to their constituencies, and discretionary actions on the part of legislators are subject to electoral review and public opinion.

-Mechanisms of oversight and review are in place so that laws and policies can be effectively and equitably implemented.

Judicial Review of Discretionary Power

The exercise of discretionary power is open to judicial review to ensure it is:

- Legality: It should adhere to legal standards; that is, such actions should accord with legal norms and statutory provisions.

Not Arbitrary: Decisions shall be based on rational criteria and not on whim or personal bias.

-Respects Fundamental Rights: Exercise of discretion shall not contravene any of the fundamental rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

Judicial review helps in keeping a check and balance on discretionary power by making sure that it complies with the legal and ethical limitations. If such discretion is exercised improperly or the decisions are unreasonable, unfair, or contrary to any statute or the constitution, the courts will interfere.