RULE OF LAW-AN OVERVIEW
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background/Objectives: The concept of the rule of law opposes the arbitrary use of discretionary power by administrative authorities. It emphasizes that rules should be based on the law and not on personal preferences. The rule of law is a fundamental principle of our Constitution, and equality before the law is a corollary of it.
Methods/Statistical Analysis: The methodology adopted for this research work will primarily be based on doctrinal analysis, i.e., utilizing theoretical sources. The theoretical work will focus on administrative actions of public bodies, their policies, and the Constitutional, Legislative, Executive, and judicial control of administrative actions through the doctrine of legitimate expectation. Material will be collected from various disciplines of administrative and Constitutional law. The research will also rely heavily on various journals, reviews, and national & international judicial pronouncements.
Findings: The modern concept of the rule of law implies that the function of government in a free society should be executed in a way that recognizes the civil and political rights of individuals. It stands against arbitrary power and is closely related to Article 14, which requires fairness in administrative actions. To enable individuals to compete on equal terms, it is necessary to take positive steps to uplift the disadvantaged and bring them to a level of advantage similar to the fortunate ones.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
IJCERT Policy:
The published work presented in this paper is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. This means that the content of this paper can be shared, copied, and redistributed in any medium or format, as long as the original author is properly attributed. Additionally, any derivative works based on this paper must also be licensed under the same terms. This licensing agreement allows for broad dissemination and use of the work while maintaining the author's rights and recognition.
By submitting this paper to IJCERT, the author(s) agree to these licensing terms and confirm that the work is original and does not infringe on any third-party copyright or intellectual property rights.
References
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 27.
Massy, I.P. (1998). Administrative Law, 20.
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 27.
Retrieved from www.lexisnexis.co.uk on October 27, 2016.
Ram Prasaed Narayan Sahi v. State of Bihar, AIR 1953 SC 215 at 217.
Retrieved from plato.stanford.edu on October 27, 2016.
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 27.
Quoted in Jagdish Swarup, L. M. Singhvi, Constitution of India-II, 236-237 (2006).
Massy, I.P. (1998). Administrative Law, 20.
Jagdish Swarup, L. M. Singhvi, Constitution of India-II, 236 (2006).
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 27.
Kesari, U.P.D. (14th Ed). Lectures on Administrative Law, 24.
Jain, M.P. (2006). Indian Constitutional Law, 6.
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 29-30.
Massy, I.P. (1999). Administrative Law, 2.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1976) 2 SCC 521.
Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner, A.I.R. 1970 SC 150.
Wade, H.W.R. (1977). Administrative Law, 25-26.
Upadhyaya, J.J.R. (2004). Administrative Law, 30.
State of Maharashtra v. Veerappa R. Saboji, (1990) 2 SCC 653 at 658-59.
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1988 SC 1768 at 1769.
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 1325.
Virender Singh Hooda v. State (NCT of Delhi), AIR 1987 SC 579.
Vineet Narain v. Union of India, 1999 SCC (cri) 577.
Golak Nath v. State of Punjab, AIR 1975 SC 2299.