198. Administrative action is subject to judicial review on four grounds:
(i) Illegality
(ii) Irrationality
(iii) Procedural impropriety and,
(iv) Doctrine of proportionality of penalty or duty to act justly
Union of India Vs. Paramananda (AIR 1989 SC 1185) Shankar Das Vs. Union of India AIR 1985 SC 772)
199. Article 14 of the Constitution does not allow repetition of a wrong action to bring both wrongs on par
The respondent was held ineligible for the post for not possessing the prescribed essential qualifications. Her representation was referred to the expert committee who upheld her ineligibility. She raised a plea that in 1993, a similarly placed candidate was given appointment. Rejecting her contention, the Supreme Court observed - "In our considered opinion, such an action cannot give rise to equality clause enshrined by Article 14 of the Constitution of India, 1950. It is well settled and needs no authority that misconstruction of a provision of law in one case does not give rise to a similar misconstruction in other cases on the basis of doctrine of equality. An illegality cannot be allowed to be perpetuated under the so-called 'equality doctrine'. That is not the sweep of Article 14."
[Bihar Public Service Commission v. Kamini, C.A. No. 1970 of 2007 decided on 16.4.2007]
200. Any particular method or procedure adopted for long time should not ordinarily be interfered with
"It is a cardinal principle in Service Jurisprudence, that a particular method or procedure adopted for a long time, need not be ordinarily interfered with, unless such method is repugnant to any constitutional provision or is contrary to any statutory rule."
[Govt. of Andhra Pradesh v. Mohd. Ghouse Mohinuddin, Civil Appeal Nos. 1651-1652 of 1997 decided by Supreme Court on 27.8.2001
Post a Comment