Administrative Law MCQ Quiz in বাংলা - Objective Question with Answer for Administrative Law - বিনামূল্যে ডাউনলোড করুন [PDF]

Key Points

The correct answer is option 2) fair dealing by State in all its activities.

The notion of the Rule of Law is extended to ensure that the State acts fairly in all its activities, not just in limited domains or specific sectors. This principle requires the state and its agencies to operate under legal frameworks that are applied evenly and justly, ensuring that every action taken is accountable, transparent, and anchored in law. This comprehensive scope is crucial for maintaining public trust, safeguarding individual rights, and fostering a stable and orderly society.

Hint

The correct answer to the given question is option 1: "Both A and R are correct and R is the correct explanation of A."

Here's a detailed explanation of the relationship between the assertion (A) and the reason (R), and the rationale behind choosing option 1:

Assertion A: "From a functional point of view, an administrative tribunal is neither exclusively a judicial body nor exclusively an administrative body but is somewhere between the two."

This assertion is correct because administrative tribunals are established to provide a faster, less formal, and more specialized resolution of disputes in various areas of administrative law. They operate outside the regular court system and have the flexibility to adopt procedures that are less formal than those followed in courts. While they do perform functions similar to those of courts, such as adjudicating disputes, they also engage in administrative functions, making them a hybrid entity.

Reason R: "An administrative tribunal is not bound by strict rules of evidence and procedure."

This reason is correct and provides an explanation for why administrative tribunals are considered to be between judicial and administrative bodies. The flexibility in evidence and procedure allows tribunals to operate in a manner that is more accessible and less intimidating to the general public than traditional courts. This flexibility is a key feature that distinguishes administrative tribunals from courts, which are bound by strict rules of evidence and procedure. It enables tribunals to focus more on the substantive justice of each case, rather than being constrained by formalities.

Rationale for Option 1:

Option 1 is correct because both statements are accurate, and importantly, Reason R explains why Assertion A is true.

Key Points

The correct match between List I (Legal Cases) and List II (Legal Principles) is as follows:

 A. State of Rajasthan v. G Chanda                     I. Pith and substance

This principle is used to determine under which entry in the List a law falls under, focusing on its true nature, regardless of incidental encroachments.    

 B. K.T Moopil Nair v. State of Kerala                 II. Colourable Legislation

This case highlighted that legislation cannot do indirectly what it cannot do directly. This principle identifies laws that are ostensibly valid but made with an ill intent. 

 C. O.N Mahindroo v. Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa  IV. Harmonious construction

This principle is about interpreting provisions of a statute in a way that they complement each other, avoiding any conflict, ensuring the statute is read as a whole.         

 D. M karunanidhi v. Union of India                    III. Repugnancy

This principle deals with conflicts between laws made by the Centre and the State, where the central law prevails over the state law in case of inconsistency.               

Explanation for Each Point:

Pith and Substance: This doctrine is applied primarily in the context of distribution of powers between the Centre and the States. It means that if the law essentially falls within the jurisdiction of the legislature that enacted it, it cannot be invalidated merely because it incidentally encroaches on matters outside its jurisdiction.

Colourable Legislation: This concept is based on the Latin maxim "Quando aliquid prohibetur ex directo, prohibetur et per obliquum," meaning what cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. This principle exposes the intention behind the legislation to see if it's trying to achieve something indirectly that it cannot do directly.

Harmonious Construction: This principle is used when there are two or more provisions in a statute which appear to be in conflict with each other. It suggests that these provisions should be interpreted in such a manner that, if possible, effect can be given to both and the statute can be made to be internally consistent.

Repugnancy: This arises when there is a direct conflict between the central and state laws, and it is not possible to obey one without disobeying the other. According to Article 254 of the Indian Constitution, in case of any inconsistency between laws made by Parliament and laws made by the State Legislatures, the law made by Parliament prevails.

This table and the explanations clarify the legal principles involved in each of the mentioned landmark cases, demonstrating how they were applied or interpreted within the context of Indian jurisprudence.

Key Points 

Statement A: The Tribunal should not become a post-retirement heaven for civil servants.
 Correct: This statement reflects the concern that tribunals should not be seen as opportunities for civil servants to secure positions post-retirement, ensuring that appointments are made based on merit and the need for independence and expertise in the tribunal's functioning.

Statement B: Members of the Tribunals should be independent persons and not serving Civil servants.
Correct: This emphasizes the need for tribunal members to be independent, implying that they should not be currently serving as civil servants. This independence is crucial for ensuring that tribunal decisions are made impartially and are not influenced by government policies or positions.

Statement C: Members of Tribunal should retain lien in any government department.
Incorrect: Retaining a lien in a government department for tribunal members could compromise their independence, as it suggests they have an ongoing connection to the government, potentially influencing their impartiality and decisions.

Statement D: The Tribunal should resemble more the Courts and not bureaucratic boards.
Correct: This statement highlights the importance of tribunals functioning in a manner similar to courts, with an emphasis on judicial processes and principles rather than bureaucratic procedures. This is essential for ensuring that tribunals are perceived as impartial bodies that make decisions based on legal principles.

Statement E: The Tribunals must depend on government for infrastructure facilities.
Incorrect: While tribunals may require government support for infrastructure, suggesting that they must depend on the government could undermine their independence. Ideally, while logistical support from the government might be necessary, tribunals should strive for operational independence, including in matters of infrastructure and administration.

The correct answer is option 4 (A, B, and D only), as these statements accurately reflect the principles emphasized by the Supreme Court in the 2010 Madras Bar Association Case for ensuring the independence and effectiveness of administrative tribunals.

The correct answer is Sir Ivor Jennings

Key Points

• Administrative Law:
  • Administrative Law is concerned with the organization, powers, and duties of administrative authorities.
  • It regulates the functions and procedures of government agencies and ensures lawful execution of public administration.
  • Sir Ivor Jennings defined Administrative Law as the law relating to the Administration, which determines the organization, power, and duties of administrative authorities.

Additional Information

• Incorrect Options Overview:
  • Kenneth Culp Davis:
    • He is known for his extensive work in administrative law but did not define it as the law relating to the Administration.
  • Griffith and Street:
    • They contributed to administrative law literature but did not provide the specific definition attributed to Sir Ivor Jennings.
  • A.V. Dicey:
    • He is known for his theories on the rule of law and the constitution but did not define administrative law in this context.

The correct answer is 'Malafide Exercise of Power'

Key Points

• Non-application of mind in review of administrative discretion:
  • Non-application of mind refers to situations where decision-makers fail to consider relevant factors or apply their judgment correctly when exercising administrative discretion.
  • This can result in arbitrary, unreasonable, or unfair decisions, undermining the principles of good governance and justice.
• Acting Mechanically:
  • This occurs when decisions are made based on a fixed formula or routine without considering the specifics of each case.
  • It signifies a lack of individual assessment and application of mind.
• Acting under Dictation:
  • This situation arises when a decision-maker acts on the instructions of another authority rather than exercising their own discretion.
  • It indicates a failure to apply independent judgment.
• Imposing Fetters on the Exercise of Discretion:
  • This involves placing unnecessary restrictions or conditions on the exercise of discretion.
  • Such constraints can prevent the decision-maker from considering all relevant factors, leading to a non-application of mind.

Additional Information

• Malafide Exercise of Power:
  • While the malafide exercise of power involves improper or dishonest intent, it is not directly related to the non-application of mind.
  • Malafide actions are characterized by bad faith or ulterior motives, rather than a failure to consider relevant factors or exercise proper judgment.

The correct answer is 'Rule against bias'

Key Points

• Rule against bias:
  • The case of A. K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969) is a landmark judgment in Indian administrative law, primarily addressing the rule against bias.
  • The Supreme Court of India held that the principles of natural justice are applicable to administrative proceedings, including the rule against bias.
  • The rule against bias ensures that decisions are made impartially and without any vested interest, maintaining fairness in administrative actions.
  • In this case, the court emphasized that even administrative authorities must act fairly and without bias, ensuring justice and transparency in their decisions.

Additional Information

• Tortious liability of state:
  • This concept deals with the state's liability for wrongful acts committed by its servants. It is not the main issue in the A. K. Kraipak case.
• Delegated legislature:
  • Delegated legislation refers to laws made by an individual or body other than the legislature but with the legislature's authority. The A. K. Kraipak case does not primarily address this issue.
• Abuse of Discretion:
  • This involves the misuse of power by administrative authorities. While relevant, the central issue in A. K. Kraipak was the rule against bias rather than abuse of discretion.

The correct answer is Administrative procedure.

Key Points

• Sir Ivor Jennings' definition of 'Administrative Law':
  • Sir Ivor Jennings was a prominent legal scholar who extensively contributed to the study and understanding of constitutional and administrative law.
  • His definition of administrative law primarily focuses on the structure, powers, and functions of administrative authorities.
  • Jennings emphasized the importance of understanding the legal framework within which public administration operates.

Additional Information

• Administrative power:
  • Administrative power refers to the legal authority granted to administrative agencies to implement and enforce laws.
  • It includes the ability to make rules, adjudicate disputes, and take executive actions.
• Administrative organisation:
  • Administrative organisation pertains to the structure and hierarchy of administrative bodies and agencies.
  • It involves the arrangement and coordination of various departments and officials to ensure efficient functioning.
• Administrative duties:
  • Administrative duties are the specific responsibilities and tasks assigned to administrative agencies and officials.
  • These duties include implementing policies, providing public services, and ensuring compliance with laws and regulations.

Statement I Analysis:
This statement highlights a principle in legislative powers, where the legislature, under certain conditions, has the ability to delegate its legislative powers to other bodies or authorities.
The key condition mentioned is that the legislature must not abdicate or efface itself completely through this delegation. This means the primary legislative body must retain its supreme legislative authority and not relinquish all its powers.
In legal terms, delegation is permissible as long as the essential legislative functions and ultimate control remain with the legislature. This practice is common in many democratic systems to allow for more specialized or localized decision-making.
Hence, Statement I is correct.
Statement II Analysis:
This statement suggests that the Parliament (or any supreme legislative body) can abdicate or efface itself by creating a parallel legislative body.
The concept of abdication or effacement in this context would mean relinquishing all or most of the legislative powers to another body, essentially making the original legislative body redundant or significantly diminishing its authority.
Legally and constitutionally, such an act would undermine the sovereignty and the foundational principle of a legislative body being the primary source of legislative authority. It would also raise serious questions about the legitimacy and constitutionality of such an action.
Most legal systems and constitutional frameworks do not allow for the complete abdication or effacement of legislative power as it goes against the principle of separation of powers and the essence of a democratic legislative process.
Hence, Statement II is incorrect.
Conclusion:
After analyzing both statements, it is clear that Statement I correctly represents the principle of delegation of legislative powers without complete abdication, while Statement II incorrectly suggests that a legislative body can completely abdicate its powers by creating a parallel legislative body.
- Therefore, the correct answer is option 3: Statement I is correct but Statement II is incorrect.

Key Points

Option 1 is correct because both Statement I and Statement II accurately describe two grounds upon which judicial review can be sought in the context of administrative law.

Statement I: This statement accurately defines the concept of "irrationality" in the context of judicial review. The term is used to describe a decision made by a public body which is so unreasonable that no sensible person who had applied his or her mind to the issue could have arrived at it. This standard for "irrationality" was famously outlined in the case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corporation (1947) and is often referred to as "Wednesbury unreasonableness". It points to an extreme form of unreasonableness in administrative decisions.

Statement II: This statement correctly describes another aspect of "unreasonableness" in the legal context, which focuses on decisions that are fundamentally flawed either because they are not supported by the evidence (the facts do not warrant the conclusion) or they are unjustly biased or partial, leading to unequal treatment. This captures the essence of judicial review's concern with ensuring that administrative decisions are made fairly, on a rational basis, and without partiality.

Thus, Option 1 is correct because both statements accurately represent considerations that can lead to judicial review of administrative decisions, focusing on the principles of rationality and fairness.