Team  SoOLEGAL

"JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 226 IS DIRECTED, NOT AGAINST THE DECISION, BUT THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS.": Supreme Court

Team SoOLEGAL 15 Mar 2019 3:54pm

"JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER ARTICLE 226 IS DIRECTED, NOT AGAINST THE DECISION, BUT THE DECISION MAKING PROCESS.": Supreme Court


An appeal was being considered by Supreme Court bench comprising of Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Indira Banerjee against Andhra Pradesh High Court's order. The High Court refused to interfere with the order of the District Collector in refusing to grant ryotwari patta in favour of the appellants. The Apex Court found that since the land is classified as "Peddacheruvu Tank" vested with the government. Thus there could not be issuance of ryotwari patta in view of the bar contained in Section 2-A of the Andhra Pradesh Inams (Abolition & Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1956. 

Justice Indira Banerjee added that no patta can be granted for water bodies or tanks, even if they have been dried up or when not in use. She delineated some fundamental principles of Judicial review of administrative decisions.

a.    Administrative decisions are subject to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution, only on grounds of perversity, patent illegality, irrationality, want of power to take the decision and procedural irregularity. Except on these grounds administrative decisions are not interfered with, in exercise of the extra ordinary power of judicial review.

b.    A decision is vitiated by irrationality if the decision is so outrageous, that it is in defiance of all logic; when no person acting reasonably could possibly have taken the decision, having regard to the materials on record. 

c.    A decision may sometimes be set aside and quashed under Article 226 on the ground of illegality. This is when there is an apparent error of law on the face of the decision, which goes to the root of the decision and/or in other words an apparent error, but for which the decision would have been otherwise. 

d.    Judicial review under Article 226 is directed, not against the decision, but the decision making process. Of course, a patent illegality and/or error apparent on the face of the decision, which goes to the root of the decision, may vitiate the decision making process. 

e.    In exercise of power under Article 226, the Court does not sit in appeal over the decision impugned, nor does it adjudicate hotly disputed questions of fact. 

Tagged: SupremeCourt   JusticeRBanumathi   JusticeIndiraBanerjee   JudicialReview   Article226  
Did you find this write up useful? YES 0 NO 0
User Comments
Send
Digital Payment Systemview all

Active Members

Have you activated yours ?

New Members view all
Legal News Headlines
×

C2RMTo Know More

Something Awesome Is In The Work

0

DAYS

0

HOURS

0

MINUTES

0

SECONDS

Sign-up and we will notify you of our launch.
We’ll also give some discount for your effort :)

* We won’t use your email for spam, just to notify you of our launch.