General principles[ edit ] Judicial review can be understood in the context of two distinct—but parallel—legal systems, civil law and common lawand also by two distinct theories of democracy regarding the manner in which government should be organized with respect to the principles and doctrines of legislative supremacy and the separation of powers. First, two distinct legal systems, civil law and common lawhave different views about judicial review.
Today the power of the administrative authorities become very strong and thus it resulted different complications and repercussions in the socio-economic field in India. Therefore, considering the day to day increasing power of the administrative bodies judicial control is become an important area of the administrative law as because the judicial department i.
Courts have proved to be the more effective and beneficiary branch than any other Parliamentary or Legislative or Administrative action for the purpose of the controlling the administrative action in India.
In this regard Prof. Administrative law also provides for control over administrative action by an outside agency strong enough to prevent injustice to the individual while leaving the administrative agencies adequate freedom to enable them to carry on effective administration.
Administration is the meeting point of three types of government functions. The executive performs the residue of all these functions which are not vested in the two other branches of government i.
Administrative action may therefore, be legislative or judicial or neither, i.
All these functions are exercised by the administration. Administrative Judicial control of administrative action in in this way cuts across the traditional classification of governmental powers and combines into one, all the powers which were traditionally exercised by three different organs of state i.
Power of Judicial control of the Administrative action may be divided under two heads in India: Administrative actions may be controlled by the Courts by issuing different writs under different circumstances in India. Courts through issuing different writs playing a vital role in the judicial control of administrative actions in India.
Article 32 2 provides that the Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be appropriate for the enforcement of any of the fundamental rights 2 and for the control of the administrative action in India.
This right is available only against State as defined under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Thus a person can go straight to the Supreme Court for the protection of his Fundamental rights; this jurisdiction of Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution is considered as a part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
Article empowers the High Court to issue writs for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights as well as for any other oppose. Article provides that notwithstanding 1. Jayantilal Amrat Lal Vs F.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha V. Union of India, A. Anything in Article 32, every High Court shall have power throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority including in appropriate cases any Government within those territories, directions, orders or which including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them for the endorsement of any of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by part III of the Constitution and for any other purpose.
Both Article 32 and Article provide five kinds of writs through which administrative action may be judicially controlled along with other actions.
Article under clause 4 made it quite clear that though both the Articles provides right of writs under the same heads, i. Judicial Control over administrative action is exercised through the Constitutional extraordinary remedies and statutory ordinary remedies as well.
Provisions for extraordinary remedies have been made under Article 32 and of the Constitution. For controlling administrative action Supreme Court and High Court can issue the writs of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari.
A short discussion is given hereunder: Habeas Corpus means bring the body. The writ of habeas Corpus is issued as an order calling upon the person who has detain another person to produce the detune before the Court to examine the legality of his detention.
If the detune is produced before the Court and the Court finds the detention is illegal then it will order for the immediate release of the person detained illegally.Judicial Control over Administration and Protect the Citizen's Rights: An Analytical Overview Md. Awal Hossain Mollah1 paper include only judicial control over administration.
To analyse judicial Rule decision or Quasi judicial action is exercised by the administrative adjudicating power. A Judge or Candidate for Judicial Office Shall Not Engage in Political or Campaign Activity That is Inconsistent with the Independence, Integrity, or Impartiality of the Judiciary.
20 RULE Political and Campaign Activities of Judges and Judicial Candidates in General 20 RULE Political and. 3 7. Agency Action: includes the whole or part of an agency rule, order, license, sanction, relief, or the denial thereof, or a failure to act.
1 TEXAS CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT (As amended by the Supreme Court of Texas through August 22, ) Preamble Our legal system is based on the principle that an independent, fair and competent.
Providing access to court services and information. Simpler — today and tomorrow. 16a.
typed name and grade of commanding officer 16b. signature 16c. date of report (yyyymmdd) da form , jun remarks resultant sentences, punishments, or administrative action.