ADMINISTRATIVE LAW SYLLABUS

Unit I: Evolution and Scope of Administrative Law

1. Rule of Law
Entick v. Carrington (1765) – Established that no one is above the law.
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) – Discussed the Rule of Law during emergencies in
India.

2. Separation of Powers
- Ram Jawaya Kapoor v. State of Punjab (1955) – Explained the separation of powers in
India.
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Basic structure doctrine, including
separation of powers.

3. Relationship between Constitutional Law and Administrative Law

State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952) – Discussed administrative discretion and
constitutional safeguards.

Unit-II: Legislative Functions of Administration (Delegated Legislation)

1. Constitutionality of Delegated Legislation
In re Delhi Laws Act (1951) – Examined limits on delegated legislation.
Hamdard Dawakhana v. Union of India (1960) – Struck down excessive delegation.

2. Judicial Control of Delegated Legislation

A.K. Roy v. Union of India (1982) – Judicial review of delegated legislation.
Regina v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Fire Brigades Union (1995) –
UK case on judicial oversight.

3. Procedural Control
Union of India v. Cynamide India Ltd.(1987) – Importance of procedural fairness in delegated
legislation.

Unit-III: Judicial Functions of Administration (Administrative Tribunals & Natural Justice)

1. Principles of Natural Justice
A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969) – Bias in administrative decisions.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) – Expanded scope of audi alteram partem

2. Administrative Tribunals
S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India (1987) – Validity of tribunals under the Indian
Constitution.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) – Tribunals must be subject to High Court
jurisdiction.
3. Speaking Orders (Reasoned Decisions)
- S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India (1990) – Mandatory requirement of reasoned orders.

Unit-IV: Administrative Discretion & Judicial Review

1. Judicial Review of Administrative Action
- Associated Provincial Picture Houses v. Wednesbury Corporation (1948) – "Wednesbury
unreasonableness."
-Council of Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (1985) – Grounds for judicial
review (illegality, irrationality, procedural impropriety).

2. Doctrine of Legitimate Expectations

-Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation (1993) – Recognised the doctrine in
India.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SYLLABUS

. Sources and Framing of the Indian Constitution

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Highlighted the historical context and sources
of the Constitution.

. Salient features of the Indian Constitution

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975) – Examined features like democracy, rule of law, and
judicial review.

. Is the Indian Constitution Federal in Nature?

State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) – Discussed the federal nature of the Indian
Constitution.
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994) – Reinforced federalism and the limits of central power.

Unit-II: Constitutional Organs

Raja Ram Pal v. Speaker, Lok Sabha (2007) – Addressed parliamentary privileges and
composition.
M.S.M. Sharma v. Krishna Sinha (1959) – Defined the scope of parliamentary privileges.

Legislative Process
I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967) – Examined the legislative power to amend the
Constitution.

Executive Power: Power of the President and Governor

Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab (1974) – Clarified the role of the President/Governor as a
nominal head.
Nabam Rebia v. Deputy Speaker (2016) – Discussed the discretionary powers of the Governor.

Judiciary
Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997) – Upheld the power of judicial review under Articles
32 and 226.

Independence of the Judiciary

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1993) – Established the
collegium system for judicial appointments.

Unit-III: Distribution of Powers between Centre and States

a. Legislative Relations between the Union and the States
State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla (1959) – Discussed the distribution of legislative powers under
the Seventh Schedule.

b. Administrative Relations between the Union and the States

State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977) – Examined administrative control and cooperation.

c. Financial Relations between the Union and the States

State of West Bengal v. Union of India (1963) – Addressed financial federalism.

d. Relevant Doctrines:
i. Territorial Nexus
Tata Iron & Steel Co. v. State of Bihar (1958) – Applied the doctrine of territorial nexus.

ii. Harmonious Construction

Commissioner of Income Tax v. Hindustan Bulk Carriers (2003) – Applied harmonious
construction to resolve conflicts in statutes.

iii. Pith and Substance

State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara (1951) – Distinguished between the pith and substance of
laws.

iv. Doctrine of Repugnancy

M. Karunanidhi v. Union of India (1979) – Explained repugnancy under Article 254.

v. Colourable Legislation
K.C. Gajapati Narayan Deo v. State of Orissa (1953) – Defined colourable legislation.

Unit-IV: Other Provisions

b. Emergency Provisions: Articles 352-360
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976) – Controversial case on suspension of fundamental
rights during the Emergency.

Amendment of the Constitution

. Procedure of Amendment of the Constitution
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) – Established the basic structure doctrine.

Unit I: Fundamental Rights – I

a. Definition of 'State' for Enforcement of Fundamental Rights
1. Justiciability of Fundamental Rights
-Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) Basic structure doctrine limits Parliament’s
power to amend FRs.
- Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) Reinforced balance between FRs and DPSPs.

2. Doctrine of Eclipse
-Bhikaji Narain Dhakras v. State of M.P. (1955) Pre-constitutional laws inconsistent with FRs
are eclipsed.

3. Severability & Waiver

R.M.D.C. v. Union of India (1957) Doctrine of severability applied to invalidate part of a
statute.
- *Basheshar Nath v. CIT (1959) – Fundamental rights cannot be waived.

b. Right to Equality (Articles 14–18)

1. Reasonable Classification (Article 14)
-State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar (1952) Test of intelligible differentia and "rational
nexus.
- E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu (1974) Equality means absence of arbitrariness.

2. Compensatory Discrimination (Article 15 & 16)

- Indra Sawhney v. Union of India (1992) – 50% cap on reservations; creamy layer exclusion.
- Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Union of India (2008) Validity of OBC reservations in education.

3. Legitimate Expectations
- Union of India v. Hindustan Development Corporation (1993) – Defined the scope of
legitimate expectations.

c. Fundamental Freedoms (Article 19)

1. Freedom of Speech & Press
-Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras (1950) – Freedom of speech includes the freedom to
propagate ideas.
 - Bennett Coleman v. Union of India (1973) – Press freedom under Article 19(1)(a).

2. Reasonable Restrictions
- A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) – Narrow interpretation of "procedure established by
law."
- K.A. Abbas v. Union of India (1971)– Pre-censorship of films under Article 19(2).

Unit-II: Fundamental Rights – II

a. Right to Life & Personal Liberty (Articles 20–22)
1. Expansive Interpretation (Article 21)
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) "Procedure established by law" must be fair, just,
and reasonable.
- K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) – Right to Privacy as a fundamental right.

2. Gay’s Rights & Live-in Relationships

- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) – Decriminalized homosexuality (Section 377).
- Lata Singh v. State of U.P. (2006) – Recognised live-in relationships under Article 21.

3. Right to Education (Article 21A)

-Unni Krishnan v. State of A.P. (1993) Education up to 14 years is a fundamental right.
- Society for Unaided Private Schools v. Union of India (2012 – Upheld RTE Act’s 25%
reservation for EWS.

b. Right Against Exploitation (Articles 23–24)

1. Forced Labour & Human Trafficking
-People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India (1982)– "Begar" (forced labour)
violates Article 23.
2. Child Labour
- M.C. Mehta v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996)– Ban on child labour in hazardous industries.

Unit-III: Fundamental Rights – III

a. Freedom of Religion & Minority Rights (Articles 25–30)
1. Essential Religious Practices
- Shirur Mutt Case (1954) Doctrine of essential religious practices.
- Sabrimala Case (2018): Conflict between religious customs and gender equality.

2. Minority Educational Institutions

- T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka (2002) – Autonomy of minority institutions.

b. Writs & Judicial Review

1. Types of Writs
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976)– Habeas Corpus during Emergency (controversial).
 S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) Expanded locus standi for PILs (Mandamus).

2. Article 32 vs. Article 226

Charan Lal Sahu v. Union of India (1990) Article 32 is a "basic feature" of the Constitution.

Unit-IV: Directive Principles & Fundamental Duties

a. DPSPs & Their Justiciability
1. Conflict with FRs
State of Madras v. Champakam Dorairajan (1951) DPSPs cannot override FRs.
Minerva Mills Case (1980): Harmonious construction of FRs and DPSPs.

2. Key DPSP Judgments

-Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) Right to livelihood (Article 41).

b. Fundamental Duties
AIIMS Students’ Union v. AIIMS (2002) Duties are enforceable in specific contexts (e.g.,
upholding sovereignty).

c. Interrelation Between FRs & DPSPs

Unnikrishnan v. State of A.P. (1993) Education as both FR (Article 21A) and DPSP (Article 45).