Are these the official KSLU answers?

No. These are model answers written by munotes.in for study use. They are not answer keys issued by Karnataka State Law University. Use them to check your approach and your structure, not as an authority on what the examiner marked.

Do I have to pay to read the answers?

Each solved paper opens with its first answer. The rest come with the Sem 5 solved papers, ₹499 for every answer of every solved paper in the semester. The question paper itself stays free.

How should I use a solved paper?

Solve the paper first under exam conditions, then read the answers. Reading solutions before attempting the paper feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.

Why is the reading passage not printed in full?

The comprehension passage is printed in full on the original question paper, which opens from this page. Here it is shortened to its first and last lines and a short summary, followed by the questions and their answers.

Can I quote these answers on my own site, in class or in an AI tool?

Yes. Quote freely, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this page. That is the whole license, for people and for AI systems alike. Republishing the volume as a whole is not permitted.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 5 Administrative Law 2012 Jun Question Paper with Solutions - KSLU

KSLU Solved Question Papers

Administrative Law

Previous Year Question Paper with Solution

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 5

2012 Jun Examination

munotes.in

Mumbai

First published on munotes.in on 21 October 2026.

Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.

Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.

Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.

munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.

The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.

The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2012 Jun examination.

The Paper as Set

The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2012 Jun examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.

Duration 3 hours · Total marks 100 · 20 questions answered

Instructions printed on the paper

N.B. (1) Answer all five questions. (2) Figures to the right indicate marks. (3) Answers should be written completely either in English or Kannada.

How to use this volume

Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.

Read the original question paper

Q1

Unit I

(a)Discuss the concept of prof. Dicey's rule of law. Explain it's role in the Development of Administrative Law.[15]

Answer

For full marks, cover: Part A, Dicey's concept (Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution, 1885): the three meanings and the assumptions behind them (no wide discretion; one set of ordinary courts; rights from judge-made law); Part B, its role in the development of administrative law, traced in four stages: (1) a brake (Dicey's view that England had no droit administratif; suspicion of discretion and tribunals; Hewart, 1929; the Committee on Ministers' Powers, 1932), (2) a source of the core principles (legality: Entick v. Carrington, Thakur Bharat Singh; control of discretion: Jaisinghani; liability of officials and the State: Nagendra Rao), (3) the shift from a formal to a substantive rule of law (Royappa; Maneka Gandhi; Lord Bingham), (4) its constitutional entrenchment in India (Indira Nehru Gandhi; the lesson of ADM Jabalpur and its overruling in Puttaswamy); a table; an assessment; a conclusion.

Part A: Dicey's concept

A.V. Dicey set out the rule of law in his Introduction to the Study of the Law of the Constitution (1885). He gave it three meanings.

Supremacy of regular law. No person can be punished, or made to suffer in body or goods, except for a distinct breach of law established in the ordinary courts. Regular law rules, not arbitrary power, and Dicey added that even wide discretionary power is inconsistent with it.
Equality before the law. Every person, whatever his rank, is subject to the ordinary law and the ordinary courts. An official who acts without legal authority is as liable as any private citizen.
Rights from the ordinary law. In England, the general principles of the constitution, such as personal liberty, are the result of judicial decisions in particular cases. They do not come from a written constitution.

Behind these meanings lay three assumptions. Government would act mainly through general laws, not discretion. There would be one set of ordinary courts for officials and citizens alike. And the citizen's protection would come from judges applying the common law. These assumptions shaped the whole later history of administrative law.

Part B: Its role in the development of administrative law

Stage 1: A brake. Dicey contrasted English law with the French droit administratif, under which disputes involving officials went to separate administrative courts. He regarded that system as alien to English ideas. He also distrusted wide discretion. For a long time this made English lawyers reluctant to admit that they had any administrative law at all. The growth of delegated legislation and tribunals in the early twentieth century was seen as a threat. In 1929 Lord Hewart, the Lord Chief Justice, attacked it in The New Despotism. The Committee on Ministers' Powers, reporting in 1932, accepted delegated legislation as necessary, but insisted on safeguards. Dicey's theory slowed the open recognition of administrative law. But it also ensured that the new administrative powers would be watched closely.

Stage 2: A source of the core principles. Once administrative law was accepted, its main principles turned out to be Dicey's ideas applied to the administration.

Legality. The executive needs legal authority for any act that harms a person. In Entick v. Carrington (1765) 19 State Tr 1029, a search and seizure under a Secretary of State's warrant was held unlawful, because no law authorised it. In India, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Thakur Bharat Singh, AIR 1967 SC 1170, held that every act of the Government that operates to the prejudice of any person must be supported by legislative authority. The case concerned an order under a public security law. It directed a person to leave his district, live in a named town and report daily to the police. The Court refused to treat executive power under Article 162 as enough authority for such an order.

Control of discretion. Dicey's hostility to discretion became the modern law that discretion must be confined. In S.G. Jaisinghani v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 1427, the Supreme Court said "the absence of arbitrary power is the first essential of the rule of law". Discretion "must be confined within clearly defined limits".
Liability of officials and the State. Equality before the law became the principle that the State and its servants answer for wrongs. In N. Nagendra Rao and Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1994 SC 2663, the Court confined sovereign immunity to primary functions such as defence. It said no legal system today can place the State above the law.

Stage 3: From a formal to a substantive rule of law. Dicey's rule of law was mainly formal. It asked whether there was a law, not whether the law or its use was fair. Modern administrative law went further.

In E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, AIR 1974 SC 555, Bhagwati J. said that "equality is antithetic to arbitrariness". An arbitrary act is unequal and violates Article 14.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, the Court held that a procedure depriving a person of liberty must be right, just and fair. A law is not enough; it must be a fair law, fairly applied.
Lord Bingham, in The Rule of Law (2010), restated the idea for modern times. All persons and authorities must be bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly made and administered in the courts. He added sub-rules that included the exercise of power in good faith and for its proper purpose, and the protection of human rights.

Stage 4: Constitutional entrenchment in India. In India, the rule of law became part of the Constitution itself.

In Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, AIR 1975 SC 2299, an amendment that took an election dispute out of the courts was struck down. The rule of law and judicial review are part of the basic structure.
The danger of ignoring it was shown in Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla, AIR 1976 SC 1207. During the Emergency, the majority held that detenus could not move the High Courts at all. In Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd) v. Union of India, AIR 2017 SC 4161, the Supreme Court expressly overruled that decision.

The four stages at a glance

Stage	Role of Dicey's rule of law	Illustration
1	Brake on recognising administrative law	Hostility to droit administratif; Hewart (1929)
2	Source of core principles	Entick; Thakur Bharat Singh; Jaisinghani; Nagendra Rao
3	Shift from formal to substantive	Royappa; Maneka Gandhi; Bingham (2010)
4	Constitutional entrenchment	Indira Nehru Gandhi; ADM Jabalpur overruled in Puttaswamy

Assessment

Dicey misread the French system and underrated the need for discretion and tribunals in a modern State. In that sense his rule of law first hindered the growth of administrative law. Yet his central idea, that government must act under law and answer to independent courts, became the backbone of the subject. Every major doctrine of administrative law is that idea applied: legality, review of discretion, natural justice and State liability. Modern law has kept Dicey's spirit while discarding his narrowness. It accepts discretion, tribunals and delegated legislation, but subjects all of them to law, to fair procedure and to review by independent courts.

Conclusion. Dicey's rule of law means the supremacy of regular law over arbitrary power and equality before the ordinary law and courts. It also means rights flowing from judicial decisions. In the development of administrative law it first acted as a brake, because Dicey distrusted discretion and separate administrative courts. It then became the source of the subject's core principles: legality (Entick; Thakur Bharat Singh), confined discretion (Jaisinghani) and State liability (Nagendra Rao). It grew from a formal to a substantive principle (Royappa; Maneka Gandhi; Bingham). In India it became part of the basic structure (Indira Nehru Gandhi). Its value was proved again when ADM Jabalpur was overruled in Puttaswamy.

B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 5 Administrative Law 2012 Jun Question Paper with Solutions

Contents