KSLU Solved Question Papers
Administrative Law
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 5
2015 Jun Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 5 Administrative Law 2015 Jun Question Paper with Solutions
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 2015 Jun examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2015 Jun examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2015 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 · 13 questions answered
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.
Q1" The study of Administrative law is not an end in itself but a means to an end". Examine. How does it differ from constitutional law.[16]
Answer
For full marks, cover: Part A, the meaning of the statement: administrative law as an instrument, not a self-contained body of rules; the ends it serves (control of power under the rule of law; fairness to the individual; efficient and responsive administration; accountability; participation), each with an illustration from Indian law (Jaisinghani, Kraipak, Maneka Gandhi, Nilabati Behera, the RTI Act, the Lokayuktas); what follows for the way the subject is studied; Part B, how administrative law differs from constitutional law (subject-matter, sources, generality, supremacy, remedies), with the overlap shown by Maneka Gandhi; a conclusion.
Part A: A means to an end
What the statement means
A student could learn administrative law as a list of doctrines: delegation, natural justice, the writs, tribunals, liability. The statement warns against that. These doctrines are not valuable for their own sake. They exist to secure certain results in the relationship between the State and the people it governs. Rules that fail to secure those results should be changed. Rules that secure them should be understood in their light.
So the right question about any rule of administrative law is: what is it for, and does it work?
The ends it serves
1. Keeping power within law. Modern administration holds vast power. The first end is that this power be used only as the law allows. S.G. Jaisinghani v. Union of India, AIR 1967 SC 1427, said that the absence of arbitrary power is "the first essential of the rule of law", and that discretion "must be confined within clearly defined limits". The doctrines of ultra vires and abuse of discretion are means to this end.
2. Fairness to the individual. A person affected by an administrative decision should be treated fairly. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 150, extended natural justice to administrative action. An unjust administrative decision, it said, may have a more far-reaching effect than a quasi-judicial one. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597, required that procedure affecting liberty be "right and just and fair", not arbitrary. The hearing rule and the rule against bias are means to fairness.
3. Efficient and responsive government. Administrative law does not aim to paralyse government. Delegated legislation, tribunals and discretion exist precisely so that the State can act quickly and expertly. Good administrative law enables as well as restrains.
4. Accountability and redress. Those harmed by wrongful administration should be compensated and the wrongdoers called to account. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, AIR 1993 SC 1960, awarded compensation for a custodial death on strict liability in public law. The law of State liability is a means to this end.
5. Openness and participation. Citizens should be able to know what the administration does and take part in decisions that affect them. The Right to Information Act 2005, the Lokayuktas and prior publication of rules all serve this end.
What follows for the study of the subject
- Functional study. Each doctrine should be judged by whether it secures its end. If a remedy is too slow, costly or technical to help ordinary people, it has failed, however elegant it is.
- Openness to new tools. Because the ends matter more than the means, administrative law readily adopts new devices: public interest litigation, the Ombudsman, the right to information, proportionality.
- Balance. Since the ends include both control and efficiency, the subject is always a balance. Too much control stifles government; too little invites abuse.
When the ends pull in different directions
The ends of administrative law do not always point the same way, and the means must be adjusted to reconcile them.
- Fairness and speed. A full hearing before every decision would protect individuals but could cripple urgent action. In Maneka Gandhi the Court allowed a passport to be impounded first, where notice might frustrate the purpose. But a hearing "remedial in aim" had to follow as soon as the order was made. The means was adapted so that both ends were served.
- Fairness and the public interest. In Bihar School Examination Board v. Subhas Chandra Sinha, AIR 1970 SC 1269, an examination at one centre was cancelled because of mass copying, without hearing each candidate. Individual hearings would have been impractical and pointless where no one was individually charged. The integrity of the examination prevailed.
- Control and expertise. Courts review discretion, but they do not substitute their own view for that of an expert authority. Judicial review is a means of keeping power lawful, not of taking it over.
These examples show why the means must be flexible. A rule applied mechanically, without regard to its purpose, can defeat the very end it was meant to serve.
An illustration of the approach
Consider the rule that reasons must be given for quasi-judicial decisions. Studied as an end in itself, it is a formal requirement to be ticked off. Studied as a means, it serves several ends at once. It makes the authority think carefully, it lets the affected person understand and challenge the decision, and it enables courts to review it. S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India, AIR 1990 SC 1984, required reasons for exactly these purposes. Seen this way, a decision with formal but empty reasons fails the rule, because it fails its ends. The same approach explains why courts ask whether a breach of procedure caused real prejudice. A rule of procedure that has served its purpose in substance is not defeated by a technical slip. The test is always whether the end was achieved, not whether every form was observed.
Part B: How it differs from constitutional law
The relationship
Both belong to public law. Constitutional law creates the organs of the State and distributes power among them. Administrative law governs the working of one organ, the administration, in its day-to-day dealings with citizens. The first is the framework; the second is the detailed operation within it.
The differences
- Subject-matter. Constitutional law covers the structure of government as a whole: the legislature, the executive, the judiciary, federal relations, fundamental rights. Administrative law focuses on administrative authorities: their powers, their procedures, the controls over them and the remedies against them.
- Sources. Constitutional law in India is found chiefly in the written Constitution. Administrative law is drawn from a mass of statutes, rules, regulations, directions and, above all, judge-made principles.
- Generality. Constitutional law deals in broad principles, such as equality or personal liberty. Administrative law applies those principles to particular situations, such as a licence refusal or a dismissal.
- Supremacy. Constitutional law is the supreme law. Administrative law must conform to it. An administrative rule or action that violates the Constitution is void.
- Amendment. The Constitution is changed by the special procedure of Article 368. Administrative law changes with ordinary legislation, new rules and new decisions.
Where they meet
The line is not sharp. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India concerned the impounding of a passport without a hearing, a typical administrative act. The Supreme Court decided it under Articles 14 and 21. It held that procedure depriving a person of liberty must be right, just and fair. A constitutional principle thus became a rule of administrative procedure. Much of Indian administrative law, from natural justice to arbitrariness, is now anchored in the Constitution.
| Point | Constitutional law | Administrative law |
|---|---|---|
| Concern | Structure and distribution of power | Working of administrative authorities |
| Main source | The Constitution | Statutes, rules, judicial principles |
| Level | Broad principles | Application to particular cases |
| Status | Supreme | Subordinate to the Constitution |
| Change | Article 368 | Ordinary legislation and decisions |
Conclusion. Administrative law is "not an end in itself but a means to an end". Its doctrines exist to keep power within law (Jaisinghani) and to secure fairness to individuals (Kraipak, Maneka Gandhi). They also aim to make government efficient yet accountable (Nilabati Behera). It also promotes openness, through the RTI Act and the Lokayuktas. It should be studied and judged by how well it secures these ends. It differs from constitutional law in its narrower subject, its varied and largely judge-made sources, its detailed application and its subordinate status. Yet the two meet constantly, as Maneka Gandhi shows.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 5 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free.
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.