A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS IN INDIA: A COMPARATIVE STUDY WITH THE UNITED KINGDOM

Abstract

Judicial review is the power of a court to examine legislative, executive, and judicial activities to ensure that they are constitutionally valid. It is one of the best instances of constitutionalism, which promotes the concept of power restraint. The paper would be focusing on the judicial review of administrative acts, which are actions taken by government agencies. These agencies are governmental bodies that have an impact on people's rights by setting rules, adjudicating cases, and conducting investigations, among other things. It can take many different forms, such as a board, office, officer, or company.
The article will include a comparison of India with the United Kingdom in terms of judicial review of administrative action. As far as the Indian situation is concerned, this paper would address certain grounds of judicial review, followed by many significant theories such as the notion of legitimate expectation, public responsibility, and proportionality in the justification of judicial review.
In addition, the author shall also deal with the judicial review in the United Kingdom and the various related principles such as the Wednesbury principle. And at the last, the paper would look at the practice of judicial review of administrative actions and practical implications in light of various legal precedents