Omission By Officers Leads To 'Let Court Decide Syndrome': Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Union To Ensure Admin Law Classes For IAS Trainees

Highlighting the need for stronger administrative accountability, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has emphasized the role of legal education and training in curbing the increasing tendency of administrative authorities to shift responsibility to the judiciary.Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri noted that when the administrative authorities by their acts and omissions evade their own responsibilities and leave it to the Courts to decide, it leads to a “let the Court decide syndrome” which can be dismantled inter alia by taking pre-emptory measures like legal education, training and accountability.The Court further said that lack of knowledge of basic principles in the field of administrative law is also a strong factor causing the aforesaid syndrome. Consequently, it directed the Union of India to ensure that in the Training Institutes for Civil Servants including Lal Bahadur Shastri National Academy of Administration, Mussoorie, adequate and in-depth training and education be imparted in the subject of Administrative Law by a dedicated faculty on the subject."Thereafter, regular refresher courses be also conducted from time to time. Professors, Legal Practitioners, Research Scholars or other suitable resource persons be also associated from time to time," the bench added.These observations were made while hearing a batch of petitions challenging the departmental action taken against several employees of power companies in Haryana.Justice Puri highlighted that “Law and Society are never static and they are always dynamic. In England, there is no written Constitution and still the field of administrative law progressed through judge-made law. In India, there are three organs of the State i.e. the Judiciary, the Legislature and the Executive. None of the organs of the State is superior to the other. The sole superiority vests in the Constitution of India and hence, the Constitution of India is supreme."The judge further added that, "Infringement or breach of principles of natural justice in any form need to be corrected through Courts and at the same time, these principles are required to be inculcated and imbibed in the deciding authorities, who are judicial, quasi-judicial and purely administrative authorities in order to meet the Constitutional goals and to uphold the Rule of Law. It is in this context that various instances of breach of the principles of natural justice are under consideration in the present bunch of cases.”The Court also passed slew of directions including the following:(i) Whenever a quasi-judicial authority or a purely administrative authority is vested with a power by any law for the time being in force to decide or pass an order, the power can be exercised by the same authority in which the power vests and no other authority.(ii) An order passed by a subordinate officer or any other officer not authorised to pass an order by stating that the same has been passed with the approval of the authority in whom power otherwise vests is illegal, perverse, arbitrary and coram non-judice.(iii) An order passed by punishing authority on behalf of appellate authority by stating the same to have been passed with the approval of appellate authority is impermissible, illegal, nullity, coram non- judice and violative of principles of natural justice namely, Nemo Judex in Causa Sua.(iv) An order imposing punishment or any other order involving civil consequences as also an appellate or revisional order, if passed by a single stroke of a pen in the noting sheet or otherwise stating to be rejected or accepted or remanded etc. is illegal, arbitrary, cryptic, non- speaking and without application of mind. Therefore, it is also violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.(v) When a quasi-judicial authority or an administrative authority passes any order involving civil consequences, the same has to be communicated to the concerned employee within reasonable time unless prohibited by any law for the time being in force. Communication can be made by any other subordinate officer by forwarding and attaching the actual order passed by the competent authority and not by substituting it with his own order.(vi) A draft order prepared by any authority other than the competent authority and thereafter, put up for approval and simply approved by the competent authority either by tick marking the same or otherwise is no order in the eyes of law since the order has not been passed by the competent authority but is only an approval of a draft order prepared by some other authority who was not competent to pass the order. A speaking order involving civil consequences must be passed by a competent authority in whom the power vests under the law and simply approving a draft order drafted by another officer amounts to abdication of powers causing miscarriage of justice and therefore impermissible.The Court found that “Out of the present bunch of 38 cases, 30 cases pertain to UHBVNL, 5 cases pertain to DHBVNL and 3...

Omission By Officers Leads To 'Let Court Decide Syndrome': Punjab & Haryana HC Directs Union To Ensure Admin Law Classes For IAS Trainees

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags