Question map
A legislation which confers on the executive or administrative authority an unguided and uncontrolled discretionary power in the matter of application of law violates which one of the following Articles of the Constitution of India?
Explanation
The correct answer is Option 1 (Article 14).
Article 14 of the Indian Constitution guarantees Equality before Law and Equal Protection of Laws. The Supreme Court has consistently held that the "Rule of Law" is a basic feature of the Constitution. If a law confers "unguided and uncontrolled" discretionary power on the executive, it creates room for discrimination and arbitrariness.
- Arbitrariness vs. Equality: In the landmark E.P. Royappa case, the Judiciary established that "Equality is antithetical to arbitrariness." Any law that allows an authority to act according to personal whims without defined guidelines violates the guarantee of non-arbitrariness under Article 14.
- Article 28: Relates to religious instruction in educational institutions; it is irrelevant to administrative discretion.
- Article 32: Provides the right to constitutional remedies; it is the mechanism for enforcement, not the substantive right being violated here.
- Article 44: A Directive Principle (UCC) which is non-justiciable.
Thus, unguided discretion is struck down as "manifestly arbitrary," directly violating the mandate of Article 14.
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full viewThis is a classic 'Spirit of the Constitution' question. It moves beyond the text of Article 14 to its jurisprudential core: the Rule of Law. If you only memorized 'Equality before Law' without understanding that 'Arbitrariness is the sworn enemy of Equality' (E.P. Royappa case logic), you would miss this.
This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.
- Discusses Article 14 as guaranteeing absence of arbitrary discrimination both in laws and in their administration.
- Explicitly links arbitrariness in administrative orders to a violation of Article 14.
- Directly ties arbitrary or uncontrolled discretion by authorities to breach of equality protection under Article 14.
- Explains constitutional limits on arbitrary executive action (example: taxation) and right to remedy in courts.
- Illustrates that the Constitution prevents executive arbitrariness, supporting the view that unguided discretion is unconstitutional.
- States that the Supreme Court and High Courts can declare invalid any law or executive action if it is against the Constitution.
- Provides the remedial mechanism by which arbitrary administrative discretion (violative of constitutional rights) can be checked.
- [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Directly covered in the 'Rule of Law' section of Laxmikanth or D.D. Basu (Chapter on Fundamental Rights).
- [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: The doctrine of 'Rule of Law' (A.V. Dicey) → Absence of Arbitrary Power → Therefore, unguided discretion violates Article 14.
- [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: 1. E.P. Royappa Case (1974): Established that 'Equality is a dynamic concept... where an act is arbitrary, it is implicit that it is unequal.' 2. Maneka Gandhi Case (1978): The 'Golden Triangle' (Arts 14, 19, 21) — a law must be 'just, fair, and reasonable'. 3. Doctrine of Excessive Delegation: Legislature cannot delegate 'essential legislative functions' to the executive. 4. Administrative Law: Difference between 'Discretion' (allowed with guidelines) and 'Arbitrariness' (banned).
- [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: Do not read Articles in isolation. When studying Art 14, ask: 'What violates this?' Answer: Class legislation (bad) vs. Reasonable classification (good). Unguided discretion = Class legislation/Arbitrariness.
Article 14 prohibits arbitrary discrimination and protects against arbitrary administrative action, directly addressing unguided discretion by authorities.
High-yield for UPSC: Article 14 is central to questions on fundamental rights, administrative law, and judicial review. Mastery helps answer cases on arbitrary state action, equality clauses, and links to procedural fairness and other fundamental rights.
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > p. 105
Unguided, uncontrolled discretionary power manifests as arbitrariness in administrative decisions, which the Constitution restricts.
Essential for questions on administrative law and executive limits; connects to concepts like rule of law, equal protection, and remedies. Helps analyze whether statutes delegate adequate guidelines to authorities and predict judicial responses.
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > p. 105
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Exceptions to Funda· mental Rights. > p. 95
Courts have power to invalidate laws or executive actions that contravene constitutional protections against arbitrary exercise of power.
Crucial for UPSC answers involving enforcement of fundamental rights and constitutional remedies; links to separation of powers, remedies under Articles like 32/226, and precedents on invalidating arbitrary delegations.
- Democratic Politics-I. Political Science-Class IX . NCERT(Revised ed 2025) > Chapter 4: WORKING OF INSTITUTIONS > 4.4 THE JUDICIARY > p. 70
- Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > p. 105
The 'Golden Triangle' Test: Since they asked about Art 14 and arbitrariness, the next logical question is the link between Art 14, 19, and 21 established in the Maneka Gandhi case. Specifically, that a procedure depriving life/liberty (Art 21) must also satisfy the test of reasonableness (Art 19) and non-arbitrariness (Art 14).
The 'Right vs. Remedy' Logic: Option C (Article 32) is a *remedy* to enforce rights, not the right being violated itself. Option B (Religion) and D (UCC) are thematically unrelated to 'administrative power'. This leaves Article 14. Logically, 'Unguided power' = 'Arbitrariness'. Arbitrariness is the exact opposite of 'Equality' (Rule of Law).
Mains GS-4 (Ethics) & GS-2 (Governance): 'Unguided Discretion' is the root cause of corruption. In Ethics, this links to the need for 'Code of Conduct' and 'Citizen Charters' to minimize executive discretion. In GS-2, it links to the concept of 'Delegated Legislation' and the need for Parliamentary control over the Executive.