With the evolution of modern welfare state, state functionaries have to perform numerous functions and discretion has to be accepted as a necessary evil. In order to avoid misuse of authority, a mechanism of legislative, administrative, and judicial controls have been devised. With the help of qualitative research methodology, this research aims to investigate how to keep control over the administrative actions without creating hindrance for the state officials in performance of their duties. Despite the fact that there are two competing views regarding conferring of discretion, the same could be adjusted with the help of reasonable controls at various stages: pre-conferment and post-conferment, which can be further categorized into legislative, administrative, and judicial controls. Nevertheless, these controls have to be exercised with utmost diligence so as to avoid apprehension of interbranch conflict and to ensure smooth functioning of the executive authorities.

No abstract

In the history of the Indian subcontinent, the claims that the science of administration of justice reached its apex during the period of the Great Mughals are critically investigated in this paper. Though the Mughals initiatives were oriented to public and social welfare, their absolute authority over the state cast shadows on the system they introduced, one of which was administration of justice. With the help of qualitative research methodology, this article examines whether the Mughal system of administration was meant to dispense with justice and uphold welfare of the people or it was just a replica of the police state where sovereignty was exercised in a dictatorial manner.

No abstract

No abstract