Amending the Status Quo: A Comparative Study of Administrative Law in India

Unpacking the nuances of the Indian Constitution's amendment process through the lens of Administrative Law. The Indian Constitution has always walked a fine line between being flexible and being rigid. While it has undergone 103 amendments since its inception, the process of amendment remains a contentious issue. Take the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, 1973, where the Supreme Court, in a 7:6 verdict, held that Parliament's power to amend the Constitution is not absolute, but subject to certain limitations. This case has had a lasting impact on the amendment process in India. In Administrative Law, we find ourselves grappling with the concept of separation of powers. The doctrine of promissory estoppel, which I like to think is basically what every Bollywood hero should have invoked, is a prime example of this. In the case of Punjab Land Development and Reclamation Corporation v. Presiding Officer, 2000, the Supreme Court held that the government's promise to grant land to a farmer could not be denied, despite the lack of a formal contract. This case highlights the blurred lines between the executive and the judiciary. In contrast, the United States has a more rigid amendment process. Article V of the US Constitution requires a two-thirds majority in both the House and the Senate, or a convention called by two-thirds of the state legislatures, to propose an amendment. This has led to only 27 amendments since the Constitution's adoption in 1787. The US has a stronger tradition of judicial review, which has led to some fascinating cases. Take, for instance, the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison, 1803, where the Supreme Court established its power of judicial review. In India, we have the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976, which introduced the concept of a "Basic Structure" of the Constitution. This concept was first articulated by Justice H.R. Khanna in the Kesavananda Bharati case. The Basic Structure doctrine has been a cornerstone of Indian Administrative Law, ensuring that certain fundamental features of the Constitution cannot be altered or destroyed. As law students, we often find ourselves grappling with the nuances of Administrative Law. We are constantly reminded of the importance of the separation of powers, the rule of law, and the limits of executive power. Through comparative studies like this, we can gain a deeper understanding of the complexities of Administrative Law and its implications for our society. For me, this study is a reminder that the law is a constantly evolving entity, and that our understanding of it must also evolve to keep pace.