DOCTRINE OF LEGITMATE EXPECTATION

October 19, 2024

Introduction

The doctrine of legitimate expectation is a doctrine generally applied in administrative law according to which public officials have to perform their work and carry out their functions by fulfilling the legitimate expectations from them. This doctrine serves as a ground for judicial review. Though this has not been mentioned in any law, it has evolved only through the judicial precedents. Reference may be made to Article 14 of the Constitution.

Recently, in the case of Army Welfare Education Society New Delhi v. Sunil Kumar Sharma (2024), the Supreme Court further clarified this doctrine.

The present law note aims to present before the readers the law on legitimate expectation, its evolution, and the landmark Supreme Court decisions on this doctrine of legitimate expectation.

Origin and meaning of the doctrine of legitimate expectation

The legitimate expectation may be defined as the expectation that flows from the public authorities towards the individuals that they shall function in a particular manner. Such expectation may arise out of any promise, express or implied, or representation, or the past conduct of the public authorities. Today, administrative law is governed by various doctrines like principles of natural justice, the theory of proportionality, and reasonableness. Doctrine of legitimate expectation is one such principle of administrative law.

The evolution of this doctrine can be traced to the landmark case of the Supreme Court, namely, Council of Civil Services Union v. Ministers for the Civil Services (1985). In this case it was held that any decision if taken by the public authorities and it has the effect of changing the rights or obligations of any person that are enforceable by or affecting him, or he is deprived of any advantage or any privilege that was earlier available to him, or he was entitled to enjoy some benefit that was unjustly taken from him, then these furnish a valid ground for the claim of legitimate expectation.

Enforceability of the doctrine of legitimate expectation

Generally, this question is raised: whether the doctrine is a legal right or in what circumstances it may be enforced. To answer this question, it must be mentioned that this doctrine is not created by statute. It is the product of the judiciary. So the enforceability of this doctrine is dependent on judicial discretion. The discretion is exercised fairly, soundly, and judiciously.

Essential requirements to claim Legitimate Expectation

The following requirements must essentially be fulfilled for a valid claim of this doctrine.

  1. Legitimate expectation

For a valid claim of legitimate expectation, it is the first requirement that expectation must be legitimate. The nature of the expectation is such that any prudent, rational person is expected to have that expectation. It is not based upon the whims, fancies, and desires of the person. Also, the legitimate expectation must not be based upon some moral expectations. The nature of the claim must be such that it is based upon some laws, customs, or has arisen out of some continguous practice of public authorities.

  1. Some regular and established practice

The demand or expectation must flow from some regular or established practice that was carried out by the public authorities. It must be continuous and must flow for a considerable period of time. It is based upon such regularity and uninterruption that expecatio arises.

  1. Required relationship with the authority

The individual claiming legitimate expectation must show some relationship with the authority based upon which the expectation has arose. The relationship must be any commercial dealig or such relationship that flows from the conduct of the authority. The authority must be a public authority, as the demand can’t be made against a private authority.

  1. Arbitrary action or decision taken by the authority

To claim relief on the basis of the doctrine of legitimate expectation, it must be shown that the claim is based upon some arbitrary and illegal, biased action of the authority.

However, if it is shown by the public authority that the decision is taken in the larger public interest and there is no abuse of the power, then the claim shall not be sustained.

  1. There must be locus standi with the claimant.

The claimant must have a locus standi. However, in cases of public interest litigation based upon this doctrine, this requirement may be relaxed.

In what circumstances may this doctrine of legitimate expectation be enforced?

The doctrine may be enforced in the following circumstances, according to the landmark case of Madras City Wine Merchants v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994).

  • There must be some explicit promise or representation made by the public authority.
  • The promise was clear and unambiguous.
  • There was the existence of some continuous practice in the past, and on the basis of that, the claimant had the expectation for its continuation.

However, as mentioned earlier and also in the case of P.T.R. Exports (Madras) Private Ltd. And Ors. v. Union of India and Ors. (1996), the doctrine of legitimate expectation is dependent on the disretion of the court and shall have no application when the decision has been taken by the public authority in its executive power and the larger public interest.

Article 14 and the doctrine of legitimate expectation

Article 14 of the Constitution deals with the right to equality. It is said that anything that is arbitratry or whimsical is anthesis to equality. The doctrine of legitimate expectation also provides relief against the arbitrary and mala fide decisions of the authorities. Therefore, the claim of legitimate expectation is sometimes related to Article 14 of the Constitution, and this provision is applied accordingly.

When the doctrine of legitimate expectations is not applicable

In the following circumstances, the doctrine of legitimate expectations is not applicable. –

  • If the exercise was contrary to law, then it can’t be continued on the basis of legitimate expectations.
  • If the bona fide reasons are shown for the discontinuance of the practice or the action of the authority, then the doctrine shall not be applicable.
  • If any decision is taken in the public interest, then the public interest shall prevail over the doctrine.

Conclusion

In sum and substance, the doctrine of legitimate expectation is a required doctrine to hold the accountability of the public authorities. The Supreme Court time and again has provided new realms to this doctrine through its decisions. The doctrine may also be read into the constitution law by virtue of Article 14 and is majorly applicable in administrative law.

Follow the following links for more recent updates:

https://youtube.com/@jyotijudiciarycoaching4852?si=V-ncXHylL3sGBedB

Leave a Comment