Manifestly arbitrary - Indian Laws - General

Meaning Of ''manifestly arbitrary'' In order to be described as arbitrary, it must be shown that it was not reasonable and manifestly arbitrary. The expression arbitrarily means: in an unreasonable manner, as fixed or done capriciously or at pleasure, without adequate determining principle, not founded in the nature of things, non-rational, not done or acting according to reason or judgment, depending on the will alone. [ Sharma Transport v. Government of Andhra Pradesh , 2001 (12) TMI 863 - SUPREME COURT ]. The test of manifest arbitrariness is well explained in two judgments of this Court. Cellular Operators Association of India [ 2016 (5) TMI 1458 - SUPREME COURT ] In Khoday Distilleries LTD. Vs State of Karnataka 1995 (12) TMI 378 - Supreme Court , this Court held: It is next submitted before us that the amended Rules are arbitrary, unreasonable and cause undue hardship and, therefore, violate Article 14 of the Constitution. Although the protection of Article 19(1)(g) may not be available to the appellants, the rules must, undoubtedly, satisfy the test of Article 14, which is a guarantee against arbitrary action. However, one must bear in mind that what is being challenged here under Article 14 is not executive action but delegated legislation. The tests of arbitrary action which apply to executive actions do not necessarily apply to delegated legislation. In order that delegated legislation can be struck down, such legislation must be manifestly arbitrary; a law which could not be reasonably expected to emanate from an authority delegated with the lawmaking power. In the case of Indian Express Newspaper(Bombay) Pvt. Limited and ors vs UOI [ 1984 (12) TMI 65 - Supreme Court ] , this Court said that a piece of subordinate legislation does not carry the same degree of immunity which is enjoyed by a statute passed by a competent legislature. A subordinate legislation may be questioned under Article 14 on the ground that it is unreasonable; unreasonable not in the sense of not being reasonable, but in the sense that it is manifestly arbitrary . Drawing a comparison between the law in England and in India, the Court further observed that in England the Judges would say, Parliament never intended the authority to make such Rules; they are unreasonable and ultra vires . In India, arbitrariness is not a separate ground since it will come within the embargo of Article 14 of the Constitution. But subordinate legislation must be so arbitrary that it could not be said to be in conformity with the statute or that it offends Article 14 of the Constitution .