Student at Symbiosis Law School Noida, India.
For ensuring that the hearing is fair, attention needs to be paid to application of the mind. Due consideration should be given to pleadings, contentions, proof and material reports that are difficult to give, yet that is what is generally anticipated of an individual apportioning equity. The dispute between the litigating parties might be satisfactory, contentions comprehensive, and proof significant; yet, without active application for the most part present by the individual concerned, a hearing would be unjustifiable and useless. Not using your mind is, consequently, deadly to a fair hearing. It not only makes the decision ultra vires, as well as the choice but also becomes "malafide". Under this classification, courts practice judicial command over discretion given to the administration, assuming the administrative authority has either given up its power or has placed restrictions on its exercise. When power is provided to an administrative authority, the concerned authority should practice that power by applying its psyche to the case. Where the authority relinquishes its power, e.g., Abdicating its capabilities, acting under the advice of another agency, and does not exercise due care, there is an inability to practice discretion.
International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, Volume 5, Issue 5, Page 216 - 220DOI: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.113565
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution -NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits remixing, adapting, and building upon the work for non-commercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright © IJLMH 2021