SHIV SAGAR TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Judgment of the court was delivered by .-

(2.) THE administrative law has of late seen vast increase in discretionary powers. But then, the discretion conferred has to be exercised to advance the purpose to subserve which the power exists. Even the Minister, if he/she be the repository of discretionary power, cannot claim that either there is no discretion in the matter or unfettered discretion. This proposition was rejected emphatically by the House of Lords in the a landmark decision of Pad field. This apart, as pointed out in United States v. Wunderlich:

(3.) DELHI being the capital of the country is the seat of the central government and, as is known, it employs a very large number of persons. As per the figures given in "DELHI at a Glance: 1996, the number of central government employees in 1994-95 was around 2,15,000. As against this, the number of government quarters in DELHI is about 65,000. The paucity of government accommodation is thus apparent and speaks for itself when it is noted that the waiting period for Types 111 and IV quarters by July 1996 (when the position was said to have eased) was about 20 and 15 years respectively. This is not all. If one were to take a private accommodation on rent, as an employee would be compelled to do if government accommodation would not become available, the rent to be paid in a city like DELHI would eat away a large chunk of the carry-home pay. This explains the mad rush to get a government quarter allotted anyhow, by hook or by crook. The persons empowered and authorised to make allotments, being aware of the pressing need tend to misuse their powers. When the misuse is within tolerable limits, no uproar is heard, no media publication is seen. But when the magnitude of misuse assumes a menacing proportion, outburst of various types becomes noticeable and then a scam surfaces.