NATIONAL LAW INSTITUTE UNIVERSITY, BHOPAL

(VII SEMESTER 2022-23)

THEORIES OF ADMINISTRATION LAW

SUBMITTED BY- SOUMYA VERMA

SUBMITTED TO – PROF. SUSHMA SHARMA

ROLL NO. – 2019BALLB35

ENROLMENT NO. - A-2077

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 3
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM, HYPOTHESIS, RESEARCH 4-5
QUESTIONS, OBJECTIVES, LITERATURE REVIEW
CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THEORIES 5
Green Light theory, Red Light Theory and Amber

5-8

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN GREEN AND RED LIGHT THEORY

8-10
ANALYSIS 10-11
CONCLUSION 11
BIBLIOGRAPHY 11
 INTRODUCTION
Different schools of thought debate whether the executive actions should be brought under strict
judicial control, whether the executive actions should be independent of judicial control, or
whether a middle ground should be adopted between the two extremes in order to prevent power
abuse and limit administrative discretion. Therefore, the purpose of this essay is to examine the
red, green, and amber light theories of administrative law, which serve as a framework for
making sense of all these different conversations.
Marbury v. Madison1 was the first case to establish judicial supremacy and the exercise of that
supremacy through judicial review, and it was determined by the American Supreme Court in
1803 A.D. Common law nations such as Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and Nepal
eventually recognized this fact and began using administrative law concepts in judging
government plans, programs, and acts. In light of this, people all across the world began asking
important questions like, "What is the role of the law?" Can you explain the role of the judicial
system?
To what extent should the judicial system be in charge of running things?
Which institution, government or the courts, should have final authority?
Should public (administrative) conflicts be resolved using the same methodology as private
adjudication?
Should private property rights be protected more than public safety?
Beginning in the early 1990s, there was a heated discussion on how best to change government
administration, with "New Public Management" in England and "Reinventing Government" in
the United States both receiving significant attention. Rule of law and the significance of legal
rules and directives for the operation of administration were favored by the traditional school,
while the new school favored the idea of governance reform, which sought to make
administration more result-oriented through the relaxation of strict legal rules and regulations.

These political discussions helped give rise to new ideas and ideologies within the realm of
administrative law. The question of whether executive acts should be brought under stringent
judicial oversight, whether executive actions should be independent of judicial control, or
whether a middle ground should be established between the two, was one major concept that

1
Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 137 (1803).
arose from such considerations. Later, the concept of a traffic signal was developed to help
answer this dilemma. At first, there was just the concept of a green light and a red light theory. In
2004, however, two scholars, Wade and Forsyth, helped clarify the gray area between the two
schools of thought. This gave rise to these theories.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM
This project aims to differentiate between the red and green light theories and bring clarification
regarding what administrative law aims to convey and what limitations it entails around it
because of the existence of two models.

HYPOTHESIS
The researcher assumes that both the theories are mostly similar in its application.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. To research on what these models offer to explain?

2. To research on how administrative law can expand?
3. To check whether there is requirement of any other theory to accommodate the rest two?

OBJECTIVES OF STUDY
1. To determine what does the model want to convey.
2. To determine its applicability in certain areas of application.

LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Principles of Administrative Law (7th Edition, 2017) by M.P Jain and S.N. Jain
This book has in it the explanation to the most basic start and development in the theories.
The author has used several case laws to explain the same, the nitty-gritties has been
followed cclosely and appropriately. The basic assumption of the researcher has been
clarified clearly.
2. Lectures on Administrative Law By C.K. Takwani (7th edn, 2021)
 The whole concept of administrative law has been clarified by the author in a comprehensive
manner with on point explanation. Several other aspects related to the difference between all
the theories have been talked about in detail.
3. Administrative Law By I.P. Massey ( 9th Ed., 2017)
The author in the article has clearly wrote out the essentials and important parts to understand
the administrative reforms that took place. He has lucidly described his version to connect
the various loopholes in the existing system. He has enunciated on various other modes of
theories.

______________________________________________________________________________

CONCEPTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THEORIES

RED LIGHT THEORY

It is generally agreed that the red light theory has its roots in the 19th-century libertarian political
movement. This ideology distrusted the executive branch and worked to limit the state's
interference with citizens' freedoms and property. Dicey's explanation of "legal sovereignty,"
according to which the government must act in accordance with the legal rules set out by
Parliament, is a good illustration of the concept of red light theory. As a result, the courts have
the authority to rein in the government and make sure it follows the law when it deviates from
the rules that have been established. The rule of law remains central in a'self-correcting
democracy,' which has strong ties to the red light theory 2. There is a widespread consensus that
the law is a coherent and independent field that serves as a crucial check on government power.
That judicial intervention serves as a sanction when public bodies or executive authorities
overstep their authority is a central tenet of this theory. This is because everyone's freedom will
be in jeopardy if the state and its institutions are allowed to exercise unrestrained bureaucratic
and executive power. As a result, a state's political structure needs to include judicial oversight.
Red light theorists also hold that the judiciary is trustworthy because it applies its own set of
standards of independence and fairness when evaluating the constitutionality of executive action.
Consequently, it can serve as a reliable mechanism of checks and balances in a governmental
structure.

2
Keshav Raj Pandey, Administrative Law, Ramesh Silwal, Chitwan, Nepal, 2017, p. 50.
The various principles of this theory are as follows:

 The courts are the people's primary line of defense against abuse by the executive branch.
 Politics must yield to the rule of law.
 We need to make sure the courts are monitoring the admins.
 When it comes to matters of law and order, the court system should be your first stop.
 The goal of public policy should be to protect and expand people's freedoms.
 The legal system is non-partisan, impartial, and autonomous from the realms of politics
and administration.
 The purpose of administrative law should be to limit or restrain government power.

As a result, the red light theory views the law as a tool for limiting government overreach and
safeguarding personal freedom. It calls for judicial intervention in the review of administrative
actions. Dicey's theory, as outlined, is based on the 'balanced constitution' model, which provides
for legal power of executive power. Executive power is subjected to political control even by
Parliament through the legislation of stringent regulations and to direct authority through judicial
monitoring3.
GREEN LIGHT THEORY
Since there were many criticisms regarding the extent of Red Light theory being propounded in a
way which was found to be critical by the theorists, Green Light Theory was given a place in the
learning of the law.
Between the two world wars, an alternative tradition emerged as a result of growing criticism
and opposition to the red light theory. This custom represented the "green light theory," an
alternative to the "red light theory." According to this view, the exercise of executive authority to
deliver public goods is perfectly acceptable. As a result, the role of the courts in limiting the
power of the executive branch is questionable. It does not, however, support unchecked or
arbitrary state power.
To some, the Green Light Theory is a functionalist theory that advocates a positive view of the
state. The government is viewed as friendly and trustworthy, with no possibility of wrongdoing.
Because of this, the green light theory stresses the significance of administrative law's role in
facilitating government action rather than intervening in it through judicial or political control. It

3
Stephen P. Osborne, The New Public Governance?, Routledge, London, United Kingdom, 2009, pp. 2-3.
suggests how administrative bodies can use the law as a weapon by turning it into an enabling
mechanism.
Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill's utilitarianism inspired this view, which argues that a
state can do the most good for the most people if it reduces its own role in the economy and
instead encourages its citizens to take responsibility for it. It argues that the democratic
framework is the best means by which societal goals can be accomplished collectively.
Therefore, the goal of this theory is not to undermine people's rights or challenge the bedrock
principles of a liberal democracy4. This suggests that the public interests can be served by giving
the Executive broad discretion and removing it from the purview of the courts.
Some of the central ideas behind this theory are as follows:

 Politics is all there is to the law. This means that the rule of law is not a guarantee of
smooth government operations.
 The public sector administration is an important part of a functional state, rather than a
necessary evil.
 Prohibiting improper governmental behavior should not be the sole goal of administrative
law. In addition, it needs to focus on making administration easier and promoting
efficient management.
 Adjudication according to legal rules is not the only good idea for boosting the
administration.
 There are venues besides the judicial system that can resolve disputes.

Since the courts and their legal values are seen as an impediment to administrative progress, the
primary goal of green light theory is to limit the power of the judicial branch. There should be a
democratic system of checks and balances, as that's what the green light indicates. With these
premises in mind, green light theorists agree to aid the administration by blocking any form of
judicial or legal oversight of executive decisions.
AMBER LIGHT THEORY
In administrative law, the red light theory and the green light theory represent two opposing
viewpoints, while the amber light theory seeks to mediate between them. According to
proponents of the "amber light" theory, the best features of both theories should be used in the

4
Ibid.
administration of law. Using this theory, we can distill the essence of "fire-watching" and "fire-
fighting" to their barest essentials. By establishing appropriate norms for administrative
behavior, administrative law acts as "fire-watching," and erroneous administrative actions are
"fire-fighting" when they are overturned by the courts. The proponents of the amber light theory
maintain that efficient public administration necessitates a harmony between internal and
external control systems. The green light theorists aren't the only ones who have noticed the
amber middle ground between the two theories. Green light theory, as acknowledged by Harlow
and Rawlings, does not advocate for unrestrained or arbitrary state action. In fact, it doesn't fully
refute the red light theory's rigidity5.
The various principles of this theory are as follows:
The rule of law is independent of and superior to the political system.
Laws can effectively put restraints on the state, but they should also permit the administration
some discretionary power within reasonable bounds.
Judicial articulation and enforcement of broad principles of legality provide the most effective
means of restraining the state.
A core tenet of this theory is the protection of a specific understanding of human rights.
Therefore, the amber light theory is a synthesis that takes into account the need for some level of
control over administrative decisions as well as the importance of establishing good standards of
administrative conduct, effective decision-making, accountability, and human rights.
It is linked to both theories and does not provide evidence for either one on its own. It accepts the
central ideas from both theories and seeks to bring them into harmony with one another.

DIFFERENT BETWEEN RED AND GREEN LIGHT THEORIES

Although the two theories are mutually dependent on one another and mutually enriching, they
nonetheless differ on a number of fundamental levels. Below is a rundown of these distinctions:
The red light camp believes the court should take an activist stance when reviewing
administrative decisions, while the green light camp doubts the courts' ability to rein in the
executive branch6.
Both the red light and green light theories view governmental actions with suspicion.

5
Harlow & Rawlings (n10) pp.22-23.
6
Leyland & Anthony (n7) p.10.
The red light theory places a premium on the judicial system as the primary mechanism for
administrative control, while the green light theory favors exploring alternative mechanisms.
In contrast to the green light theory, which views judicial oversight of administration as an
interference with or barrier to efficient policymaking, the red light theory views judicial
oversight as a potent tool for ensuring competent policymaking.
In contrast to the green light theory, which recognizes the need for judicial review only when
doing so is necessary to facilitate administrative actions, the red light theory sees judicial review
as a mechanism for controlling administrative actions. Both the red light and green light theories
hold that law is superior to politics and administration, respectively.

In terms of politics, the red light theory seems conservative and the green light theory seems
progressive.
The red light camp believes that the legal system and the rule of law hold all the answers, while
the green light camp views the legal system and the legal profession as antiquated and unhelpful.
ANALYSIS
Administrative law's goals and the scope of discretionary authority for public administration in
carrying them out have been the subject of a number of competing theories advanced at different
times. According to the red light theory, lawmakers should not give the executive branch wide
latitude. There is a high likelihood of abuse of power if it is granted absolute discretion. This
means that administrative law's primary goal should be to limit the scope of government power
to ensure that everyone's rights are respected.
On the other hand, the green light theory argues that the government cannot efficiently operate
under the watchful eye of the courts. It doesn't say law has no place, but it does argue that if the
legal system is used to guide public policymaking, it should be more enabling than stifling.
Last but not least, the amber light theory aims to find common ground between the two theories
and insists that neither is inherently superior. Both theories, in fact, share some beneficial
principles. And it should be the goal of administrative law to take the best features of both
theories and apply them within the framework of the state. The amber light theory should be
given the most weight because it attempts to bridge the gap between the red and green light
theories without watering down either one.
CONCLUSION
Therefore, having read all these theories, it may be inferred that public administration must be
permitted to exercise a certain level of discretion in the exercise of their functions. However, the
administration should not be left uncontrolled. There must be some limitations to their powers in
order to prevent any potential misuse or abuse of those powers. Most importantly, the supremacy
of law should prevail in order to protect individual liberties.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
CASES-

1. 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 137 (1803)

BOOKS-

4. Durga Das Basu, Introduction To The Constitution of India (24th edn, Lexis Nexis 2020)
5. Guy S. Goodwin-Gill, Jane McAdam, The Refugee in International Law (4th edn, OSAIL
2007)

ONLINE RESOURCES-

1. Arpita Sinha, 'Validity Of CAA And NRC In Human Rights Regime- A Case Study On
Assam Crisis' (The Law Brigade Publishers, 15 September
2020) <https://thelawbrigade.com/constitutional-law/validity-of-caa-and-nrc-in-human-
rights-regime-a-case-study-on-assam-crisis/#_edn24> accessed 11 October 2021.
2. Abhinav Chandrachud, 'The Origins Of Indian Citizenship' (Bloomberg Quint, 26 December
2019) <https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/citizenship-amendment-act-the-unsecular-
origins-of-indian-citizenship-by-abhinav-chandrachud> accessed 12 October 2021.
3. Arun Teja Polcumpally, ‘India’s Citizenship Amendment Act: A Primer’ (South Asian
Voices, 5 February 2020) < https://southasianvoices.org/indias-citizenship-amendment-act-a-
primer/> accessed 12 October 2021.
4. Professor Michelle Foster and Dr Adil Hasan Khan, 'CITIZENSHIP (AMENDMENT) ACT
AND INTERNATIONAL LAW' [2021] 1(1) Institute for International Law and Humanities.

5. Brian Gorlick, ‘Human Rights and refugees: enhancing protection through international
human rights law’ (2000) United Nation High Commissioner for Refugees <
 https://www.unhcr.org/research/working/3ae6a0cf4/human-rights-refugees-enhancing-
protection-international-human-rights-law.html> accessed 12 October 2021.
6. Priya Bhavsar, ‘Not A Refugee? Principle of According Status of Refugee & Protection
From Refoulment’ (Law Beat, 17 April 2021) < https://www.lawbeat.in/columns/not-
refugee-principles-according-status-refugee-protection-refoulment> accessed 12 October
2021.
7. Advisory Opinion on the Extraterritorial Application of Non-Refoulement Obligations under
the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol’ (UNHCR) <
https://www.unhcr.org/4d9486929.pdf> accessed 12 October 2021.
8. Atul Alexandar, ‘Evaluating the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 in India: Perspectives
from international Refugee Law’ (GROJIL, 27 February 2020) <
https://grojil.org/2020/02/27/evaluating-the-citizenship-amendment-act-2019-in-india-
perspectives-from-international-refugee-law/> accessed 12 October 2021.