Download Testbook App

UPSC Polity Notes

Doctrine of
Proportionality
Doctrine of Proportionality is commonly asserted as a basis for Judicial review in most of the cases
involving administrative action. In the case of Om Kumar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India
adopted the Doctrine of Proportionality. Proportionality refers to the fact that administrative action should
not be more severe than necessary to achieve the desired result. Let us look at the concept of the Doctrine
of Proportionality, which is an important topic of UPSC IAS examination and constitutes a major part of
the UPSC General Studies paper 2 syllabus.

Also download Polity Notes for UPSC with this link!

Background Of Doctrine Of Proportionality

• Doctrine of Proportionality is commonly asserted as a basis for Judicial review in most of the cases
involving administrative action
• The doctrine of proportionality arose in Europe and is now an integral part of European
administrative law.
• The doctrine of proportionality basically states that the punishment should not be disproportionate
to the crime committed.
• The tools chosen by the administration to attain a specific goal or outcome should not be more
restrictive than what is required to achieve it.
• We live in a time when administrative authorities have been given broad discretionary powers;
that cannot be exercised arbitrarily, thus the idea of doctrine of proportionality is utilised to keep
them in check.
• When taking administrative action, the body should keep in mind the goal it is pursuing and the
methods it is employing to get there; if its actions depart from the goal, are discriminatory, or
disproportionate, the court will overturn them under the doctrine of proportionality.
• In the case of Om Kumar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court of India adopted the doctrine of
proportionality concept.
• The Supreme Court noted in this judgment that Indian courts have been applying this approach in
circumstances of legislation that violates fundamental rights entrenched in Article 19(1) of the
constitution since 1950.
• Despite the fact that India has adopted the Doctrine of proportionality in a fairly limited manner.
• The European model has not been fully implemented.
• According to the doctrine of proportionality, a body must strike a balance between its actions and
the goal for which the powers were granted.
Check out the article on Important articles in Indian Constitution with this link article!
 Download Testbook App

Understanding The Doctrine of Proportionality

• When taking administrative action, the body should keep in mind the goal it's aiming for and the
techniques it's using to get there.
• If its actions deviate from the goal, are discriminatory, or disproportionate, the court will invalidate
them under the doctrine of proportionality.
• It is a common misperception that judicial review under this approach is the same as appeal.
• When an administrative action is challenged on the basis of the idea of doctrine of proportionality,
the appellate authority is simply required to determine whether the procedure was correct or if the
punishment provided was the least restrictive means to achieve the goal.
• The Indian legal system has chosen a narrow approach to this doctrine of proportionality since a
broader doctrine would render the administration's discretionary powers obsolete.
• It will empower the judiciary to encroach on executive powers.
• The judiciary cannot take the place of the executive and act on its behalf. As a result, India's
doctrine is ideal for maintaining this status.
• Administrative tribunals deal with administrative actions and serve as the primary reviewer,
whereas courts only serve as the secondary reviewer.
• The doctrine of proportionality assesses two parts of a decision:
1. If the relative merits of different aims or interests were suitably weighted or fairly balanced
and whether the relative merits of different objectives or interests were correctly weighted
or fairly balanced.
2. Whether the measure in question was overly restrictive in the circumstances or imposed an
unwarranted hardship on those impacted.

Check out the article on Original Jurisdiction of Supreme Court here!

The Doctrine of Proportionality Related Cases

Cases Description

Om Kumar v. Union of • In India, this case established the doctrine of Proportionality.

India • The Supreme Court found that, since 1950, Indian courts have
frequently employed the doctrine of proportionality in deciding
the constitutionality of legislative actions affecting the
fundamental freedoms outlined in Article 19(1) of the Indian
Constitution.
• The Supreme Court found that administrative measures affecting
basic freedoms (Articles 19 and 21) in India have always been
judged on doctrine of proportionality criteria, even when the
doctrine of proportionality is not clearly expressed.
• As a result, the Court said explicitly that the concept of doctrine
of proportionality applies to judicial review of administrative
actions that violate the Indian Constitution's Articles 19 and 21.

K. S. Puttaswamy vs. • The Supreme Court upheld the proportionality test.

Union of India

Page - 2
 Download Testbook App

• It was decided that when considering the doctrine of

proportionality of law, the state's restrictions on citizens' essential
rights should be taken into account.

P. State Road Transport
Corporation v. Subhash
Chandra Sharma
• The Supreme Court ruled that the labour court's decision was
arbitrary and capricious.
• The court stated that the disciplinary committee's sentence was not
"shockingly disproportionate" in any way to the allegation
brought against him, as the respondent's wrongdoing was grave
and intolerable.
• The High Court also failed to exercise its power under Art. 226 by
failing to correct the labour court's ruling, according to the court.

Dev Singh v. Punjab • This instance perfectly demonstrates the application of the
Tourism Development doctrine of Proportionality.
Corporation • According to the concept , the measures employed to achieve the
goal should be narrowly limited and the least restrictive.
• The corporation intended to discourage employees from acting
recklessly in this case, therefore it fired the appellant.
• Even though there were other least restrictive means or
punishments under bye-law that could have been used to punish
him, they were not used.
• As a result, the court used the doctrine of proportionality in this
case and evaluated the level of penalty.

Anuradha Bhasin Vs. • The Supreme Court has questioned the legality of the internet
Union of India shutdown and movement restrictions in Jammu and Kashmir.
• It was held to summarise the doctrine of proportionality theory's
standards, which must be fulfilled by authorities before issuing
any order restricting people' fundamental rights.

Aadhar privacy and • The Supreme Court used the Doctrine of Proportionality as the
doctrine of touchstone to determine the validity of the Act and scheme.
proportionality • It postulates that the nature and extent of the State’s interference
with the exercise of a right must be proportional to the goal it seeks
to achieve.
• The balancing of the purported benefits of Aadhaar and the
potential threat it carries to the fundamental right to privacy.
• This formed the core question with respect to the validity of
Aadhaar in the constitutional scheme.
Also, read the article on Proportional Representation with this link!

Conclusion
• It is a prevalent misconception that judicial review is the same as an appeal under this procedure.
• When an administrative action is challenged on the doctrine of proportionality, the appellate
authority must merely examine whether the procedure was correct or if the punishment was the
least restrictive means of achieving the aim.

Page - 3
 Download Testbook App

• A broader doctrine of proportionality would render the administration's discretionary powers

outdated, the Indian legal system has taken a restrictive approach to this notion.
• It will give the court the authority to interfere with executive powers.
• The court cannot act in the executive's place and on its behalf. India's ideology, as a result, is
suitable for sustaining this status.
Also read, Important Amendments in Indian Constitution!

UPSC Mains Practice Question

Q. In judicial review, what do you mean by the doctrine of proportionality? Examine how the doctrine of
proportionality was used to support Aadhar's constitutional legality.

We hope all your doubts regarding the doctrine of proportionality would have been addressed now.
Testbook provides study material for various competitive examinations. Ace your UPSC preparation by
downloading the Testbook App!

Doctrine of Proportionality- FAQs

Q1. What is the doctrine of Proportionality?
A1. Doctrine of Proportionality is commonly asserted as a basis for Judicial review in most of the cases
involving administrative action. The doctrine arose in Europe and is now an integral part of European
administrative law.

Q2. How does the doctrine of proportionality apply?

A2. When an administrative action is challenged on the doctrine of proportionality, the appellate authority
must merely examine whether the procedure was correct or if the punishment was the least restrictive
means of achieving the aim.

Q3. Which case introduced the doctrine of proportionality?

A3. Om Kumar v. Union of India 2000 introduced the doctrine of proportionality in India.

Q4. What is the principle of doctrine of proportionality in administrative law?

A4. Proportionality refers to the fact that administrative action should not be more severe than necessary
to achieve the desired result. This means that shooting a sparrow with a canon is not a good idea. As a
result, this theory attempts to strike a balance between methods and aims.

Q5.What is the Indian judicial system's stance on the doctrine of proportionality?

A5. A broader doctrine would render the administration's discretionary powers outdated, the Indian legal
system has taken a restrictive approach to this notion. It will give the court the authority to interfere with
executive powers.

Page - 4