Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

476. The precious words of the Hon'ble Apex Court do hint at two things:
1. there are no across the board principles to state what is sustainable development as it would depend on the facts of each case. 2. Proper decision making needs to be based on informed reasons about the ends pursued.

26. The Minister while passing the order dated 23rd June, 2011 exercised statutory discretion and to judge its validity, normally, the test based on Wednesbury Principle needs to be applied. Whenever a decision making function is entrusted to the subjective satisfaction of a statutory functionary, there is an implicit obligation on such functionary, like the Minister in the present case, to apply his mind to pertinent and proximate matters only, issuing the irrelevant and the remote . A decision is said to be unreasonable in Wednesbury sense if (i) it is based on wholly irrelevant material or wholly irrelevant consideration,(ii) it has ignored a very relevant material which it should have taken into consideration, or (iii) it is so absurd that no sensible person could ever have reached to it. Controversies relating to arbitrariness thus can be determine on application of Wednesbury Principle, and for that purpose it is necessary to examine whether relevant matters had not been taken into account. In other words it needs to be understood whether the Minister's decision was fair and fully informed and consistent with the principle of sustainable development.