The Bench went on to note that though courts may set aside administrative actions that may be illegal or arbitrary, this alone may not address the repercussions of abuse of power.
“It is equally incumbent upon the courts, as a secondary measure, to address the injurious consequences arising from arbitrary and illegal actions. This concomitant duty to take reasonable measures to restitute the injured is our overarching constitutional purpose.”
It also expressed the difficulty constitutional courts face while identifying appropriate remedial measures, largely owing to the dual variables of time and limited resources. Elaborating further, it said,
“The inherent difficulty in bridging the time gap between the illegal impugned action and restitution is certainly not rooted in deficiencies within the law or legal jurisprudence but rather in systemic issues inherent in the adversarial judicial process. The protracted timeline spanning from the filing of a writ petition, service of notice, filing of counter affidavits, final hearing, and then the eventual delivery of judgment, coupled with subsequent appellate procedures, exacerbates delays.”
Source: Barandbench
