Judicial review of administrative process over substantive outcomes

The scope of judicial review under constitutional provisions extends beyond the superficial validity of an administrative outcome to a rigorous examination of the underlying decision-making process itself. Where administrative or statutory power is exercised for extraneous purposes, influenced by irrelevant considerations, or driven by legal malice, courts are duty-bound to intervene and set aside the resulting orders. Public authorities are required not only to act fairly and transparently in reality, but also to manifestly appear to act fairly in the eyes of the public at large. If the process leading to a decision is infected with procedural high-handedness, administrative vendetta, or a disregard for established judicial directions, the final determination cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny. Preserving institutional integrity requires stripping away administrative smoke screens to expose underlying arbitrary actions. (Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj v. Union of India and Anr. | 2026 INSC 101)