Supreme Court on Doctrine of Legitimate Expectation: Balancing State Policy Power with Administrative Fairness

The judgment underscores that the 'reasonableness' of a state action is the heart of Article 14 of the Constitution. If an administrative authority changes a policy without a rational basis or a public interest justification, it violates the principle of non-arbitrariness. The Court noted that the State's duty to act fairly is a facet of the Rule of Law. Therefore, administrative authorities are required to act consistently and transparently to maintain public trust. However, the Court also balanced this by stating that the doctrine cannot be used to block a policy change that is genuinely in the public interest. The State’s 'power to change' is preserved, provided it passes the test of proportionality and fairness. This ruling serves as a reminder to the executive that policy-making is not a shield against judicial review if the process lacks transparency or harms individuals who relied on previous state promises. UPSC Relevance: This judgment is highly relevant for GS Paper II (Governance and Judiciary) and Public Administration (Administrative Law). Aspirants can use this doctrine to answer questions regarding the Rule of Law, Administrative Discretion, and the Citizen-Administration Interface, specifically highlighting how judicial oversight ensures that executive actions remain within the bounds of constitutional morality.