JUDGMENT

Hansaria, J.-The administrative law has of late seen vast increase in discretionary powers. But then, the discretion conferred has to be exercised to advance the purpose to suberve which the power exists. Even the Minister, if he/she be the repository of discretionary power, cannot claim that either there is no discretion in the matter or unfettered discretion. This proposition was rejected emphatically by the House of Lords in the landmark decision of Padfield, 1968 AC 997. This apart, as pointed out in United States v. Wunderlish1 :

"Law has reached its finest moments, when it has freed man from unlimited discretion of some ruler, some...official, some bureaucrat...Absolute discretion is a ruthless master. It is more destructive of freedom than any of man s other invention."

1A. These high principles of administrative law have been placed at the forefront because, as would appear from what is being stated later, in the present case there was gross misuse of discretionary power relating to allotment of accommodation to government employees. As against the discretionary quota of 10 per cent, it shot upto 70 per cent; and on top of that 8,768 houses were allotted by stating th