Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Acts

Posted on

This article is written by Samridhi Sachdeva pursuing BBA LLB from Gitarattan International Business School, GGSIPU. In this article, the author tries to define the judicial and quasi-judicial acts for the readers to understand better and also the distinction between both has been explained.

INTRODUCTION

There are three organs of the government that perform various functions individually. The legislative organ creates or makes changes in the law; the executive ensures that the laws passed by the legislative are enforced accordingly and the function of the judiciary is to make sure that the laws executed are implemented correctly in every situation.

But not always it may happen that the judicial functions are taken by the judiciary body only, the executive or the administrative authority can also play the judicial role. In some situations, these bodies can acquire the ‘quasi-judicial authority’. 

A judicial act is something that bounds the judiciary of any system to take decision with the proper proceedings of the court. And the quasi-judicial acts don’t bound any body but give decisions without the proceedings of the court.

Judicial Acts

The acts that are done by a particular competent authority, by looking upon the facts and the circumstances of the situation are judicial acts. They are done in the manner of court proceedings and impose the liabilities on the guilty and try to save the rights of the other person. They follow a strict procedure to go on. The acts that are done by a particular competent authority, by looking upon the facts and the circumstances of the situation are judicial acts. They are done in the manner of court proceedings and impose the liabilities on the guilty and try to save the rights of the other person. They follow a strict procedure to go on. These acts are done by the judges of the court when they give decisions on any case using the particular laws or the judges may even create laws while passing judgements. The judges are bound by the law to give decisions by following the complete court procedure. 

There is no liability of the judge in trespass for the want of jurisdiction, the burden of proof of the facts lies completely on the plaintiff in every case. And also, no disputes should be filed against any judge, who acts judicially and in good faith. The decisions taken by the judge in every case, when the judge is acting judicially gives no person the right to fight against the decision taken by that judge in a particular case.

This rule of immunity in the judicial acts is also applied to the members of naval and military courts-martial or courts of inquiry constituted in compliance with the military law and usage and not only to the judges of the ordinary civil courts. Also, to a limited extent, it applies to the arbitrators as well and the persons who are appointed in a position like that of the arbitrator. The person, if acting honestly, is not liable for any faults in the decision. He will be liable if any corrupt or partisan exercises are being done in his office. But he can not be made personally liable if he works in utter use of judicial discretion and he can not be questioned upon the correctness and competence of his decision.

Quasi-Judicial Acts

The word ‘quasi’ holds a Latin origin and means ‘similar to but not exactly’. The quasi-judicial acts are not exactly court proceedings. They may seem to derive the powers and functions of some laws, but they are still not considered as courts. They don’t usually follow any procedure of the court. These acts are done by the persons who are not judge of any court or do not hold a judiciary power under certain laws. The institutions may hire a manager or chief who may act as a judge and pass decisions regarding the working of that institution.

These acts are performed by the person who is not a judge and applied to the action and discretion of the public administrative officers and bodies, who are in charge or duty-bound to investigate facts or prove the existence of facts, hold hearings, weigh the evidence and provide the results and decisions accordingly to exercise their power of judicial nature.

The powers of universities over their officers and graduates and the powers of the colleges of the universities over their students are an example of the quasi-judicial acts. The finance commission also holds a quasi-judicial authority. The General Council of Medical Education has power over the registered medical practitioners. These acts depend on the institution of foundation, provisions of which are binding on persons who are benefitted through them. The partners of a company together hold a quasi-judicial authority when they act upon the recruitment or firing of any partner or taking decisions to build or enhance the functions and working of that company. 

The basic rule of the acts to be quasi-judicial is that the persons who exercise them are protected from civil liability, if they observe the rules of natural justice and also the particular statutory rules which may prescribe their course of action.

Difference between Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Acts 

The judicial and quasi-judicial acts differ from each other as the judicial acts require a proper proceeding of the court and the judge is duty-bound whereas the quasi-judicial acts don’t require the courts and decisions taken under them are by the person, who is not a judge.

The judicial acts are bound by the common law precedents to give decisions whereas the quasi-judicial acts are not usually bound.

In absence of any common law precedent, judicial acts may invent new laws but the quasi-judicial is based on the decisions of the existing laws.

Conclusion

So, the above article has clearly mentioned that the judicial acts are the one that involves a proper court proceeding with a proper judiciary system whereas the quasi-judicial acts are those where the court proceedings are not necessary but they have to be used when the authorities of the institution have landed into a great dispute and the person who takes decisions in the quasi-judicial acts is not a judge of the court. The quasi-judicial acts can be performed by the executive or administrative body of any institution. 

Latest Posts

Archives


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *