- (1.) APART from and independently of the aspects of the lack of bona fides or mala fides, in the matters of control and jurisdiction, whether in connection with the judicial review of administrative or executive action, whether with reference to the satisfaction of conditions requisite for initiation of proceedings under Chapter XIV of the Criminal Procedure Code or whether in relation to the entertainment of the proceedings under the Contempt of courts Act, 1971, the Courts have always considered the authority as co-relative with functions irrespective of its designation or nomenclature. The courts have always been concerned with the facet of decision making with reference to the authority The Courts have always considered as to whether the authority concerned in matters was a decision making authority, or was an authority capable of rendering executive decisions.
(2.) ANY authority acquires the description relevant for the purpose when in terms of its function, the following aspects manifest in relation thereto.
(3.) A true judicial decision pre-supposes an existing dispute between two or more parties and then involves four requisites: (1) The presentation (not necessarily orally of their case by the parties to the dispute ; (2) If the dispute between them is a question of fact, the ascertainment of the fact by means of evidence adduced by the parties to the dispute and often with the assistance of argument by or on behalf of the parties on the evidence ; (3) If the dispute between them is a question of law, the submission of legal argument by the parties; and (4) A decision which disposes of the whole matter by a finding upon the facts in dispute and an application of the Law of the Land to the facts so found, including where required a ruling upon any disputed question of law. Cooper v. Wilson and others. 1937 2 king's Bench Division, 309-atpage 341,;