Read the following passage carefully and answer the question.

One is that power should not be exercised arbitrarily. This has meant that it should be exercised for the purpose for which it has been conferred. It also means that power should be exercised with in the statutory ambit; and purported exercise of it would not just be ultra vires, but in true sense of the term arbitrary. Simple negation of arbitrariness is, however, not enough to preserve the Rule of Law values. Indian courts have gone further to insists on specific positive content of the Rule of Law obligations. These include the rules of nature justice which have to be followed not just in quasi-judicial action but often also in purely administrative action. The scope and content of the requirements of natural justice have varied from time to time according to the judicial interpretation, but the board insistence remains. In addition, access to information as to the grounds of decision has remained an important preoccupation of the Indian judiciary, as any impediments to it have the tendency of obstructing judicial review of administrative action.

This means that the courts have from time to time insisted that exercise of administrative power be accompanied by reasons, although the exact status of the obligation to give reason is as yet indeterminate. The Rule of Law notion has been in addition consistently extended to secure for the individual fair dealing by the state in its economic activities.