In reviewing a determination of an administrative agency not made after a quasi-judicial hearing, the Appellate Division noted that the reviewing court's inquiry is limited to determining whether the administrative decision:
1. Is arbitrary and capricious;
2. Without a rational basis in the record; and
3. Has a reasonable basis in law.
The Appellate Division observed that "An agency's interpretation of the statutes and regulations that it administers is entitled to deference, and must be upheld if reasonable".
Further, the court opined that "The agency's determination need only be supported by a rational basis", noting that "An administrative determination is arbitrary and capricious when it exceeds the agency's statutory authority or is made in violation of the Constitution or laws of this State".
In the words of the Appellate Division: "If the agency's determination is rationally based, a reviewing court may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency even if the court might have decided the matter differently" as it is not "for a reviewing court to weigh the evidence or reject the choice made by the agency where the evidence conflicts and room for choice exists ."
Click HERE access the Appellate Division's decision posted on the Internet.