Administrative Law - Part III - Slides.pdf

Admin law notes

1. Delegated Legislation
Shibam Talukdar

2. Conceptual Background
•AccordingtoSalmond,legislationiseithersupremeorsubordinate.
Whereastheformerproceedsfromsovereignorsupremepower,thelatter
flowsfromanyauthorityotherthanthesovereignpower,andis,therefore,
dependentforitsexistenceandcontinuanceonsuperiororsupreme
authority.
•Delegatedlegislation,thus,isalegislationmadebyabodyorpersonother
thanthesovereigninParliamentbyvirtueofpowersconferredbysuch
sovereignunderthestatute.
•Asimplemeaningoftheexpressiondelegatedlegislationmaybegivenas
under:
•Whenthefunctionoflegislationisentrustedtoorgansotherthanthe
legislaturebythelegislatureitself,thelegislationmadebysuchorgans
iscalleddelegatedlegislation.

3. Conceptual Background
•AccordingtoJainandJain,theterm“delegatedlegislation”isused
intwosenses:
1)exercisebyasubordinateagencyofthelegislativepower
delegatedtoitbythelegislature,or
2)thesubsidiaryrulesthemselveswhicharemadebythe
subordinateauthorityinpursuanceofthepowerconferredonit
bythelegislature.

4. Conceptual Background
•Initsfirstapplication,itmeansthattheauthoritymakingthelegislationis
subordinatetothelegislature.Thelegislativepowersareexercisedbyan
authorityotherthanthelegislatureinexerciseofthepowersdelegatedor
conferredonthembythelegislatureitself.Thisisalsoknownas“subordinate
legislation”,becausethepowersoftheauthoritywhichmakesitarelimitedby
thestatutewhichconferredthepowerandconsequently,itisvalidonly
insofarasitkeepswithinthoselimits.
•Initssecondconnotation,“delegatedlegislation”meansandincludesallrules,
regulations,bye-laws,orders,etc.Thus,theobjectoftheMinimumWages
Act,1948is“toprovideforfixingminimumwagesincertainemployments”.
TheActappliestoemploymentsmentionedintheSchedule.ButtheCentral
Government(executive)isempoweredtoaddanyotheremploymenttothe
Scheduleif,“intheopinionoftheGovernment”theActshouldapply.

5. Conceptual Background
•TheEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955enumeratescertaincommoditiesas
“essentialcommodities”undertheAct.Butthelistgiveninthestatuteisnot
exhaustiveandtheCentralGovernmentisempoweredtodeclareanyother
commodityas“essentialcommodity”andtoapplytheprovisionsoftheActtoit.
•ThePaymentofBonusAct,1965empowerstheCentralGovernmenttoexempt
anyestablishmentoraclassofestablishmentsfromtheoperationoftheAct,
havingregardtothefinancialpositionandotherrelevantconsiderations.
•TheDefenceofIndiaAct,1962authorisedtheCentralGovernmenttomake“such
rulesasappeartoittobenecessaryorexpedient”forthedefenceofIndiaand
maintenanceofpublicorderandsafety.
•TheIncome-taxAct,1961empowerstheBoardtomakerules“forcarryingout
thepurposesoftheActandfortheascertainmentanddeterminationofanyclass
ofincome”.

6. Conceptual Background
•Thestatuteenactedbythelegislatureconferringthelegislativepower
upontheexecutiveisknownasthe“parentAct”or“primarylaw”and
therules,regulations,bye-laws,orders,etc.madebytheexecutivein
pursuanceofthelegislativepowersconferredbythelegislatureare
knownassubordinatelawsorsubsidiarylawsorthe“childlegislation”.

7. Subordinate Legislation and Supreme Legislation: Distinction
•WhereasanAct,enactmentorastatuteismadebythelegislature,
subordinateordelegatedlegislationiscreatedbyanexecutiveor
administrativeauthority.Botharetheproductsof“legislativefunction”(in
widersense)oftheStatehavingthe“forceoflaw”intheirapplicationto
subjects.Butthereisadistinctionbetweenthetwo.
•AsSalmondstates,anActoflegislatureproceedsfromsupremepowerofthe
Stateandhasno“rival”inthefield.Italsodoesnotderiveitsauthorityfrom
anyotherorganoftheState.Subordinatelegislation,ontheotherhand,is
framedbytheexecutiveandowesitsexistence,continuanceandvalidityon
superiororsupremeauthority,i.e.legislature.
•Anexecutivebodycanmakesubordinatelegislationonlyifsuchpoweris
conferredonitbyacompetentlegislature,nototherwise.Again,a
subordinatelaw-makingbodyisboundbythetermsofitsdelegatedor
derivativeauthority.

8. Subordinate Legislation and Supreme Legislation: Distinction
•InChiefSettlementCommr.v.OmPrakash,AIR1969SC33,theSupreme
Courtstated:
•Itisessentialtoemphasisethatunderourconstitutionalsystemthe
authoritytomakethelawisvestedinParliamentandtheState
Legislaturesandotherlawmakingbodiesandwhateverlegislative
powertheexecutiveadministrationpossessesmustbederiveddirectly
fromthedelegationofthelegislationandexercisedvalidlyonlywithin
thelimitsprescribed.Thenotionofinherentorautonomouslaw-making
powerintheexecutiveadministrationisanotionthatmustbe
emphaticallyrejected.

9. Subordinate Legislation and Supreme Legislation: Distinction
•WhereParliamentissupremeandsovereign,itisomnipotentandits
legislativepowerisunlimited,e.g.theBritishParliament.
•InBritainithasbeensaid,“Parliamentcandoeverything,butmakeamana
womanandawomanaman.”
•AstatuteenactedbytheBritishParliamentisnotopentojudicialreviewand
cannotbedeclaredultraviresorunconstitutionalbyacourtoflaw.
•InIndia,alawmadebyParliamentisopentochallengeonthegroundthatit
violatesprovisionsoftheConstitution.
•DelegatedlegislationinIndiacanbechallengedasnotonlybeingultravires
theConstitutionbutalsoasbeinginconsistentwiththeparentAct.
•Subordinatelegislationcanbechallengedonanyofthegroundsonwhichthe
plenarylegislationischallenged.
•Everysubordinatelegislationmustyieldtotheplenarylegislation.

10. Delegated Legislation: A Necessary Evil?
•Pleaserefertoyourtextbook(s).

11. Reasons behind the growth of Delegated Legislation
•PressureuponParliamentarytime
•Technicalityandcomplexityofsubjectmatter
•Flexibility
•Experimentation
•Confidentiality
•Emergentsituations
•Complexityofmodernadministration

12. Classification of Delegated Legislation
(a)Title-basedclassification
•Delegatedlegislationmaybeintheformsofrules,regulations,bye-laws,
notifications,schemes,orders,ordinances,directions,etc.
(b)Discretion-basedclassification
•AdiscretionmaybeconferredontheexecutivetobringtheActintooperation
onfulfilmentofcertainconditions.Suchlegislationiscalled“conditional”or
“contingent”legislation.

13. Classification of Delegated Legislation
(c)Purpose-basedclassification
•Aclassificationmaybebasedonnatureandextentofpowerconferredand
purposesforwhichsuchpowercanbeexercised.Thus,executivecanbe
empoweredtofixanappointeddayfortheActtocomeintoforce;tosupply
details;toextendtheprovisionsoftheActtootherareas;toincludeorto
excludeoperationoftheActtocertainterritories,persons,industries,
commodities;andtosuspendortomodifytheprovisionsoftheAct,etc.
(d)Authority-basedclassification
•Astatutemayalsoempowertheexecutivetodelegatefurtherpowers
conferredonittoitssubordinateauthority.Thisisknownas“sub-delegation”.

14. Different Forms of Delegated Legislation
1.CentralActtoCentralGovernment
2.CentralActtoStateGovernment
3.CentralActtoCentralandStateGovernments
4.CentralActtoStatutoryBodies
5.StateActtoStateGovernment
6.StateActtoStatutoryBodies
7.StateActtoMunicipality/Panchayat

15. Central Act or Parliamentary Law to Central Government
•CentralActDelegatedLegislationUnionGovernment
•Section3ofDefenceofIndiaAct,1962
•“Powertomakerules.—(1)TheCentralGovernmentmay,by
notificationintheOfficialGazette,makesuchrulesasappearto
itnecessaryorexpedientforsecuringthedefenceofIndiaand
civildefence,thepublicsafety,themaintenanceofpublicorder
ortheefficientconductofmilitaryoperations,orformaintaining
suppliesandservicesessentialtothelifeofthecommunity.”

16. Central Act or Parliamentary Law to Central Government
•Section3ofAllIndiaServicesAct,1951
•“Regulationofrecruitmentandconditionsofservice.—(1)TheCentral
Governmentmay,afterconsultationwiththeGovernmentsoftheStates
concerned,andbynotificationintheOfficialGazettemakerulesforthe
regulationofrecruitment,andtheconditionsofserviceofpersons
appointedtoanAll-IndiaService.
•(1A)Thepowertomakerulesconferredbythissectionshallincludethe
powertogiveretrospectiveeffectfromadatenotearlierthanthedateof
commencementofthisAct,totherulesoranyofthembutno
retrospectiveeffectshallbegiventoanyrulesoastoprejudiciallyaffect
theinterestsofanypersontowhomsuchrulemaybeapplicable.”
•RulesandregulationsmadebytheCentralGovernmenttolaidbeforethe
Parliament.

17. Central Act or Parliamentary Law to State Government
•CentralActDelegatedLegislationStateGovernment
•Section3ofTheWaqfAct,1995empowerstheState
Governmentstomakerulesspecifyingqualificationsof
“mutawalli”incaseawaqfhasspecifiedqualificationsforthe
same.
•Section8ofTheOpiumAct,1878empowerstheState
Governmentstomakerulestoregulatethesafecustodyof
opiumwarehouses,thelevyoffeesforsuchwarehousing,etc.

18. Central Act to Central and State Governments
•CentralActDelegatedLegislationCentralandStateGovernments
•TheEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955empowerstheCentral
Governmenttoaddorremovea“commodity”fromitsSchedulein
consultationwiththeStateGovernments.TheActempowerstheCentral
andStateGovernmentstofixpricesoffoodgrains.Section5oftheAct
permitstheCentralGovernmenttosub-delegateitspowerofmaking
ordersandissuingnotificationstoasubordinateofficerorauthorityor
toaStateGovernmentoritssubordinateofficerorauthority.
•TheMotorVehiclesAct,1988,throughitsseveralprovisions,empowers
theCentralandtheStateGovernmentstomakerulesforvarious
purposessuchaslicensing,registration,etc.

19. Central Act to Statutory Bodies
•CentralActDelegatedLegislationStatutoryBodies
•Section3oftheReserveBankofIndiaAct,1934establishesand
incorporatesthestatutorybody,ReserveBankofIndia.Section28Aof
theActempowerstheRBItomakeregulations,withprevioussanction
oftheCentralGovernment,inconnectionwithspecialbanknotesand
specialonerupeenotes.
•Section3oftheSecuritiesandExchangeBoardofIndia,1992establishes
andincorporatesthestatutorybody,SEBI.Section30oftheAct
empowersSEBItomakeregulationsconsistentwiththeActandthe
rulesmadethereundertocarryoutthepurposesoftheAct

20. State Act to State Government
•StateActDelegatedLegislationStateGovernment
•Section148oftheBombayProhibitionAct,1949empoweredtheBombay
Statetomakerulesforthepurposeofcarryingouttheprovisionsofthe
Actoranyotherlawforthetimebeinginforcerelatingtoexcise
revenues—includingregulatingtheimport,export,transport,collection,
sale,purchase,bottling,consumption,useorpossessionofanyintoxicant,
[denaturedspirituouspreparation]orhemp,mhowraflowersormolasses.
•Section59oftheGujaratAgriculturalProduceMarketsAct,1963
empowerstheStateGovernmenttomakerules,eithergenerallyor
speciallyforanymarketareaormarketareasforthepurposesofcarrying
outthepurposesoftheAct.

21. State Act to Statutory Bodies
•StateActDelegatedLegislationStatutoryBodies
•Section7oftheGujaratNationalUniversityAct,2003empowers
theUniversitytomakeregulationsforregulatingtheaffairsand
themanagementoftheUniversity.

22. State Act to Municipality/Panchayat
•StateActDelegatedLegislationMunicipality/Panchayat
•MunicipalitiesandPanchayatshaveseparatelegalexistence.
•Section104oftheRajasthanPanchayatiRajAct,1994empowers
thePanchayatstoframebye-lawstopreventdamagetopublic
streetsandPanchayatproperty,toregulatesanitation,
conservancyanddrainageinitsPanchayatCircle,toregulatethe
disposalofcarcassesofdeadanimals,toregulatetheplacesused
forthesaleofmeatorfishandwine,etc.

23. Different Forms of Title
•Rules,regulations,orders,bye-laws
•InEngland,thereexistsaclassification.
•Procedurallawmadebytheexecutive–Rules.
•Substantivelawmadebytheexecutive–Regulations.
•Judicialorquasi-judicialdecisionsofadministration–Orders.
•Lawsmadebytheexecutiveinrelationtoregulatingandcontrollingthe
conductofgovernmentbodies–Bye-laws.
•InSukhdevSinghv.BhagatRam,AIR1975SC1331,itwasheldthatin
India,thereexistslittleornosuchdistinction.

24. Purpose-based Delegation
1)PowertobringanActintoforce.
2)PowertoextendthelifeofanAct.
3)Powertoextendtootherterritories.
4)Powertoinclude.
5)Powertoexclude.
6)Powertoadopt.
7)Powertofillindetails.
8)Powertoprescribepunishment.
9)Powertomodify.
10)Powertoremovedifficulties.

25. Power to bring an Act into force
•PowergiventoCentralGovernmenttobringtheActintoforce.Thefunction
whichlegislaturecouldhaveperformedisdelegatedtoexecutive,whereby
executiveisdeterminingtheenforcementofanenactment.
•TheLegalServicesAuthoritiesAct,1987
•Section1(3)states,“ItshallcomeintoforceonsuchdateastheCentral
Governmentmay,bynotification,appoint;anddifferentdatesmaybe
appointedfordifferentprovisionsofthisActandfordifferentStates…”
•Cameintoforceon9
th
November1995
•TheChitFundsAct,1982
•Section1(3)statesthattheActshallcomeintoforceonsuchdateasthe
CentralGovernmentmay,bynotificationintheOfficialGazette,appoint,
anddifferentdatesmaybeappointedfordifferentStates.

26. Power to extend life of an Act
•Sometimeslegislationmaybeprescribedforaparticularperiodof
timeorterritorialarea.Apartoflegislativefunctionsistodetermine
thelifeandapplicationofanenactment.
•BiharMaintenanceofPublicOrderAct,1947
•Section2containedaprovisionunderwhichtheProvincial
Government,withtheassentofbothHousesoftheState
Legislature,could,byanotification,prolonglifeoftheActfora
furtherperiodofoneyearthantheperiodalreadyspecified
(after15March1948).

27. Power to extend application of an Act
•Lawsmaybemeantforaparticularterritory.Thepowerto
extendtheapplicationofthelawtootherterritorialareas
mightbewithinthecompetenceoftheexecutive.
•TheTeaDistrictsEmigrantLabourAct,1932
•Section38(2)authorisedtheCentralGovernmentto
extendtheprovisionsoftheActtoanyotherlandand
premisesinAssaminadditiontotheareaalready
specifiedintheAct.

28. Power to include
•Legislationmayincludeitems,persons,groupsofpersons,or
institutionsasbeingwithinitspurview.
•Powertoincludereferstopowertoincludemoreitems,persons,
groupsofpersons,orinstitutionstotheexistinglist.
•TheMinimumWagesAct,1948
•Section27empowerstheStateGovernmentstoaddtoeither
PartoftheScheduleanyemploymentinrespectofwhich
minimumratesofwagesshouldbefixedundertheAct.The
ScheduleshallinitsapplicationtotheStatebedeemedtobe
amendedaccordingly.

29. Power to exclude/exempt
•Powertoexclude/exemptreferstopowertoexcludeitems,persons,groups
ofpersons,orinstitutionsfromtheexistinglist(Schedule)foraspecified
periodorexemptitems,persons,groupsofpersons,orinstitutionsfrom
theapplicationoftheAct.
•ThePaymentofBonusAct,1965
•Section36empowerstheappropriateGovernmenttoexemptan
establishmentorclassofestablishmentfromalloranyofthe
provisionsoftheAct,forsuchtimeperiodandsubjecttosuch
conditionsasmaybespecified,ifitisofopinionthatitwillnotbein
publicinteresttoapplyalloranyoftheprovisionsofthisAct
thereto,havingregardtothefinancialpositionandotherrelevant
circumstancesofanyestablishmentorclassofestablishment.

30. Power to adopt
•Alawwhichisimplementedinoneterritorycouldbe
adoptedandappliedtoanotherterritory.
•TheUnionTerritories(Laws)Act,1950
•Section2empoweredtheCentralGovernmentto
extend,bywayofnotificationintheOfficialGazette,to
implementanyenactmentwhichisinforceinaStateto
certainUnionTerritories.

31. Power to fill in details
•Legislaturemakesskeletonlegislation.
•EssentialCommoditiesAct,1955
•SubstantivelawmakingpowerisgiventotheCentral
andStateGovernments,wherebytheyarerequiredto
fillthegapsintheenactmentbywayofdelegated
legislation.

32. Power to fill in details
•Legislaturemakesskeletonlegislation.
•EssentialCommoditiesAct,1955
•SubstantivelawmakingpowerisgiventotheCentralandState
Governments,wherebytheyarerequiredtofillthegapsintheenactment
bywayofdelegatedlegislation.
•Export(QualityControlandInspection)Act,1963
•Section7giveswide-rangingpowerstotheCentralGovernmentto
establish,recognise,orwithdrawrecognitionfromagenciesforquality
controlorinspectionorboth.Section8empowerstheCentral
Governmenttorecogniseorestablishmarkstodenoteconformitywith
standardspecifications.

33. Power to prescribe punishment
•Prescribingpunishmentfordefinedoffencescouldbedone
bytheexecutivethroughdelegatedlegislation.
•IndianElectricityAct,1910
•TheCentralElectricityBoardmay,inmakinganyrule
underthisAct,directthateverybreachthereofshallbe
punishablewithfinewhichmayextendtothree
hundredrupees,andinthecaseofacontinuing
breach,withafurtherdailyfinewhichmayextendto
fiftyrupees.

34. Power to modify
•Executivehasthepowertomakechangeswithoutchangingthevery
characterofthelaw.
•Modification—
1)IncidentalModification
2)SubstantialModification
•RajnarainSinghv.TheChairman,PatnaAdministration,1954AIR569
•LachmiNarainv.UnionofIndia,AIR1976SC714
•Inthecases,itwasheldthatexecutive,throughdelegated
legislation,canmakemodificationwhichareincidentalinnature.
Modificationcannotamounttosubstantialmodification.Ifdone
so,itis/shallbeinvalid.

35. Power to remove difficulties (Henry VIII Clause)
•Ifintheimplementationofalaw,anydifficultyariseswhereit
becomesinoperative,executivecancomeupwithacertainlegislation
tomakeitfunctional.Thisisknownasthepowertoremove
difficulties.
•Income-taxAct,1961
•Section298providesthatifanydifficultyarisesingivingeffect
totheprovisionsoftheAct,theCentralGovernmentmay,by
generalorspecialorder,doanythingnotinconsistentwithsuch
provisionswhichappearstoittobenecessaryorexpedientfor
thepurposeofremovingthedifficulty.

36. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•Fieldv.Clark(1892)
•TheUSSupremeCourtheldthatCongresscannotdelegateits
legislativepowers.
•Thisuniversallyrecognisedprinciple,whichmaintainstheintegrityof
thesystemofgovernance,isordainedbytheConstitution.
•Therearetwoprinciplesunderwhichdelegatedlegislationcannotbe
permittedintheUSA(Frankfurter,J.):
1)Separationofpowers
2)Delegatusnonpotestdelegare
•PeopledelegatedtheirlawmakingpowertotheCongressand
Congresscannotfurtherdelegatethesametotheexecutive.

37. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•PanamaRefiningCo.v.Ryan(1935)
•Section9(c)oftheNationalIndustrialRecoveryActof1933
authorisedthePresidenttoprohibitthetransportationin
interstateandforeigncommerceofpetroleumand
petroleumproductsorwithdrawnfromstorageinexcessof
theamountspermittedbystateauthority.
•AnyviolationofanorderofthePresidentissuedunderthe
saidsubsectionshallbepunishablebyafine,nottoexceed
$1,000,orimprisonmentnottoexceedsixmonths,orboth.

38. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•PanamaRefiningCo.v.Ryan(1935)
•ThePresidentthendelegatedthatpowertotheSecretaryofthe
Interiorthroughaseriesofexecutiveordersthatrequiredall
petroleumcompaniestoprovidemonthlystatementsunderoath
verifyingdetailsoftheirbusinesspracticesandtoretainallwork-
relateddocumentsforpotentialinspectionbytheDepartmentof
theInterior,amongotherthings.
•TwoTexanoilcompanies,PanamaRefiningCo.andAmazon
PetroleumCorp.filedseparatelawsuitschallengingtheSecretary
oftheInterior’sregulationsandSection9(c)oftheNIRA.

39. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•PanamaRefiningCo.v.Ryan(1935)
•TheDistrictJudgesinbothcasessidedwiththecompaniesagainst
thegovernment,buttheFifthCircuitCourtofAppealsruledinfavor
ofthefederalgovernmentanddirectedthatbothlawsuitsbethrown
out.
•ThecasesthenappearedtogetherbeforetheSupremeCourtunder
thenamePanamaRefiningCo.v.Ryan.
•TheCourtruled8-1thatSection9(c)oftheNationalIndustrial
RecoveryActunconstitutionallydelegatedlegislativepowertothe
President,whichalsorenderedtheexecutiveordersinvalid.

40. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•PanamaRefiningCo.v.Ryan(1935)
•Themajorityopinionwasthattheattempteddelegationwasplainlyvoid
becausethepowersoughttobedelegatedwaslegislativepower,but
nowhereinthestatutedidCongressdeclareorindicateanypolicyor
standardtoguideorlimitthePresidentwhenactingunderthedelegation.
•Dissent:
•JusticeBenjaminCardozofeltthatthe“declarationofpolicy”inSection
1oftheAct,statingthattherewasanationalemergency,wasa
sufficientdefinitionofastandardtomakethestatutevalid.
•ItisnotdignifiableonthepartoftheCourttosearchforsuchstandard
andpolicy.
•Iflegislatureretainsthepowerofrepeal,anythingcanbedelegated.

41. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•A.L.A.SchechterPoultryCorp.v.UnitedStates,295US495(1935)
•TheUSSupremeCourtinvalidatedSection3oftheNationalIndustrial
RecoveryActof1933(NIRA)inviolationofthenondelegation
doctrine.
•ThecaseconcernedCongress’delegationoflegislativepowertothe
executivebranchtoadministerNIRAaswellasthefederal
government’spowertooverseeintrastatecommerce.
•NIRAauthorisedtheNationalRecoveryAdministrationtocreate
industry-wide“codesoffaircompetition”,withinputfromboth
businessesandlaborunions,toreplaceexistingantitrustlaws.

42. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•A.L.A.SchechterPoultryCorp.v.UnitedStates,295US495(1935)
•UnderNIRA,theNationalRecoveryAdministrationformulated
the“LivePoultryCode”,whichsetrulesforthepoultryindustry
regardinghours,wages,healthandsafety,andotherpractices.
•SchechterPoultryCorporationwaschargedandconvictedof19
codeviolationsbytheUSDistrictCourtfortheEasternDistrictof
NewYork.
•SchechterappealedtheDistrictCourt’sdecision,buttheUS
CourtofAppealsforthe2ndCircuitsustainedallbuttwoofthe
convictions.

43. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•A.L.A.SchechterPoultryCorp.v.UnitedStates,295US495(1935)
•SchechterpetitionedtheUSSupremeCourt;oneofthearguments
wasthatNIRAviolatedthenondelegationdoctrinebyunlawfully
delegatinglegislativeauthoritytotheNationalRecovery
Administration.
•TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtruledunanimouslyinfavorof
Schechter,holdingthatSection3ofNIRAviolatedArticleIoftheU.S.
Constitutionbydelegatinglegislativepowertotheexecutivebranch
withoutfirstestablishinganintelligibleprinciple—effectivelyallowing
thepresident“toexerciseanunfettereddiscretiontomakewhatever
lawshethinksmaybeneeded.”

44. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•A.L.A.SchechterPoultryCorp.v.UnitedStates,295US495(1935)
•Inparticular,NIRAauthorizedtheNationalRecoveryAdministration
tocreateindustry-widecodesoffaircompetitionbutfailedtodefine
theparametersoffairandunfaircompetition.
•Theabsenceofthesedefinitionsplayedasignificantpartinthe
majorityopinion’sargumentthatNIRArepresentedan
unconstitutionaldelegationofcongressionalpower.
•JusticeBenjaminCardozoconcurredwiththecourt’sjudgmentbut
arguedthatbecauseofitsattempttoregulateintrastatematterssuch
ashoursandwages,evenCongressdidnothavesufficientauthority
toenforcetheLivePoultryCode.

45. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•NationalBroadcastingCo.,Inc.v.UnitedStates,319U.S.190(1943)
•TheCommunicationsActof1934authorisedtheFederal
CommunicationsCommission(“FCC”)topromulgateregulationsthat
encouragedthelargerandmoreeffectiveuseofradiointhepublic
interest,convenience,ornecessity.
•Althoughthisdelegationoflegislativeauthoritywasexpansive,itwas
notunconstitutionallyvagueandindefinitebecausethestatutory
publicintereststandardguidedtheFCC’sdeterminations.
•TheFCCwasallowedtoissuespecialregulationsdesignedtocorrect
theabusesdisclosedbyitsinvestigationofradiostationsengagedin
networkbroadcasting.

46. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•NationalBroadcastingCo.,Inc.v.UnitedStates,319U.S.190
(1943)
•TheUSSupremeCourtheldthattheActconfersbroadpower
upontheFCCtoregulatebroadcastersinthepublicinterest.
•TheActdefinedthepublicinterestastheinterestofthelistening
publicin“thelargerandmoreeffectiveuseofradio.”
•TheCourtalsorejectedtheargumentthatthepublicinterest
standardissufficientlyvaguetorepresentanunconstitutional
delegationofpower.
•InitiationofacceptanceofdelegatedlegislationintheUSA.

47. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•Yakusv.UnitedStates,321U.S.414(1944)
•TheEmergencyPriceControlActof1942,asamended,
empoweredthePriceAdministratorwiththelegislativepower
ofCongresstocontrolcommoditypricesintimeofwar.
•ThepurposeoftheActistopreventwartimeinflation.
•TheActprovidesfortheestablishmentofanOfficeofPrice
AdministrationunderthedirectionofaPriceAdministrator
appointedbythePresident.

48. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•Yakusv.UnitedStates,321U.S.414(1944)
•TheAdministratorisauthorised,afterconsultationwithrepresentative
membersoftheindustrysofaraspracticable,topromulgate
regulationsfixingpricesofcommoditieswhich“inhisjudgmentwillbe
generallyfairandequitableandwilleffectuatethepurposesofthis
Act”when,inhisjudgment,theirprices“haverisenorthreatentorise
toanextentorinamannerinconsistentwiththepurposesofthisAct.”
•TheAdministratorisdirectedinfixingpricestogivedueconsideration,
sofaraspracticable,topricesprevailingduringadesignatedbase
period,andtomakeadjustmentsforrelevantfactorsofgeneral
applicability.

49. Delegated Legislation in the USA
•Yakusv.UnitedStates,321U.S.414(1944)
•TheessentialsofthelegislativefunctionarepreservedwhenCongress
hasspecifiedthebasicconditionsoffactuponwhoseexistenceor
occurrence,ascertainedfromrelevantdatabyadesignated
administrativeagency,itdirectsthatitsstatutorycommandshallbe
effective.
•ThestandardsprescribedbytheAct,withtheaidofthe“statementof
considerations”requiredtobemadebytheAdministrator,are
sufficientlydefiniteandprecisetoenableCongress,thecourtsandthe
publictoascertainwhethertheAdministrator,infixingthedesignated
prices,hasconformedtothosestandards.

50. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•Queenv.Burah[1878]UKPC1
•TheActXXIIof1869passedbytheIndianLegislaturedealtwiththe
GovernorGeneral’spowerto:
•bringtheActineffect,
•determinewhatlawsweretobeapplicable,and
•extendapplicationofprovisionsoftheActtootherareas.
•TheActwaspassedtoremoveGaroHillsfromthecivilandcriminal
jurisdictionofBengalandvestthepowersofcivilandcriminal
administrationinofficersappointedbytheLt.GovernorofBengal.
•TheLt.GovernorwasfurtherauthorisedbyS.9oftheActtoextendany
provisionoftheActwithincidentalchangestoKhasi,NagaandJaintiaHills.

51. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•Queenv.Burah[1878]UKPC1
•OneBurahwastriedformurderbytheDeputyCommissionerofKhasi
andJaintiaHillsandwassentencedtodeath.
•ThequestionwaswhetherthefunctionsoftheLt.Governorwouldbe
categorisedasdelegatedlegislation.
•ThematterwentbeforetheCalcuttaHighCourtwhichfoundS.9tobe
ultraviresthepowersoftheIndianLegislaturesinceitwasa
delegationoftheBritishParliament.
•TheCalcuttaHighCourtheldthatdelegationoflegislationbythe
IndianLegislaturewasimpermissible.

52. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•Queenv.Burah[1878]UKPC1
•ThePrivyCouncilobservedthattheIndianLegislatureisnotanagent
ordelegateoftheBritishParliamentandwasintendedtohave
plenarypowersoflegislation.
•ItwasobservedthattheIndianLegislaturehadexerciseditsjudgment
astotheplace,person,law,powersandwhattheLt.Governorwas
requiredtodowastomakeiteffectiveuponfulfilmentofcertain
conditions.
•Thisiscalledconditionallegislationwhichwasupheldbythecourt.

53. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•Emperorv.BenoariLalSarma,1945(47)BomLR260
•TheGovernorGeneralpromulgatedtheSpecialCriminalCourts
Ordinanceof1942onthegroundofdeclarationofanemergencyon
theoutbreakofwarunderthepowersvestedinhimbySection42of
theGovernmentofIndiaAct,1935.
•TheOrdinancedelegatedthepowertotheprovincialgovernmentsin
todeclarethislawapplicableintheircaseofanemergency.

54. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•Emperorv.BenoariLalSarma,1945(47)BomLR260
•ThePrivyCouncilvalidatedthisdelegationonthegroundof
conditionallegislation.
•ThePrivyCouncilobservedthatitwasapieceofconditionallegislation
asthelegislationwascompleteandwhathadbeendelegatedwasthe
powertoapplythelawonthefulfilmentofcertainconditions.

55. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•JatindraNathv.ProvinceofBihar,(1949)2FCR595
•Ontheeveofindependence,theFederalCourthadheldthat
therecouldbenodelegatedlegislationinIndiaexceptfor
conditionallegislation.
•Section1(3)oftheBiharMaintenanceofPublicOrderAct,
1948vestedpowersontheprovincialgovernmenttostretch
thelifeoftheActtothatofayearasitmaydeemfit.
•Thevalidityofthesectionwaschallenged.

56. Delegated Legislation in Pre-independence India
•JatindraNathv.ProvinceofBihar,(1949)2FCR595
•TwoquestionsbeforetheFederalCourt:
•CanexecutiveextendthelifeofanActthroughdelegatedlegislation?
•CanexecutivemodifyanActthroughdelegatedlegislation?
•TheFederalCourtheldthatdelegatedlegislationisnotpermissible.
•Itwasfurtherheldthatdelegatedlegislationcannotextendthelifeofan
Actormodifythesame.
•Withthisdecision,confusionwascreatedamongthecourtsregarding
thelimitsofdelegationoflegislativepowers.

57. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•ThePresidentofIndia,underArticle143oftheConstitutionofIndia,soughttheopinion
oftheSupremeCourtonthequestionoftheconstitutionalityofthethreefollowingActs:
1)Section7oftheDelhiLawsAct,1912
•EmpoweredtheprovincialgovernmenttoextendtotheDelhiareaanylawwhichIs
inforceinIndiawithmodificationandrestriction.
2)Section2oftheAjmer-MerwaraAct,1947
•EmpoweredtheprovincialgovernmenttoextendtotheprovinceofAjmer-Merwara
anylawinforceinotherprovincewithmodificationandrestriction.
3)Section2ofthePartCStates(Laws)Act,1950
•EmpoweredtheCentralGovernmenttoextendtoPartCStatesanyActwhichisin
forceinanyPartAStateswithsuchmodificationandrestrictionasitthinksfit.
•Section2statesthatwhileextendinganylaw,theGovernmentisempoweredto
repealoramendanycorrespondinglawwhichisinforceinPartC.

58. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•Fivequestionsaroseinthiscase:
•Candelegatedlegislationextendalaw?
•Candelegatedlegislationmodifyalaw?
•Candelegatedlegislationrestrictalaw?
•Candelegatedlegislationrepealalaw?
•Candelegatedlegislationamendalaw?

59. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•Argumentsadvanced:
•Thereweretwoextremistviewsputforthbythecounsels.
•MCSetalvadtooktheviewthatpowerofdelegationcomesalong
withthepoweroflegislationandthesamedoesnotresultin
abdicationofthepowers.
•Theopposingcounseltooktheviewthatthereexistseparationof
powersinthecountryandIndiafollowsdelegatusnonpotest
delegare.Therefore,thereisanimpliedprohibitionondelegationof
power.

60. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•TheSupremeCourtdeclareddelegatedlegislationtobevalid,butthepowerto
repealoramendcannotbedelegated.
Name of Judge Q1 (extend)Q2 (modify)Q3 (restrict)Q4 (repeal)Q5 (amend)
Justice HJ Kania Invalid Invalid Invalid Invalid Invalid
Justice Fazal Ali Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid
Justice Patanjali Sastri Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid
Justice MehrChand Mahajan Invalid Invalid Invalid Invalid Invalid
Justice BK Mukerjea Valid Valid Valid Invalid Invalid
Justice SR Das Valid Valid Valid Valid Valid
Justice Vivian Bose Valid Valid Valid Invalid Invalid

61. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•SummaryofJudgments:
•“Separationofpowers”isnotapartoftheConstitutionofIndia.
•Indianparliamentwasneverconsideredasanagentofanybody.
Therefore,thedoctrineofdelegatusnonpotestdelegareisnot
applicable.
•Parliamentcannotcompletelyabdicateitselfbycreatingaparallel
authority.
•Onlyancillaryfunctionscanbedelegated.
•Essentiallegislativefunctionscannotbedelegated.Essentialfunctions
involvelayingdownthepolicyofthelawandenactingthatpolicyinto
bindingrulesofconduct.

62. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•DelhiLawsAct,1912,re(AIR1951SC332)
•MinorityJudgment:
•ChiefJusticeKania,formedpartoftheminorityalongwithMahajan,J.
•TheChiefJusticedeclaredthat,whethersovereignorsubordinate,the
legislativeauthoritycandelegateifitstandsthethreebasictests:
1)Itmustbeadelegationinrespectofasubjectormatterwhichiswithinthe
scopeofthelegislativepowerofthebodymakingthedelegation.
2)Suchpowerofdelegationisnotnegativedbytheinstrumentbywhichthe
legislativebodyiscreatedorestablished;and
3)Itdoesnotcreateanotherlegislativebodyhavingthesamepowersandto
dischargethesamefunctionswhichithas,ifthecreationofsuchabodyis
prohibitedbytheinstrumentwhichestablishesthelegislativebodyitself.

63. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•HamdardDawakhanav.UnionofIndia,AIR1960SC554
•Section3oftheDrugsandMagicRemedies(Objectionable
Advertisements)Act,1954laiddownalistofdiseasesforwhich
advertisementwasprohibitedandauthorizedtheCentral
Governmenttoincludeanyotherdiseaseinthelist.
•TheSupremeCourtheldtheprovisiontobeinvalidasnocriteria,
standardsorprincipleshadbeenlaiddowntherein,andthepower
delegatedwasunguidedanduncontrolled.
•Itmaybenotedthatthelegislativepolicyhadalreadybeenlaiddown
inthePreambleandtitleoftheAct.

64. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•GwaliorRayonSilkMfg.(Wvg.)Co.Ltd.v.TheAssistantCommissionerof
SalesTax&Ors.,1974AIR1660
•S8(2)(b)oftheCentralSalesTaxAct,1956authorisedlevyingofsales
taxoninterstatesalesattherateof10%orattherateapplicabletosale
orpurchaseofgoodsinthatstate,whicheverishigher.
•ThisprovisionwaschallengedonthegroundthatParliament,innot
fixingtherateitselfandinadoptingtherateapplicablewithinthe
appropriatestate,hasnotlaiddownanylegislativepolicyandhad
abdicateditslegislativefunction.
•Theprovisionwasupheldtobevalidbyallthefivejudges.

65. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•GwaliorRayonSilkMfg.(Wvg.)Co.Ltd.v.TheAssistantCommissionerofSalesTax
&Ors.,1974AIR1660
•JusticeKhannagavethe“StandardTest”:Whenlegislatureconferspowersonan
authoritytomakedelegatedlegislationitmustlaydownpolicy,principleor
standardfortheguidelinefortheauthorityconcerned.
•JusticeMathewgavethe“AbdicationTest”:Aslongasthelegislaturecanrepeal
theparentactconferringpoweronthedelegateandwithdrawtheauthorityand
discretionithadvestedinthedelegate,thelegislaturedoesnotabdicateits
powers.(Abdicationreferstoconfermentofarbitrarypowerbythelegislatureupon
asubordinatebodywithoutreservingforitselfcontroloverthatbody.)
•Themajorityrefusedtoacceptthistest.

66. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•MKPapiahandSonsv.ExciseCommissioner,(1975)1SCC492
•Sections22and71oftheMysoreExciseAct,1965delegatedpowertofix
ratesofexcisedutytotheGovernmentbymakingrules.Rulesmadeunder
theGovernmentweretobelaidbeforetheStateLegislature.
•Thequestionwaswhetherthelegislaturehasabdicateditsessential
legislativefunction.
•JusticeMathewobservedthatthelayingoftherulesbeforethelegislature
wasasufficientcheckonthepowerconferredonthedelegate.

67. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•MKPapiahandSonsv.ExciseCommissioner,(1975)1SCC492
•JusticeMatthewreinforcedthe“AbdicationTest”inthiscaseandheldthe
legislationtobevalid.
•“Thedilutionofparliamentarywatch-doggingofdelegatedlegislationmaybe
deploredbut,inthecompulsionsandcomplexitiesofmodernlifecannotbe
helped.”
•Welcomingthedeparture,HMSeervaistatedthattheunanimousjudgmentin
MKPapiahshowedthat“aftertwenty-fiveyearsofwanderinginthelegalmaze
ofitsowncreation,theSupremeCourtofIndia,liketheSupremeCourtofthe
UnitedStateshascomeroundtotherigexpressedbythePrivyCouncilin1878.”

68. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•KeralaStateElectricityBoardv.IndianAluminumCo.,1976AIR1031
•Section2(a)oftheKeralaEssentialArticlesControl(TemporaryPowers)
Act,1961defines“essentialarticle”asmeaninganyarticle(notbeingan
essentialarticleasdefinedinEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955)whichmay
bedeclaredbytheGovernmentbyanotificationtobeanessentialarticle.

69. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•KeralaStateElectricityBoardv.IndianAluminumCo.,1976AIR1031
•TheSupremeCourtheldthatlegislaturecannotdelegatetheessentiallegislative
functions,whichmeansthattheLegislaturemustdeclarethepolicyofthelaw
andprovideastandardfortheguidanceofthesubordinatelawmakingauthority.
•TheKeralaActauthorizestheGovernmenttodeclareanyarticleasessential
exceptthosementionedintheEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955withoutlaying
downanydefinitecriteriaorstandards.Thisissurrenderingunguidedand
uncanalisedpowertotheexecutive.TheActcannotbecalledaninstanceof
conditionallegislation.
•ThepowersconferredontheGovernmentbytheKeralaActexceedthelimitsof
permissibledelegation.

70. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•St.JohnTeachersTrainingInstitutev.NationalCouncilforTeacherEducation,
(2003)3SCC321
•TheSupremeCourtemphasisedontheneedandnecessityofdelegated
legislation.
•Itwasobservedthatthelegislaturecannotpossiblyforeseeevery
administrativedifficultythatmayariseinoperatingastatute.Delegated
legislationfillthosegapsanddetails.
•Rulesframedbytheexecutiveinexerciseofdelegatedpower,however,cannot
supplantthelawenactedbythelegislaturebutcansupplementit.Delegated
legislationmadeinexerciseofpowerundertheparentActissupporting
legislationandhastheforceandeffect,ifvalidlymade,astheActitself.

71. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•KiranGuptav.StateofUttarPradesh,(2000)7SCC719
•Section9oftheUttarPradeshSecondaryEducationServicesCommission
andSelectionBoardsAct,1982waschallengedonthegroundthat
essentiallegislativefunctionprescribingguidelinesforrecruitmentof
teachershadbeendelegatedtotheCommission.
•ReadingSection4(CompositionofCommission),theSupremeCourtheld
thattheCommissionwasabodycomposedofexperts(onesittingor
retiredmemberofjudiciaryandotherexpertsinthefieldofeducation)
andcouldbeentrustedwiththedutyofselectionofteachers.

72. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•BombayDyeing&Mfg.Co.Ltd.v.BombayEnvironmentalActionGroup
(2006)3SCC434
•TheSupremeCourtheldthatthepresumptionasregardsthe
constitutionalityoflawisavailablenotonlyincaseoflawenactedby
ParliamentorStateLegislaturebutalsoincaseofdelegatedlegislation.

73. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•MadhyaPradeshHighCourtBarAssn.v.UnionofIndia(2004)IISCC766
•TheSupremeCourtdeclaredthatundertheConstitution,thepowerto
legislatelieswiththelegislature.
•Hence,thepowertomakelaws,cannotbedelegatedbythelegislatureto
theexecutive.
•Inotherwords,alegislaturecanneithercreateaparallellegislaturenor
destroyitslegislativecharacter.

74. Delegated Legislation in Post-independence India
•MadhyaPradeshHighCourtBarAssn.v.UnionofIndia(2004)IISCC766
•Essentiallegislativefunctionsmustberetainedbythelegislatureitself.
•Suchfunctionsconsistofdeterminationoflegislativepolicyandits
formulationasabindingruleofconduct.
•Butitisequallywell-settledthatonceessentiallegislativefunctionis
performedbythelegislatureandthepolicyhasbeenlaiddown,itisalways
opentothelegislaturetodelegatetotheexecutiveancillaryand
subordinatepowersnecessaryforcarryingoutpolicyandpurposesofthe
Actasmaybenecessarytomakethelegislationcomplete,effectiveand
useful.

75. Conditional Legislation
•“Conditionallegislation”maybedescribedas“astatutethat
providescontrolsbutspecifiesthattheyaretogointoeffectonly
whenagivenadministrativeauthorityfulfilstheexistenceor
conditionsdefinedinthestatute.”
•Inconditionallegislation,legislaturemakesthelaw.Itisfulland
complete.
•Nolegislativefunctionisdelegatedtotheexecutive;butthe
parentActisnotbroughtintoforce,anditislefttotheexecutive
tobringtheActintooperationonfulfilmentofcertainconditions
orcontingencies.

76. Categories of Conditional Legislation
1)Wherethelegislationis“fullandcomplete”butleavesits
futureapplicabilitytotheexecutiveauthority.
2)Wherethelegislationisenforced,butleavesthepowerto
bewithdrawnfromoperationoftheActinagivenareaor
ingivensituationstotheexecutiveauthority.
3)Wherethelegislationleavesittotheexecutiveauthorityto
grantbenefitoftheActtooneclassdeprivingtherival
classofsuchbenefit.

77. Cases on Conditional Legislation
•Fieldv.Clark,36LEd294
•TheTariffActof1890authorisedthePresidentbyproclamationto
suspendtheoperationoftheAct,permittingfreeintroductionintothe
USofcertainproducts,uponhisfindingthatthedutiesimposedupon
suchproductswerereciprocallyunequalandunreasonable.
•TheSupremeCourtheldtheActvalidonthegroundthattheActwas
completeandthePresidentwasamereagentofCongresstoascertain
anddeclarethecontingencyuponwhichthewillofCongresswastotake
effect.
•Thelegislaturecannotdelegateitspowerstomakealawbutitcanmake
alawtodelegateapowertodeterminesomefactorstateofthings
uponwhichthelawintendstomakeitsownactiondepend.

78. Cases on Conditional Legislation
•KingEmperorv.BenoariLalSarma,AIR1945PC48
•BypromulgatinganOrdinance,theGovernorGeneralwasempowered
tosetupspecialcourts,buttheoperationoftheOrdinancewasleftto
theProvincialGovernmentonbeingsatisfiedthatemergencyhadcome
intoexistence.
•TheCalcuttaHighCourtheldthattherewasexcessivedelegationand
theOrdinancewas,therefore,invalid.TheFederalCourtconfirmedthe
decisionoftheCalcuttaHighCourt.
•ThePrivyCouncilreversedthedecisionandupheldthevalidityofthe
Actbystatingthatitwasapieceofconditionallegislationasthe
legislationwascompleteandwhathadbeendelegatedwasthepower
toapplytheActonfulfilmentofcertainconditions.

79. Cases on Conditional Legislation
•SardarInderSinghv.StateofRajasthan,AIR1957SC510
•TheRajasthanTenants’ProtectionOrdinancewaspromulgated
fortwoyears.
•UnderSection3oftheOrdinance,theRajpramukhwas
empoweredtoextendthelifeofthesaidOrdinancebyissuinga
notification,ifrequired.
•ThedurationoftheOrdinancewasextendedbyissuinga
notificationwhichwaschallengedbeforetheSupremeCourt.
•Thecourtupheldtheprovisionasbeingconditionallegislation.

80. Cases on Conditional Legislation
•M.P.HighCourtBarAssn.v.UnionofIndia,(2004)IISC766
•TheMadhyaPradeshReorganisationAct,2000empoweredthe
StateGovernmenttoabolishStateAdministrativeTribunal.
•Thevalidityoftheprovisionwaschallengedonthegroundthat
thedelegationofpowerconferredontheStatetoabolishthe
tribunalwasinthenatureof“excessivedelegation”asitwas
“essentiallegislativefunction”or“legislativepolicy”.

81. Cases on Conditional Legislation
•M.P.HighCourtBarAssn.v.UnionofIndia,(2004)IISC766
•Negativingthecontentionandholdingtheprovisionasconditional
legislationandreferringtoearlierdecisions,theSupremeCourtstated:
“Inthecaseonhandalso,theActof2000asenactedbyParliament
wasfullandcompletewhenitleftlegislativechamber.Therewas,
therefore,noquestionofdelegationoflegislativepowerbythe
legislatureinfavouroftheexecutive.Whatwaslefttotheexecutive
wasmerelytodecidewhethertocontinuetheAdministrativeTribunal
ortoabolishit.TheStateGovernment,afterconsideringthefactsand
circumstancesdecidednottocontinuetheTribunalwhichwaswithin
thepoweroftheStateGovernmentand,hence,noobjectioncanbe
raisedagainstexerciseofsuchpower.”

82. Conditional Legislation and Delegated Legislation:
Distinction
Ground of Distinction Conditional Legislation Delegated Legislation
Needtosupplementthe
ParentAct
TheParentActis“fullandcomplete”.The
subordinatelawdoesnotneedtofillany
void.
TheParentActmightcontaingaps.The
subordinatelawmightberequiredtofill
thosegaps.
Discretion Dutyoftheexecutivetoapplythelaw
afterperformingthefunctionoffact-
finding.
Discretionoftheexecutivewhetherto
exercisethepowerdelegatedtoornot.
Extentofpowers
[HamdardDawakhanav.
UnionofIndia,AIR1960
SC554]
Limited/restrictedpowers:powerto
determinewhenthelegislative-declared
ruleofconductshallbecomeeffective.
Wide-rangingpowers:delegationofrule-
makingpowerwhichconstitutionallymay
beexercisedbyanadministrativeagent.
Threatofexcessive
delegation
[StateofTamilNaduv.
K.Sabanayagam,(1998)
ISCC318]
Conditionallegislationcontains“no
elementofdelegationoflegislative
power”andisnotopentoattackonthat
ground(excessivedelegation).
Delegatedlegislationconfers“some”
legislativepoweronanoutsideauthority
(executive)andassuchisopentoattack
onthegroundofexcessivedelegation.

83. Sub-delegation
•Whenastatuteconferssomelegislativepowersonanexecutive
authorityandthelatterfurtherdelegatesthosepowersto
anothersubordinateauthorityoragency,itiscalled“sub-
delegation”.
•Thus,insub-delegation,adelegatedelegates.
•Thisprocessofsub-delegationmaygothroughmanystages.
•IfwemaycalltheenablingActthe“parent”andthedelegated
andsub-delegatedlegislationthe“children”,the“parent”inits
ownlifetimemaybeget“descendants”uptofourorfivedegrees.

84. Sub-delegation and Sub-sub-delegation
•Section3oftheEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955empowersthe
CentralGovernmenttomakerules.
•Thiscanbesaidtobethefirst-stageor“parent”delegation.
•UnderSection5,theCentralGovernmentisempoweredtodelegate
powerstoitsofficers,theStateGovernmentsandtheirofficers.
•Thiscanbesaidtobethesecond-stageor“descendant”delegation
(sub-delegation).
•WhenthepowerisfurtherdelegatedbytheStateGovernmentsto
theirofficers,itcanbesaidtobethethird-stagedelegation(sub-
sub-delegation).

85. Sub-delegation: Illustration
•UnderSection3oftheEssentialCommoditiesAct,1955,the
SugarControlOrder,1955wasmadebytheCentralGovernment
(first-stagedelegation).
•UndertheOrder,certainfunctionsandpowerswereconferred
ontheTextileCommissioner(second-stagedelegation).
•Clause10toempoweredtheTextileCommissionertoauthorise
anofficertoexerciseonhisbehalfalloranyofhisfunctionsand
powersundertheOrder(third-stagedelegation).

86. Object of Sub-delegation
•Thenecessityofsub-delegationcanbesupported,interalia,on
thefollowinggrounds:
1)Powerofdelegationnecessarilycarrieswithitthepowerof
furtherdelegation.
2)Sub-delegationisancillarytodelegatedlegislation.
3)Anyobjectiontothesaidprocessislikelytosubvertthe
authoritywhichthelegislaturedelegatestotheexecutive.

87. Express Power of Sub-delegation
•Whereastatuteitselfauthorisesanadministrativeauthorityto
sub-delegateitspowers,nodifficultyarisesastoitsvaliditysince
suchsub-delegationiswithinthetermsofthestatuteitself.
•InCentralTalkiesLtd.v.DwarkaPrasad,AIR1961SC606,theU.P.
(Temporary)ControlofRentandEvictionAct,1947providedthat
nosuitshallbefiledfortheevictionofatenantwithout
permissioneitherofaDistrictMagistrateoranyofficer
authorisedbyhimtoperformanyofhisfunctionsundertheAct.
AnordergrantingpermissionbytheAddl.DistrictMagistrateto
whomthepowersweredelegatedwasheldvalid..

88. Express Power of Sub-delegation
•InAllinghamv.MinisterofAgricultureandFisheries,(1948)IAll
ER780(DC),undertherelevantstatute,theCommitteewas
empoweredbytheMinisterofAgriculturetoissuedirections.
TheCommitteesub-delegateditspowertoitssubordinate
officer,whoissuedadirection,whichwaschallenged.
•Thecourtheldthatsub-delegationofpowerbythecommittee
wasnotpermissibleandthedirectionissuedbythesubordinate
officerwas,therefore,ultravires.

89. Express Power of Sub-delegation
•InGanpatiSinghjiv.StateofAjmer,AIR1955SC188,theparent
ActempoweredtheChiefCommissionertomakerulesforthe
establishmentofpropersystemofconservancyandsanitationat
fairs.
•TherulesmadebytheChiefCommissionerempoweredthe
DistrictMagistratetodevisehisownsystemandseethatitwas
observed.TheSupremeCourtdeclaredtherulesultraviresas
theparentActconferredthepowerontheChiefCommissioner
andnotontheDistrictMagistrateand,therefore,theactionof
theChiefCommissionersub-delegatingthatpowertotheDistrict
Magistratewasinvalid.

90. Express Power of Sub-delegation
•InA.K.Royv.StateofPunjab(1986)4SCC326,thepowerto
prosecuteunderthePreventionofFoodAdulterationAct,1954
wasconferredontheStateGovernment.
•TheStateGovernment,inexerciseofdelegatedlegislation,viz.
PreventionofFoodAdulteration(Punjab)Rules,1958delegated
thesaidpowertoFoodAuthority.
•TheFoodAuthority,byissuinganotificationsub-delegatedthe
powertoFoodInspector,whoprosecutedtheaccused.
•TheSupremeCourtheldsub-delegationunauthorisedand
quashedthenotification.

91. Express Power of Sub-delegation
•Sometimes,astatutepermitssub-delegationtoauthoritiesorofficers
notbelowaparticularrankorinaparticularmanneronly.
•Aspersettledlaw,ifthestatutedirectsthatcertainactsshallbedonein
aspecifiedmannerorbycertainpersons,theirperformanceinanyother
mannerthanthatspecifiedorbyanyotherpersonthanoneofthose
namedisprohibited.
•InAjaibSinghv.GurbachanSingh,AIR1965SC1619,undertherelevant
statute,theCentralGovernmentwasempoweredtomakerulesfor
detentionofanypersonbyanauthoritynotbelowtherankofDistrict
Magistrate.
•WheretheorderofdetentionwaspassedbyanAddl.District
Magistrate,theactionwasheldbad.

92. Implied Power of Sub-delegation
•Refertotextbook.

93. Fin.