DR.

RAM MANOHAR LOHIA NATIONAL

LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW
Session: 2015-16

FINAL DRAFT

Administrative Law

On

“Parliamentary Control Over Delegated legislation”

SUBMITTED TO – MR. SHASHANK SHEKHAR

ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (LAW)

SUBMITTED BY :- SHIVAM KUMAR

ROLL NO.123 SECTION- B

BA.LLB. (Hons.) SEMESTER VI

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I owe a great many thanks to a great many people who helped and supported
me during the writing of this project.

I would like to express my special thanks and gratitude to my teacher Mr.

Shashank Shekhar who gave me the golden opportunity to do this project
which also helped me in doing a lot of research work and I came to know about
a lot of new things.

I am really thankful to them.

Secondly I would also like to thank my friends who helped me a lot in finishing
this project within the limited time. I am making this project not only for marks
but also to increase my knowledge. Thanks again to all who helped me.
 Table of Contents
 Introduction: Delegated Legislation Under Administrative Law ............... 4
 To Meet Emergencies ................................................................................. 7
 To Meet Unforeseen Contingencies ........................................................... 8
 Direct but general control over delegated legislation is Exercised ............ 9
 Direct special control ................................................................................ 10
 Laying on Table ........................................................................................ 11
 Laying with immediate effect but subject to annulment .......................... 11
 Legal consequences of non-compliance with the laying provisions ........ 12
 Factors responsible for the ineffectiveness of parliamentary control over
delegated legislation in India .................................................................... 15
 Conclusion ................................................................................................ 16
 Bibliography ............................................................................................. 17
Introduction: Delegated Legislation Under Administrative Law

Administrative law is the bye-product of the increasing socio-economic functions of the State
and the increased powers of the government. Administrative law as a separate branch of legal
discipline, especially in India, came to be recognized by the middle of the 20th century.
Today the administration is ubiquitous and impinges freely and deeply on every aspect of an
individual’s life. Therefore, administrative law has become a major area for study and
research. Administrative Law has been characterized as the most outstanding legal
development of the 20th century.

Administrative law has turned out to be extremely fundamental in the created society, as the
relationship of the administrative authorities and the peoples have turned out to be
exceptionally mind boggling. Keeping in mind the end goal to administer these perplexing
relations, some law has turned into the need of great importance; which might realize
consistency, assurance and might represent a beware of the abuse of powers vested in the
administration.

Administrative law can be traced to the well-organized administration under the Mauryas and
Guptas, followed by the administrative system of Mughals; to the administration under the
East India Company, the precursor of the modern administrative system. But in the modern
society, the functions of the state are manifold. In fact, the modern state is regarded as the
custodian of social welfare and consequently, there is not a single field of activity which is
free from direct or indirect interference by the state. Along with duties and powers the state
has to shoulder new responsibilities. The growth in the range of responsibilities of the state
thus ushered in an administrative age and an era of Administrative law. Every delegate is
subject to the authority and control of the principal and the exercise of delegated power can
always be directed, corrected or cancelled by the principal. Hence parliamentary control over
delegated legislation should be a living continuity as a constitutional remedy. The fact is that
due to the broad delegation of legislative powers and the generalised standard of control also
being broad, judicial control has shrunk, raising the desirability and the necessity of
parliamentary control. The Parliamentary control over delegated legislation in USA and India
is not as effective as in UK. In UK the laying off procedure is followed effectively because
there all administrative rule-making is subjected to the control of Parliament through the
Select Committee on Statutory instruments. In India the control is not very much effective.
There are no statutory provisions regarding ‘laying’ of delegated legislation. Though the
working of the Scrutiny committees is not very effective, yet they have proved to be an
effective body in examining and improving upon the legislative control over delegated
legislation. The practice of delegated legislation enables the executive to experiment. This
method permits rapid utilization of experience and implementation of necessary changes in
application of the provisions in the light of such experience. Experiments can be made and
experience can be profitability utilized. A law passed by Parliament has to be in force till the
next session of the Parliament when it can be repealed. In situations, which require frequent
adjustments, experimentation is the only answer. The underlying object of parliamentary
control is to keep watch over the rule-making authorities and also to provide an opportunity
to criticize them if there is abuse of power on their part. Parliament has control in that the
enabling or parent Act passed by Parliament sets out the framework or parameters within
which delegated legislation is made. In India, the question of control on rule-making power
engaged the attention of the Parliament. The legislative control over administration in
parliamentary countries like India is more theoretical than practical
One of the most significant developments of the present century is the growth in the
legislative powers of the executives. The development of the legislative powers of the
administrative authorities in the form of the delegated legislation occupies very important
place in the study of the administrative law. We know that there is no such general power
granted to the executive to make law. The work of executive is limited to supplement the law
under the authority of legislature. This type of activity has been described as delegated
legislation or subordinate legislation. Delegated legislation refers to all law-making, which
takes place outside the legislature and is generally expressed as rules, regulations, bye-laws,
order, schemes, etc. Delegation of powers means the powers passed on by the higher
authority to the lower authority to make laws. Delegated legislation means the powers given
by the legislature to the executive or administration to enact certain laws. The simple
meaning of the expression “delegated expression” may be: “When the function of the
legislation is entrusted to organs other than the legislature by the legislature itself, the
legislation made by such organs is known as delegated legislation.”

According to M.P. Jain, “the term ‘delegated legislation’ is used in two senses: (a) exercise
by a subordinate agency of the legislative power delegated to it by the legislature, or (b) the
subsidiary rules themselves which are made by the subordinate authority in pursuance of the
power conferred on it by the legislature.”

The concept can be further substantiated with the help of an example. The Parliament of UK
itself made the Road Traffic Act, 1930, and so the legislation is original (rather than
delegated). Section 30 of that Act provides that, “the Minister [of Transport and Civil
Aviation] may make regulations as to the use of motor vehicles, their construction and
equipment.” Accordingly the Minister made the Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use)
Regulations, 1955. The regulations were made by someone other than Parliament and are,
therefore, delegated (rather than original) legislation.

Delegated legislation, also referred to as secondary legislation, is legislation made by a

person or body other than Parliament. Parliament, through an Act of Parliament, can permit
another person or body to make legislation. An Act of Parliament creates the framework of a
particular law and tends only to contain an outline of the purpose of the Act. By Parliament
giving authority for legislation to be delegated it enables other persons or bodies to provide
more detail to an Act of Parliament. Parliament thereby, through primary legislation (i.e. an
Act of Parliament), permit others to make law and rules through delegated legislation. The
legislation created by delegated legislation must be made in accordance with the purpose laid
down in the Act.

Delegated Legisation is not another wonder. Following the time when the statutes came to be
made by the Parliament, delegated legislation likewise came to be made by a power to which
the force was designated by Parliament. There has been dependably a requirement for
delegated legislation. The components prompting the development of appointed enactment
might be outlined as underneath:

The greater part of the matter of the Parliament has expanded and it has no time for the
thought of muddled and specialized matters. The Parliament can't furnish the general public
with the imperative quality and amount of legislation in view of absence of time. More often
than not of the Parliament is committed to political matters, matters of arrangement and
especially outside issues.

To Meet Emergencies

Certain emergency situations may arise which necessitate special measures. In such cases
speedy and appropriate action is required. The Parliament cannot act quickly because of its
political nature and because of the time required by the Parliament to enact the law. In such
cases quick action needs to be taken. In times of war and other national emergencies, the
executive is vested with special and extremely wide powers to deal with the situation. There
was substantial growth of delegated legislation during the two world wars.

Certain matters covered by delegated legislation are of a technical nature which requires
handling by experts. In such cases it is inevitable that powers to deal with such matters is
given to the appropriate administrative agencies to be exercised according to the requirements
of the subject matter. Parliament cannot provide for such matters as the members are at best
politicians and not experts in various spheres of life. Therefore, it is convenient for the
legislature to confine itself to policy statements only, as the legislators are generally ignorant
of legal and technical skills.

The practice of delegated legislation introduces flexibility in the law. At the time of passing
any legislative enactment, it is impossible to foresee all the contingencies. Legislative
amendment is a slow and cumbersome process, but with the aid of delegated legislation, the
executive can meet the situation expeditiously.

The practice of delegated legislation enables the executive to experiment. This method
permits rapid utilization of experience and implementation of necessary changes in
application of the provisions in the light of such experience. Experiments can be made and
experience can be profitability utilized. A law passed by Parliament has to be in force till the
next session of the Parliament when it can be repealed. In situations, which require frequent
adjustments, experimentation is the only answer.
To Meet Unforeseen Contingencies

Parliament while settling on a specific game-plan can't anticipate the challenges, which might
be experienced in its execution. As needs be different statutes contain an 'evacuation of
trouble proviso' exercising so as to engage the organization to uproot such challenges the
forces of making tenets and regulations. These provisions are generally so worded that wide
powers are given to the administration.

(i) Saves parliamentary time.

(ii) Government Ministers often consult interested bodies and parties before drafting
statutory instruments.
(iii) Delegated legislation is more flexible than an Act of Parliament. It can be passed quickly
and easily amended or revoked, so that the law is up to date. Therefore, it allows rapid
change.
(iv) Delegated legislation helps in removing the difficulty clause and meet unforeseen
emergencies expeditiously.
(v) Also helps in meeting situations of emergency and thus helps in reducing parliamentary
pressure.

(vi) Delegated legislation is not well publicised in contrast to debates on Bills in Parliament.
(vii) Parliament has insufficient time to scrutinise the laws. Parliament is not reviewing
legislation properly.
(viii) Sub-delegation of powers a further problem, which causes complexity and confusion. It
is impossible for anyone to keep abreast of all delegated legislation.

(ix) The large volume of delegated legislation produced every year (some 3,000 statutes
annually) means that it is very difficult for Members of Parliament, let alone the general
public, to keep up to date with the present law. This is exacerbated by the fact that delegated
legislation is made in private, unlike Acts of Parliament which are made following public
debates in Parliament.

One of the most significant developments of the present century is the growth in the
legislative powers of the executive. The advancement of the authoritative forces of the
managerial dominant presences as the appointed enactment possesses imperative spot in the
investigation of the regulatory law. We realize that there is no such broad force conceded to
the official to make law; it just supplements the law under the power of assembly. Such kind
of force is known as delegated legislation.

With regard to the control of the legislature over delegated legislation, M.P. Jain states:

In a parliamentary democracy it is the function of the legislature to legislate. If it seeks to

delegate its legislative power to the executive because of some reasons, it is not only the right
of the Legislature, but also its obligation, as principal, to see how its agent i.e. the Executive
carries out the agency entrusted to it. Since it is the legislature which grants legislative power
to the administration, it is primarily its responsibility to ensure the proper exercise of
delegated legislative power, to supervise and control the actual exercise of this power, and
ensure the danger of its objectionable, abusive and unwarranted use by the administration.

In U.S.A., the control of the Congress over delegated legislation is highly limited because
neither is the technique of “laying” extensively used nor is there any Congressional
Committee to scrutinise it. This is due to the constitutional structurization in that country in
which it is considered only the duty of courts to review the legality of administrative rule-
making.

In England, due to the concept of Parliamentary sovereignty, the control exercised by

Parliament over administrative rule-making is very broad and effective. Parliamentary control
mechanism operates through “laying” techniques because under the provisions of the
Statutory Instruments Act, 1946, all administrative rule-making is subject to the control of
Parliament through the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments. Parliamentary control in
England is most effective because it is done in a non-political atmosphere and the three-line
whip does not come into operation.

Direct but general control over delegated legislation is Exercised

(a) Through the debate on the act which contains delegation. Members may discuss
anything about delegation including necessity, extent, type of delegation and the
authority to whom power is delegated.
(b) Through questions and notices. Any member can ask questions on any aspect of
delegation of legislative powers and if dissatisfied can give notice for discussion under
Rule 59 of the Procedure and Conduct of Business in Lok Sabha Rules.

(c) Through moving resolutions and notices in the house. Any member may move a
resolution on motion, if the matter regarding delegation of power is urgent and
immediate, and reply of the government is unsatisfactory.

Direct special control

This control mechanism is exercised through the technique of “laying” on the table of the
House rules and regulations framed by the administrative authority. The notable use of this
technique was made in the Reorganization Acts of 1939 to 1969, which authorised the
President to reorganise the executive government by administrative rule-making. In England
the technique of laying is very extensively used because all the administrative rule-making is
subject to the supervision of Parliament under the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946 which
prescribes timetable. The most common form of provision provides that the delegated
legislation comes into immediate effect but is subject to annulment by an adverse resolution
of either house.

By Section 4 of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946, where subordinate legislation is required
to be laid before Parliament after being made, a copy shall be laid before each House before
the legislation comes into operation. However, if it is essential that it should come into
operation before the copies are laid, it may so operate but notification shall be sent to the
Lord Chancellor and the Speaker of the House of Commons explaining why the copies were
not laid beforehand. Under Section 6 of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946, the draft of any
statutory instrument should be laid before the parliament.
Laying on Table

In almost all the Commonwealth countries, the procedure of ‘Laying on the Table’ of the
Legislature is followed. It serves two purposes: firstly, it helps in informing the legislature as
to what all rules have been made by the executive authorities in exercise of delegated
legislation, secondly, it provides a forum to the legislators to question or challenge the rules
made or proposed to be made.

The Select Committee on delegated Legislation summarised the laying procedure under
following heads:

In this type of laying the rules and regulations come into effect as soon as they are laid. It is
simply to inform the House about the rules and regulations.

Laying with immediate effect but subject to annulment

Here the rules and regulations come into operation as soon as they are laid before the
Parliament. However, they cease to operate when disapproved by the Parliament.
In this process the rules come into effect as soon as they are laid before the Parliament, but
shall cease to have effect if annulled by a resolution of the House.

This technique takes two forms: firstly, that the rules shall have no effect or force unless
approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament, secondly, that the rules shall cease to
have effect unless approved by an affirmative resolution.

Such a provision provides that when any Act contains provision for this type of laying the
draft rules shall be placed on the table of the House and shall come into force after forty days
from the date of laying unless disapproved before that period.

In this type of laying the instruments or draft rules shall have no effect unless approved by
the House.
In India, there is no statutory provision requiring ‘laying of’ of all delegated legislation.
In the absence of any general law in India regulating laying procedure, the Scrutiny
Committee made the following suggestions:

(i) All Acts of Parliament should uniformly require that rules be laid on the table of the
House ‘as soon as possible’.

(ii) The laying period should uniformly be thirty days from the date of final publication of
rules; and

(iii) The rule will be subject to such modifications as the House may like to make.

Legal consequences of non-compliance with the laying provisions

In England the provisions of Section 4(2) of the Statutory Instruments Act, 1946 makes the
laying provision mandatory for the validation of statutory instruments. In India, however, the
consequences of non-compliance with the laying provisions depend on whether the
provisions in the enabling Act are mandatory or directory.

In Narendra Kumar v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the provisions of Section
3(5) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, which provided that the rules framed under the
Act must be laid before both Houses of Parliament, are mandatory, and therefore Clause 4 of
the Non-Ferrous Control Order, 1958 has no effect unless laid before Parliament.

However, in Jan Mohammad v. State of Gujarat, the court deviated from its previous stand.
Section 26(5) of the Bombay Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1939 contained a laying
provision but the rules framed under the Act could not be laid before the Provincial
legislature in its first session as there was then no functioning legislature because of World
War II emergency. The rules were placed during the second session. Court held that the rules
remained valid because the legislature did not provide that the non-laying at its first session
would make the rules invalid.
Even if the requirement of laying is only directory and not mandatory, the rules framed by the
administrative authority without conforming to the requirement of laying would not be
permissible if the mode of rule-making has been violated.

Indirect control is exercised by Parliament through its Committees. With a view to strengthen
Parliamentary control over delegated legislation, Scrutiny Committees were established. In
UK and India, there are Standing Committees of Parliament to scrutinise delegated
legislation. In the USA, on the other hand, there is no equivalent to such committees, the
responsibility being diffused. The responsibility is shared but a host of committees – standing
committees in each House of Congress, committees on government operation in each house,
and some other joint bodies like the committee on atomic energy. In England, the Select
Committee on Statutory Instruments was established by the House of Commons in 1944. In
1950, the Law Minister made a suggestion for the establishment of a Committee of the House
on the pattern of the Select Committee on Statutory Instruments, 1944, to examine delegated
legislation and bring to the notice of the House whether administrative rule-making has
exceeded the intention of the Parliament or has departed from it or has affected any
fundamental principle.

Such a committee known as the Committee on Subordinate Legislation of Lok Sabha was
appointed on December 1, 1953. The main functions of the Committee are to examine: (i)
whether the rules are in accordance with the general object of the Act, (ii) whether the rules
contain any matter which could more properly be dealt with in the Act, (iii) whether it is
retrospective, (iv) whether it directly or indirectly bars the jurisdiction of the court, and
questions alike. The Committee has between 1953 and 1961, scrutinized about 5300 orders
and rules has submitted 19 reports.

There is also a similar Committee of the Rajya Sabha which was constituted in 1964. It
discharges functions similar to the Lok Sabha Committee.

The Committee on Subordinate Legislation has made the following recommendation in

order to streamline the process of delegated legislation in India.

(i) Power of judicial review should not be taken away or curtailed by rules.
(ii) A financial levy or tax should not be imposed by rules.

(iii) Language of the rules should be simple and clear and not complicated or ambiguous.

(iv) Legislative policy must be formulated by the legislature and laid down in the statute and
power to supply details may be left to the executive, and can be worked out through the rules
made by the administration.

(v) Sub-delegation in very wide language is improper and some safeguards must be provided
before a delegate is allowed to sub-delegate his authority to another functionary.

(vi) Discriminatory rules should not be framed by the administration.

(vii) Rules should not travel beyond the rule-making power conferred by the parent Act.

(viii) There should not be inordinate delay in making of rules by the administration.

(ix) The final authority of interpretation of rules should not be with the administration.

(x) Sufficient publicity must be given to the statutory rules and orders.

The working of the Committee is on the whole satisfactory and it has proved to be a fairly
effective body in properly examining and effectively improving upon delegated legislation in
India. Sir Cecil Carr aptly remarks: “It is evidently a vigorous and independent body.”

Therefore, legislature exercises its control over the delegated legislation or the rule-making
power by these two methods: namely, ‘laying’ procedure and via Scrutiny committees.
However, to what extent these two methods are effective in posing a check and control over
delegated legislation, is the question which needs to be taken into consideration. The
effectiveness of parliamentary control over delegated legislation has been discussed in the
next chapter.

The legislative control over administration in parliamentary countries like India is more
theoretical than practical. In reality, the control is not that effective as it ought to be.
Factors responsible for the ineffectiveness of parliamentary control over
delegated legislation in India

(i) The Parliament has neither time nor expertise to control the administration which has
grown in volume as well as complexity.

(ii) The legislative leadership lies with the executive and it plays a significant role in
formulating policies.

(iii) The very size of the Parliament is too large and unmanageable to be effective.

(iv) The majority support enjoyed by the executive in the Parliament reduces the possibility
of effective criticism.

(v) The growth of delegated legislation reduced the role of Parliament in making detailed
laws and increased the powers of bureaucracy.

(vi) Parliament’s control is sporadic, general and mostly political in nature.

(vii) Lack of strong and steady opposition in the Parliament have also contributed to the
ineffectiveness of legislative control over administration in India.

(viii) There is no automatic machinery for the effective scrutiny on behalf of the Parliament
as a whole; and the quantity and complexity are such that it is no longer possible to rely on
such scrutiny.
Conclusion

If in India parliamentary control over delegated legislation is to be made a living continuity, it

is necessary that the role of the committees of the Parliament must be strengthened and a
separate law like the Statutory Instruments Act, providing for uniform rules of laying and
publication, must be passed. The committee may be supplemented by a specialised official
body to make the vigilance of delegated legislation more effective. Besides this other
measures should be taken to strengthen the control of Parliament over delegated legislation.

The Parliamentary control over delegated legislation in USA and India is not as effective as
in UK. In UK the laying off procedure is followed effectively because there all administrative
rule-making is subjected to the control of Parliament through the Select Committee on
Statutory instruments. In India the control is not very much effective. There are no statutory
provisions regarding ‘laying’ of delegated legislation. Though the working of the Scrutiny
committees is not very effective, yet they have proved to be an effective body in examining
and improving upon the legislative control over delegated legislation.
Bibliography
 The first seminar on administrative law was organized by the Indian law Institute, New
Delhi in December, 1957, right after its inauguration. Since then the major area of
activity of the Institute has been administrative law.
 Dr. Sunita Zalpuri, Training Package on administrative law, Associate Professor, J & K.
Available on ,
 Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (1979) 1 SCC 137.
 Halsbury’s Laws of England, 4th Ed., Vol. 44, p. 981-984.
 C.K. Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, Eastern Book Company, 3rd Ed., 2007,
p. 59.
 Treatise on Administrative Law, 1996, Vol. 1, p. 51.
 Supra Note 6, at p. 61-62.
 Available on
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/print_this_page.asp?article_id=1569
Available on
http://sixthformlaw.info/01_modules/mod2/2_2_1_legislation/18_del_leg_adv_disadv.ht
m
 Gary Slapper, The English Legal System, Taylor & Francis, 2009, p. 97.
 Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (1979) 1 SCC 137.
 Treatise on administrative law, 1996, Vol. I, P. 136.
 I.P. Massey, Administrative Law, Eastern Book Company, 6th Ed., 2005, p. 102.
 Supra Note 6, at p. 133.
 Delegated Legislation in India, ILI, 1964, p. 166-169.
 Supra Note 6, at p. 135.
 C.K. Thakker, Administrative Law, Eastern Book Company, 1992, p. 152.
 R v. Sheer Metalcraft, (1954) 1 All ER 542.
 AIR (1960) SC 430.
 AIR (1966) SC 385.
 Supra Note 14, at p. 108.
 Monica Chawla, Delegation of Legislative Powers, Deep & Deep Publications, 2007, p.
69. Available on http://books.google.co.in/books?id=XNpAlSfKkCkC&dq=delegated
legislation legislative control effectiveness&source=gbs_navlinks_s
 Supra Note 14, at p. 109.
 Parliamentary Control of Delegated Legislation, Public Law, 1956, p. 200.
 Laxmikanth, Public Administration, Tata MC-Graw-Hill Education, p. 212, available on
http://books.google.co.in/books?id=9JcCVqJ14gC&dq=is parliamentary control over
delegated legislation effective&source=gbs_navlinks_s
 Geoffrey Philip Wilson, Cases and Materials on Constitutional and Administrative Law,
CUP Archive, 1976, p. 362.