What is Delegated Legislation?

Delegated legislation refers to the process by which the legislature delegates its law-
making powers to subordinate authorities such as government departments, statutory
bodies, or local authorities. This delegation occurs through an enabling statute or parent
act, which establishes the framework within which detailed rules, regulations, or by-laws
can be made. It is a mechanism that facilitates flexibility, efficiency, and expertise in
governance, especially in addressing complex or technical matters that the legislature
cannot handle in detail.

Historical Background of Delegated Legislation

Global Evolution:

 Delegated legislation has its roots in England, particularly during the Industrial
Revolution, when the need for rapid and technical regulations arose due to
industrial and administrative complexities.
 Its prominence grew during World Wars I and II, as governments required
extraordinary powers to legislate quickly.

India:

1. Pre-Independence:
o The Charter Act of 1833 introduced delegated legislation in India,
enabling the Governor-General-in-Council to legislate in subordinate areas.
o The landmark case of Queen v. Burah (1878) by the Privy Council
validated conditional legislation, establishing that legislative powers could
be delegated within defined limits.
o The Government of India Act, 1935, institutionalized the framework for
delegated legislation, providing for its systematic use in governance.
2. Post-Independence:
 o Although the Indian Constitution does not explicitly mention delegated
legislation, Articles such as 312 allow Parliament and State Legislatures to
delegate powers for making rules and regulations.
o Delegated legislation is now an integral part of statutes like the Motor
Vehicles Act, 1988, and the Environment Protection Act, 1986, ensuring
efficient law enforcement.

Types of Delegated Legislation

1. Rules and Regulations:

o Framed by government departments or ministries to implement and detail
primary legislation.
o Example: Central Motor Vehicle Rules, 1989, under the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988.
2. By-laws:
o Local authorities create regulations for specific jurisdictions, such as
municipal by-laws for sanitation or traffic control.
3. Orders in Council:
o Executive orders issued to deal with emergencies or specific administrative
needs.
4. Conditional Legislation:
o Laws that come into effect upon fulfilling certain conditions or events,
validated in Queen v. Burah.
5. Administrative Directions:
o Non-binding guidelines issued by authorities to supplement or clarify
statutory provisions.

Purpose and Scope of Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation is indispensable in modern governance. The transition from a
"police state" to a "welfare state" expanded government responsibilities, necessitating
detailed and flexible laws. Legislatures delegate power to address the following:

1. Flexibility:
o Allows laws to adapt quickly to changing societal and technological
circumstances.
2. Expertise:
o Enables subject-matter experts within administrative bodies to frame
technical and localized rules.
3. Efficiency:
o Reduces legislative workload, allowing Parliament or State Legislatures to
focus on broad policy decisions.
4. Practical Governance:
o Delegation accommodates local needs and specific administrative
requirements that cannot be effectively handled by a central legislature.

Legal Framework and Principles of Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation must function within the limits of the enabling statute and adhere to
constitutional principles. Failure to do so renders it invalid under the doctrine of ultra
vires.

Statutory Basis:

 Enabling statutes empower subordinate authorities to create rules, regulations, or

by-laws. For example:
o Section 176 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, allows framing of rules for
compensation claims.
o Section 3 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, permits rule-making
for environmental safeguards.
Judicial Interpretation:

1. Queen v. Burah (1878):

o Established the validity of conditional legislation.
2. Chintaman Rao v. State of Madhya Pradesh (1950):
o Held that delegated legislation cannot infringe fundamental rights.
3. Narendra Kumar v. Union of India (1960):
o Emphasized compliance with procedural requirements like laying rules
before the legislature.

Judicial Control Over Delegated Legislation

Courts play a vital role in ensuring that delegated legislation adheres to the framework of
the enabling statute and constitutional provisions.

1. Doctrine of Ultra Vires:

o Courts can invalidate rules that exceed statutory limits or contravene
constitutional provisions.
o Example: Delhi Laws Act Case.
2. Standard of Review:
o In Bimla Devi v. HRTC (2009), the Court held that MACT decisions based
on delegated legislation must be judged on preponderance of probabilities
rather than strict legal standards.
3. Fundamental Rights:
o Delegated legislation must not violate rights guaranteed under Articles 14,
19, or 21.

Legislative Control Over Delegated Legislation

1. Laying Procedure:
 o Delegated rules must be tabled before Parliament or State Legislatures for
scrutiny, ensuring accountability.
2. Committee on Subordinate Legislation:
o This parliamentary body reviews the legality, necessity, and reasonableness
of delegated legislation.

Advantages of Delegated Legislation

1. Reduces Legislative Burden:

o Frees up legislative time for broader policy decisions.
2. Provides Technical Expertise:
o Administrative bodies bring specialized knowledge to rule-making.
3. Enhances Flexibility:
o Allows quick amendments to address emergencies or unforeseen
developments.

Criticisms of Delegated Legislation

1. Overreach:
o Excessive delegation risks undermining legislative authority, as highlighted
in Chintaman Rao.
2. Accountability Issues:
o Subordinate authorities may lack sufficient oversight, leading to arbitrary
decisions.
3. Complexity:
o Multiple rules and amendments can confuse stakeholders and lead to non-
compliance.

Judicial Precedents Specific to MACT

Delegated legislation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, has been instrumental in
simplifying claim procedures for victims of road accidents.

1. Bimlesh v. New India Insurance Co. (2010):

o Emphasized the need for expedited claim settlements under delegated rules.
2. Anita Sharma v. New India Assurance Co. (2021):
o Highlighted the flexibility of MACT procedures under delegated rules to
prioritize justice for victims.
3. HDFC Ergo v. Mukesh Kumar (2021):
o Addressed the balance between statutory provisions and the need for
pragmatic solutions in long-term compensation.

Conclusion

Delegated legislation is an essential component of modern legal systems, providing a

mechanism for efficient, flexible, and specialized governance. While it alleviates the
legislative burden and ensures technical precision, it must operate within constitutional
limits and be subject to robust judicial and legislative oversight. Through careful
application of control mechanisms, delegated legislation can balance administrative
efficiency with accountability and the protection of citizens' rights.

Classification of Administrative Action

Administrative action is a broad concept that encompasses various functions of

governance. In modern times, it transcends the traditional division of government powers
(legislative, executive, and judicial) by integrating their elements. This classification
helps understand how administrative actions function and are regulated, particularly in
judicial review.
Categories of Administrative Action

1. Rule-Making Action (Quasi-Legislative Action):

o This occurs when administrative authorities exercise delegated law-making
powers granted by the legislature.
o Characteristics:
 General applicability (applies broadly, like legislative acts).
 Prospectivity (applies to future situations).
 Policy-based decision-making.
o Example: Delegated legislation such as rules under the Motor Vehicles
Act, 1988.
o In some cases, rule-making can be specific or retroactive, based on
evidence or policy needs.
2. Rule-Decision Action (Quasi-Judicial Action):
o Administrative agencies often adjudicate disputes that affect private
individuals, combining administrative and judicial elements.
o Characteristics:
 Requires adherence to judicial traditions such as evidence collection
and hearing arguments.
 Affects individual rights directly.
o Examples:
 Disciplinary actions (e.g., against employees or students).
 Revocation of licenses.
 Determination of citizenship.
o Landmark Case: A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India – Quasi-judicial action
involves evaluating the nature and scope of power exercised.
3. Rule-Application Action (Administrative Action):
o Residuary actions that are neither legislative nor judicial.
o Characteristics:
  Concerned with specific situations.
 Often based on subjective satisfaction and policy expediency.
 Minimal procedural obligations for evidence or arguments.
o Examples:
 Referring disputes to tribunals.
 Selection committee functions.
o Administrative actions can be statutory (having legal force) or non-
statutory (without legal force but enforceable through discipline).
4. Ministerial Action:
o Refers to actions taken as a matter of legal duty without discretion or
judgment.
o Characteristics:
 Clearly defined by law with no room for interpretation.
 Specific and definitive tasks.
o Example: Revenue collection.
5. Discretionary Action:
o Involves choices among alternatives and requires officials to exercise
judgment.
o Characteristics:
 Necessary for individualized decision-making in complex situations.
 Risk of misuse if not regulated.
o Absolute discretion can be harmful to individual freedoms, necessitating
judicial oversight to ensure reasonableness and fairness.

Key Distinctions

1. Quasi-Judicial vs. Administrative Actions:

o Quasi-Judicial:
  Objective decisions based on evidence.
 Involves procedural fairness and natural justice principles.
o Administrative:
 Subjective decisions based on policy and expediency.
 May not require strict adherence to procedural fairness.
2. Ministerial vs. Discretionary Actions:
o Ministerial:
 Involves fixed duties with no room for discretion.
o Discretionary:
 Requires judgment and choice among multiple courses of action.

Conclusion

Administrative actions are integral to modern governance, balancing efficiency, fairness,

and flexibility. Their classification into quasi-legislative, quasi-judicial, administrative,
and ministerial actions highlights their varied nature and purpose. While discretion is
essential for adapting to complex scenarios, it must be exercised within legal and
constitutional limits to prevent misuse and protect individual rights. Judicial review and
procedural safeguards play a critical role in ensuring accountability and justice in
administrative actions.

A SMALL PARA

Administrative action refers to the wide array of functions performed by administrative

authorities, blending legislative, judicial, and executive powers to meet the demands of
modern governance. It is generally classified into four categories. Quasi-legislative
actions involve creating rules and regulations under delegated authority, mirroring the
functions of the legislature. Quasi-judicial actions require administrative bodies to make
decisions that impact rights, adhering to judicial principles like evidence collection and
fairness. Administrative actions are specific, policy-driven decisions often based on
subjective satisfaction, such as referring disputes to tribunals or issuing directions.
Finally, ministerial actions involve duties imposed by law that leave no room for
discretion, such as revenue collection. While administrative actions ensure efficiency,
adaptability, and specialization, they must be exercised within legal boundaries and with
adherence to principles of natural justice. Judicial oversight remains essential to prevent
misuse, maintain fairness, and protect individual rights.