The document discusses delegated legislation in India. It defines delegated legislation as the exercise of legislative power by a subordinate agency. It is used to relieve pressure on the legislature's time so it can focus on policy formulation. In India, rules, regulations, orders, notifications and bye-laws are examples of delegated legislation. The growth of delegated legislation can be attributed to factors like the pressure on parliamentary time due to expanding state activities, technical nature of subjects requiring expert assistance, need for flexibility to address unforeseen situations, enabling experimentation, and need for quick action in emergencies.

1. DELEGATED LEGISLATION

2. Delegated Legislation
• ‘Delegated Legislation’ means the exercise of
legislative power by an agency which is
subordinate to the legislature.
• Delegated legislation is a technique to relieve
pressure on legislature’s time so that it can
concentrate on principles and formulation of
policies.

3. • In India, Rules, Regulations, Orders, Notified
Orders, Notifications, Bye-laws …. all these
denote Delegated Legislation.
• Also, the same statute may employ or use
different expressions to denote the exercise of
the subordinate law-making power by an
administrative body or agency.

4. • Some of the reasons of the growth of the
Delegation of Powers are as follows:
Pressure upon Parliamentary Time:
• As a result of the expanding horizons of the
state activity, the bulk of legislation is so great
that it is not possible for the legislation to
devote sufficient time to discuss all the
matters in detail. Hence there is need for a
delegation of power.

5. Technicality:
• Sometimes, the subject – matter on which
legislation is required is so technical in nature
that the legislator, being himself a common
man, cannot be expected to appreciate and
legislate on the same, and the assistance of
experts may be required. Hence this lead to
the growth of delegation of power.

6. Flexibility:
• At the time of passing any legislative
enactment, it is impossible to foresee all the
contingencies, and some provision is required
to be made for these unforeseen situations
demanding exigent action. Hence there is a
need for flexibility which leads to the growth
of delegation of power.

7. Experiment:
• The practice of delegated legislation enables
the executive to experiment. The method
permits rapid utilization of experience and
implementation of necessary changes.
Emergency:
• In the time of emergency, quick action is
required to be taken. The legislative process is
not equipped to provide for urgent solution to
meet the situation. Hence there is need for
delegation of power.

8. Facts:
• The respondent holds a degree of B.Sc. (Home Science)
with specialisation in Foods and Nutrition from the
University of Udaipur and also an M.A. in Sociology
from Patna university.
• In 1981, Patna Women's College opened the
Department of Home Science. As per the statutes of
the university in force at that time, the qualification for
appointment as Lecturer was P.G. degree in Home
Science or in an "allied subject”.
• Respondent resigned her job and applied to the Patna
Women's College as she had a P.G. degree in an "allied
subject", vis. Sociology.
• The respondent was appointed on ”ad-hoc" basis to
take up the P.G. Home Science Classes and the Principal
requested the Vice- Chancellor to permit the
respondent to "engage" P.G. classes on an adhoc basis

9. • The Principal of the College wrote a long letter to the
Vice- Chancellor that she fulfilled the statutory
qualifications laid down by the UGC and the State
Government, for appointment as a lecturer.
• It was stated that the essential qualifications for
appointment as a Lecturer were changed "in 1985" and
that the Chancellor may be requested by the
Government to give his concurrence for the
appointment "as per old statutes prevalent at the time
of her appointment".
• The University recommended her case to the
Chancellor.
• On 18.9.1989, the Secretary to the Chancellor
communicated the order favourably issued by the
Chancellor in favour of the respondent. The said order
reads: "It is a fit case where the services of Mrs. Tiwari
should be regularised on compassionate grounds -
order may accordingly be issued
• It appears that the University requested the Chancellor

10. • when the question of regularisation was at the
stage, the respondent filed the present writ
petition for implementation of the letters of
the Chancellor and sought a direction for
regularisation.
• A Division Bench of the High Court allowed
the writ petition by judgment and directed
regularisation as per the orders of the
Chancellor.

11. • Respondents relied on sub- clauses 7(ii) of S.9
of the Bihar Universities Act, 1976. That
provision reads as follows;
"S. 9 (i) that Chancellor : The Governor of Bihar shall
be the Chancellor.
7(ii) The Chancellor shall have the power for issue
directions to the Universities in the administrative or
academic interest of the Universities which considers to
be necessary. The directions issued by Chancellor shall be
implemented by the Vice-Chancellor, Syndicate, senate
and other bodies of the University as the case may be.

12. Held:
• No provision has been brought to our notice
which permits the Chancellor to direct
regularisation of the services of a Lecturer on
'compassionate grounds'.
• In the present case the respondent was
appointed on ad hoc basis till regular
appointments were to be made and regular
appointments required a qualification which the
respondent did not possess and further, regular
appointment could not be made except by
consulting the relevant services Commission.
• We accordingly allow the appeal, set aside the
judgment of the High court and dismiss the writ
petition.
• Case: Patna University & Anr vs Dr. Amita
Tiwari (AIR 1997 SC 3456)

13. Facts:
The appellants were prosecuted for the offence
of acquiring a controlled commodity at a rate
higher than the maximum statutory price fixed
for such commodity by the Iron Control Order,
1956.

14. Issue:
• The appellants challenged their prosecution
on the ground that the control order and the
notification did not have the force of law as
they had not been laid before the Houses of
Parliament within a reasonable time as
required by the Essential Commodities Act.

15. Law:
section 3(6) of the Act provides that every order
made under section 3 by the Central
Government or by any officer or authority of the
Central Government, shall be laid before both
Houses of Parliament, as soon as may be, after it
is made.

16. Held:
• The Legislature never intended that non-
compliance with the requirement of laying as
envisaged by sub-section (6) of section 3 of
the Act should render the order void.
Consequently non-laying of the aforesaid
notification fixing the maximum selling prices
of various categories of iron and steel
including the commodity in question before
both Houses of Parliament cannot result in
nullification of the notification.
• Case: Atlas Cycle Industries Ltd. vs State Of
Haryana (1979 AIR 1149)

17. Provision:
• No such person shall be dismissed or removed or
reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which
he has been informed of the charges against him
and given a reasonable opportunity of being
heard in respect of those charges provided that
where it is proposed after such inquiry, to impose
upon him any such penalty, such penalty may be
imposed on the basis of the evidence adduced
during such inquiry and it shall not be necessary
to give such person any opportunity of making
representation on the penalty proposed

18. • On a careful consideration of the report, and in
particular of the conclusions reached by the
Enquiry Officer in respect of the charges framed
against you the Employer is provisionally of
opinion that a major penalty, viz., dismissal,
removal or reduction should be enforced on you.
• Before he takes that action, he desires to give you
an opportunity of showing cause against the
action proposed to be taken.
• Any representation which you may make in that
connection -will be considered by him before
taking the proposed action.
• Such representation, if any, should be made, in
writing, and submitted so as to reach the
undersigned not later than 14 days from the

19. • The Employee then moved the High Court by a
petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in
which his main contention was:
– that he had no opportunity of showing cause
against the action proposed to be taken in regard
to him within the meaning of the provision.

20. • The three punishments mentioned in the
provision and inasmuch as it did not
particularize the actual or exact punishment
proposed to be imposed on the appellant, the
notice did not comply with the essential
requirements of the provision.