Procedural Control over Delegated Legislations
Procedural Control over Delegated Legislation
I. Meaning and Importance of Delegated Legislation
Delegated legislation (also known as subordinate or secondary legislation) refers to rules, regulations, orders, or bylaws made by an administrative authority or body under powers delegated by the legislature.
It enables detailed and technical rules to be framed without the legislature having to pass a new Act for every change.
Delegated legislation must comply with the parent statute and constitutional provisions.
II. Procedural Control: Definition
Procedural control refers to the methods and safeguards built into the process of making delegated legislation to ensure it is made fairly, transparently, and with proper authority.
Procedural controls serve to:
Maintain accountability.
Prevent arbitrariness.
Ensure public participation or at least notice.
Preserve legislative supremacy by allowing parliamentary oversight.
Allow judicial review based on procedural irregularities.
III. Common Procedural Controls on Delegated Legislation
Publication and Notification
Delegated legislation must be published to come into force (e.g., in an official gazette).
Failure to publish may invalidate the legislation.
Consultation Requirements
Some statutes require consultation with stakeholders before framing delegated legislation.
Approval by Parent Legislature
Affirmative Resolution Procedure: Delegated legislation requires active approval by parliament before becoming effective.
Negative Resolution Procedure: Delegated legislation becomes effective unless annulled by parliament within a certain time frame.
Laying before Parliament
Delegated legislation must be laid before the legislature for scrutiny.
Time Limits and Review
Some laws require periodic review or sunset clauses for delegated legislation.
IV. Judicial Control Over Procedural Aspects
Courts can strike down delegated legislation if there are procedural defects, such as:
Failure to comply with mandatory publication or notification.
Failure to consult when required.
Lack of parliamentary approval when required.
Breach of natural justice or procedural fairness.
V. Detailed Case Law Analysis
1. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978, India)
Facts:
Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded without giving her a chance to be heard.
Issue:
Whether the delegated legislation and administrative actions complied with procedural fairness.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that procedural safeguards, including notice and hearing, are fundamental under Article 21 (right to life and liberty).
Delegated legislation affecting fundamental rights must meet the requirements of natural justice.
Significance:
Expanded procedural control to require due process in delegated legislation impacting rights.
2. Agricultural, Horticultural and Forestry Development Board v. Minister of Agriculture (1955, UK)
Facts:
Delegated legislation was challenged for being made without proper consultation.
Issue:
Whether failure to consult stakeholders invalidated the delegated legislation.
Holding:
The court held that if statutory provisions require consultation, failure to consult is a procedural irregularity that can invalidate the legislation.
Significance:
Established that statutory procedural requirements must be strictly followed.
3. R. v. Secretary of State for Social Services, ex parte Association of Metropolitan Authorities (1986, UK)
Facts:
The Secretary of State issued delegated regulations without following the required consultation procedures.
Issue:
Was the failure to consult a breach of procedural requirements?
Holding:
Yes. The court ruled the regulations invalid because consultation was a mandatory procedural safeguard.
Significance:
Reinforced judicial insistence on procedural compliance.
4. Ridge v. Baldwin (1964, UK)
Facts:
A police officer was dismissed without being given an opportunity to be heard.
Issue:
Whether procedural fairness in delegated disciplinary legislation was necessary.
Holding:
The House of Lords held that procedural fairness (a form of procedural control) is required when delegated legislation affects rights.
Significance:
Strengthened the principle that delegated legislation and related administrative actions must follow fair procedures.
5. Union of India v. Tarsem Singh (1976, India)
Facts:
Challenged the validity of delegated legislation made without laying before the legislature.
Issue:
Is failure to lay delegated legislation before Parliament a fatal procedural defect?
Holding:
Yes. The Supreme Court held that failure to comply with statutory procedural requirements, including laying before the legislature, renders the delegated legislation invalid.
Significance:
Affirmed the necessity of parliamentary oversight in procedural control.
VI. Summary Table
| Case | Jurisdiction | Procedural Issue | Outcome | Principle Established |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Maneka Gandhi | India | Procedural fairness / Natural justice | Procedural safeguards required | Due process in delegated legislation |
| Agricultural Board v. Minister | UK | Failure to consult | Invalidated due to procedural breach | Statutory procedures must be followed |
| Ex parte Association of Metropolitan Authorities | UK | Failure to consult | Delegated legislation invalid | Mandatory consultation is essential |
| Ridge v. Baldwin | UK | Procedural fairness in disciplinary actions | Procedural fairness mandatory | Natural justice applies to delegated legislation affecting rights |
| Union of India v. Tarsem Singh | India | Failure to lay delegated legislation before legislature | Invalid legislation | Legislative oversight is mandatory |
VII. Conclusion
Procedural control over delegated legislation ensures that such legislation:
Is made transparently and lawfully.
Involves public or legislative participation when required.
Respects fundamental principles of natural justice.
Does not violate the limits set by parent legislation.
Courts play a critical role in enforcing procedural safeguards by reviewing delegated legislation for compliance. Failure to adhere to these procedural controls can lead to the nullification of such legislation.
RELATED Blog
0 comments