The Indian Legislature is empowered under the Constitution to enact national laws. Determining a legislative policy and framing it as a code of behavior is one of the major functions of the legislative branch. Obviously, other institutions cannot be granted such authority. However, given the wide range of diverse tasks associated with a welfare state, it is impractical for the legislature to fulfill every role. The delegated legislation enters the scene in this circumstance.

One of the fundamental components of administration is delegated legislature, which requires the executive to carry out certain legislative duties. Hence, the procedure by which the executive branch is granted the authority to enact laws to carry out and oversee the mandate of the main legislative body is known as delegated legislation.

The term "delegation" suggests that powers are entrusted to another individual or body, which are typically always subject to resumption by the power delegating, as noted by Lord Coleridge, C.J. in 25 QBD 304. A "delegate" is essentially an agent when using this word. An agent can only use the power of his principle; he has no independent authority. Generally speaking, a delegating body will still have the ability to withdraw the grant and take concurrent action on matters falling under its delegated authority, with the possible exception of situations in which it has already been bound by an act of its delegate. It is referred to by a number of terms, including orders, plans, bye-laws, regulations, and rules.

One of the main components of the legislative power is the delegation power. The mere fact that the legislation is sparse or that discretion is left to those tasked with enforcing the law does not serve as support for the argument that there has been an excessive delegation of legislative power, provided that the power or discretion has been granted in a way that is both legal and constitutional. This is because the Legislature must specify the policy and purpose of the enactment in the operative provisions of the statute.

Constitutionality of Delegated Legislation

Legislatures in India are deemed to have broad delegation powers, in keeping with their sovereign nature. There are, however, restrictions on this power. Essential legislative powers, which include deciding on a legislative policy and formally implementing it into a code of conduct, are not transferable by the Legislature. There is no "unanalyzed and uncontrolled power" that the Legislature can assign. The delegation is only legitimate when the legislative policy and the rules governing its implementation are sufficiently established, and the delegate is only authorized to carry out the policy in accordance with the rules established by the Legislature.

The case of Pandit Banarasi Das Bhanot v State of Madhya Pradesh established that the legislature has the established authority to impose taxes, and that the legislature has granted a delegate considerable discretion in determining the specifics of a tax policy. Justice Venkatarama Aiyer noted that it is not unconstitutional for the legislature to leave it to the executive to decide details relating to the operation of taxation laws, such as the choice of individuals on whom the tax is to be paid, the rates at which it is to be charged in respect of different classes of goods, and similar matters. He was upholding the State Government's authority to amend the Schedule relating to exemptions in a sales tax legislation.

In State of Rajasthan v. Basant Nahata, the Supreme Court ruled that one aspect of the legislative duty is the requirement that the legislature transfer its authority to the executive. According to article 245 of the Constitution, it is a component part of the legislative power overall. However, this kind of power transfer cannot be broad, unconsidered, or undirected. When granting such authority, the Legislature must establish the standards or requirements to allow the delegatee to act within the bounds of the law. The disclosure of the concept guiding the exercise of legislative power is mandatory. It is also common knowledge that crucial legislative duties cannot be assigned.

Control Mechanism over Delegated Legislation

Despite any preconceptions that may have existed in the past, delegated legislation is now accepted as necessary. Therefore, considering the safeguards and restrictions that the nation's delegated legislation should operate under would be more crucial than opposing it. Without a doubt, the process of delegated legislation involves the legislature relinquishing some degree of its legislative authority. Administrative legislation is frequently tasked with handling questions of principle. The delegated legislation system significantly expands the executive branch's authority while, in comparison, undermining the legislative branch.

It is somewhat undemocratic in that laws made by the administration lose "that safeguard of liberty which depends upon the law-making power being exercised by the elected representatives of the people who will be affected by the laws that are made," whereas laws made by the legislature are subject to the customary democratic safeguards of publicity, discussion within and outside the legislature, and so on. When the people's representatives do not have effective control over the laws that the people must abide by, self-government is in jeopardy. Legislation that is delegated is primarily bureaucratic in nature. Therefore, if it is to be prevented from the executive acting without authority, the issue of controls over delegated legislation becomes crucial.

Control of the legislature over Delegated Legislation

Legislation is the role of the legislature in a parliamentary democracy. It is not only the Legislature's right, but also its duty, as principal, to monitor how its agent—the Executive—is carrying out the agency assigned to it if it wishes to transfer its legislative authority to the executive for any reason. Since the legislature bestows legislative authority upon the administration, it is principally its duty to guarantee the lawful use of that authority, to monitor and regulate its actual application, and to guard against the administration's objectionable, abusive, or unjustified use of it.

Procedural Control over Delegated Legislation

Prior consultation with the impacted parties is a widely accepted practice in the United States. The Administrative Procedure Act's S.553 mandates that the body with the jurisdiction to make rules confer with the parties whose interests may be impacted. The relevant agency gives interested parties a chance to submit their representations within a set amount of time. In America, there are a number of Acts that provide for the engagement of certain advisory bodies created specifically for this purpose in addition to interested parties. In the United States, the process of drafting rules now frequently includes interest consultation. Prior talks with the affected parties are intended to learn about their perspectives and reduce opposition to administrative legislation.

Judicial Control over Delegated Legislation

The judicial form of control over delegated legislation is seen as an essential kind of control mechanism even in the presence of the Parliamentary Control. The primary rationale for judicial oversight stems from the courts' constitutional duty to protect the rule of law. Ensuring that the laws passed by the Parliament do not exceed the scope of the Constitution and that the delegated legislation issued under the statute falls within the boundaries of the parent statute and the constitution is a crucial responsibility of the judiciary in a state that follows a constitution.

Furthermore, the Constitution's Article 13(3)(a) defines "law" as "order, rules, bye-law, regulation, and notification," making it abundantly evident that the state authorities are not permitted to attempt to restrict or eliminate the rights granted by Part III of the Constitution through either legislative or subordinate executive laws. Because the courts can overturn a legislation if it violates the Constitution or the parent statute, judicial control is thought to be more effective than other forms of control.

Conclusion
The Indian Constitution permits delegated legislation. It can be found in the form of bylaws, regulations, orders, and other bylaws. Legislators, being politicians, are not expected to possess the intricacies and specialized knowledge of numerous subjects that modern legislation demands. When a subordinate law fails or exhibits a flaw in its implementation, it can be amended more swiftly and readily than an ordinary law.

Written By: Akanksha