Delegated Legislation and Fundamental Rights

Delegated legislation and fundamental rights are closely connected in Indian administrative law because rules, regulations, notifications, orders and bye-laws made by subordinate authorities can affect the rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Although delegated legislation is permitted, it cannot override or violate Fundamental Rights. The delegated authority must exercise its power within the limits of the Constitution and the parent statute.

Meaning of Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation refers to laws made by an authority other than the primary legislature under powers delegated to it by an Act of Parliament or a State Legislature.

It commonly includes:

• Rules;
• Regulations;
• Bye-laws;
• Orders;
• Notifications; and
• Schemes.

The parent Act provides the authority for making these instruments.

Meaning of Fundamental Rights

Fundamental Rights are constitutional rights guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution of India, Articles 12 to 35.

They impose constitutional limitations on State action.

Important rights relevant to delegated legislation include:

• Article 14 – Equality before law and equal protection of laws;
• Article 19 – Protection of specified freedoms;
• Article 21 – Protection of life and personal liberty;
• Article 25 – Freedom of conscience and religion; and
• Other applicable rights under Part III.

Application of Fundamental Rights to Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation is subject to the Constitution.

Article 13 provides that laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights are void to the extent of their inconsistency.

The definition of “law” under Article 13(3)(a) includes, among other things, rules, regulations, orders, bye-laws and notifications having the force of law.

Therefore, delegated legislation can be tested for consistency with Fundamental Rights.

Article 14 and Delegated Legislation

Article 14 guarantees equality before law and equal protection of laws.

Delegated legislation may be challenged under Article 14 where it creates an arbitrary, discriminatory or unreasonable classification without a constitutionally valid basis.

For example, if a regulation treats two similarly situated classes differently without a rational basis connected with the purpose of the legislation, its constitutional validity may be questioned.

Article 19 and Delegated Legislation

Delegated legislation may affect freedoms protected under Article 19.

For example, rules may regulate:

• Speech and expression;
• Peaceful assembly;
• Association;
• Movement;
• Residence; or
• Profession, occupation, trade or business.

Restrictions imposed through delegated legislation must have constitutional and statutory authority.

Where Article 19 permits restrictions only on specified grounds, a subordinate authority cannot create restrictions outside those constitutional limits.

Article 21 and Delegated Legislation

Article 21 protects life and personal liberty.

Administrative rules and regulations affecting personal liberty must comply with constitutional requirements.

Where delegated legislation substantially affects life or personal liberty, courts may examine whether the action has adequate legal authority and satisfies the constitutional standards applicable to Article 21.

Delegated Legislation Cannot Override Fundamental Rights

A delegate receives authority from the parent Act.

It does not receive power to disregard the Constitution.

The hierarchy can be understood as:

Constitution

↓

Parent Act

↓

Delegated Legislation

The delegated legislation must comply with both the Constitution and the parent legislation.

Constitutional Ultra Vires

Delegated legislation may be declared invalid if it violates a constitutional provision, including a Fundamental Right.

This is commonly described as substantive ultra vires on constitutional grounds.

For example:

Parent Act → Valid

Rule made under the Act → Violates Article 14

The rule may be invalid even though the parent Act itself remains valid.

Parent Act and Fundamental Rights

The validity of delegated legislation must be distinguished from the validity of the parent statute.

A parent Act may be constitutionally valid while a rule made under it is unconstitutional.

Conversely, if the parent Act itself violates a Fundamental Right, delegated legislation based upon that invalid provision may also be affected.

Delegated Legislation and Article 14

Article 14 is particularly significant because delegated legislation often involves classification and administrative discretion.

Courts may examine whether delegated legislation:

• Creates arbitrary classifications;
• Treats similarly situated persons differently;
• Lacks a rational basis;
• Is manifestly arbitrary; or
• Exercises statutory power in an arbitrary manner.

The precise constitutional test depends on the nature of the challenge.

Delegated Legislation and Reasonableness

Where a Fundamental Right permits reasonable restrictions, delegated legislation must remain within the constitutional framework.

The authority cannot impose restrictions merely because the parent Act gives it broad administrative powers.

The delegated rule must have:

• Statutory authority;
• A connection with the purpose of the Act; and
• Constitutional validity.

Delegated Legislation and Excessive Delegation

Fundamental Rights also interact with the doctrine of excessive delegation.

If Parliament delegates excessively broad power without adequate legislative policy or guidance, the delegation itself may be challenged.

This is separate from a challenge to the particular rule made under the delegated power.

Thus, there can be two distinct questions:

Was the delegation constitutionally permissible?

Is the delegated legislation constitutionally valid?

Important Cases

State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Krishnamurthy (2006)

The Supreme Court identified important grounds on which subordinate legislation may be challenged.

Delegated legislation may be invalid where it:

• Contravenes the Constitution;
• Contravenes the parent statute;
• Violates another statute;
• Is manifestly arbitrary;
• Exceeds the scope of delegated authority; or
• Fails to comply with mandatory procedural requirements.

The case is an important authority for judicial review of subordinate legislation.

Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India (1985)

The Supreme Court recognised that subordinate legislation can be challenged on constitutional grounds, including violation of Fundamental Rights.

The Court also explained that subordinate legislation is subject to judicial review on grounds applicable to delegated legislation.

Cellular Operators Association of India v. TRAI (2016)

The Supreme Court considered the validity of regulations made by a statutory regulatory authority and discussed the limits of delegated legislative power.

The case illustrates that regulatory authorities must remain within the authority granted by their enabling legislation.

General Officer Commanding-in-Chief v. Subhash Chandra Yadav (1988)

The Supreme Court emphasised that subordinate legislation cannot travel beyond the authority granted by the parent statute.

The case is relevant to the doctrine of ultra vires.

Fundamental Rights and Different Forms of Delegated Legislation

Form	Possible Fundamental Rights Issue
Rules	Unreasonable or discriminatory restrictions
Regulations	Regulation affecting constitutional freedoms
Bye-laws	Arbitrary local restrictions
Notifications	Unequal treatment or excessive restrictions
Orders	Arbitrary exercise of delegated authority
Schemes	Restrictions affecting protected rights

Delegated Legislation and Article 13

Article 13 is particularly important.

Article 13(1) deals with pre-Constitution laws inconsistent with Fundamental Rights.

Article 13(2) prohibits the State from making laws that take away or abridge Fundamental Rights.

Article 13(3)(a) includes rules, regulations, orders, bye-laws and notifications within the expression “law” for the purposes of Article 13.

Consequently, delegated legislation having the force of law can be tested against Part III.

Judicial Review

Courts can review delegated legislation to determine whether it violates Fundamental Rights.

A court may examine:

Constitutional Validity

Whether the rule violates provisions such as Articles 14, 19 or 21.

Statutory Authority

Whether the rule falls within the power granted by the parent Act.

Procedural Validity

Whether mandatory statutory procedures were followed.

Arbitrariness

Whether the subordinate legislation is manifestly arbitrary or otherwise constitutionally impermissible.

Legislative Competence

Whether the underlying legislative framework falls within the constitutional competence of the relevant legislature.

Fundamental Rights vs Directive Principles

Delegated legislation may also implement social and economic policies reflected in the Directive Principles of State Policy.

However, implementation through delegated legislation does not provide a general exemption from Fundamental Rights.

A rule intended to achieve a public or social objective must still operate within constitutional limitations.

Delegated Legislation and Article 32

Where delegated legislation violates a Fundamental Right, an affected person may seek constitutional remedies.

The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction under Article 32 may be invoked for enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

High Courts may exercise their broader writ jurisdiction under Article 226.

Key Points for Exams

• Delegated legislation is subject to the Constitution and Fundamental Rights.
• Article 13 treats rules, regulations, orders, bye-laws and notifications having the force of law as “law” for its purposes.
• Delegated legislation cannot override Fundamental Rights.
• Article 14 is relevant to arbitrary and discriminatory delegated legislation.
• Article 19 is relevant where delegated legislation restricts protected freedoms.
• Article 21 is relevant where delegated legislation affects life or personal liberty.
• Delegated legislation may be challenged as constitutionally ultra vires.
• A valid parent Act does not automatically make every rule made under it valid.
• Excessive delegation and unconstitutional delegated legislation are distinct grounds of challenge.
• Indian Express Newspapers v. Union of India (1985) is an important case on judicial review of subordinate legislation.
• State of Tamil Nadu v. P. Krishnamurthy (2006) is a leading case on grounds for challenging subordinate legislation.
• Cellular Operators Association of India v. TRAI (2016) is relevant to delegated regulatory power.
• General Officer Commanding-in-Chief v. Subhash Chandra Yadav (1988) concerns the limits of subordinate legislation.
• Courts may invalidate delegated legislation that exceeds the parent Act or violates constitutional rights.

Conclusion

Delegated legislation is an essential part of modern administration, but the power to make subordinate legislation is not superior to the Constitution.

Every rule, regulation, notification, bye-law or order made under delegated authority must remain within the parent Act and constitutional framework. Fundamental Rights therefore provide an important substantive limitation on delegated legislative power.

Delegated legislation may supplement legislation, but it cannot be used to defeat Fundamental Rights.