Administrative law is a result of rising state socio-economic functions of the state & increased governmental control. Krishna iyer claimed that parliamentary control over delegated legislation as a constitutional requirement should be a continuity of living. The executive 's role is to administer the law passed by the legislature and in the ideal state: the statute should exercise its legislative function properly and efficiently.

However, the executive also performs certain legislative and judicial functions in the present situation, the legislature does not have sufficient time to study in depth and enact regulatory measures to enforce a law and the need for delegated legislation occurs. It has rightly been said that delegated legislation is so multitudinous that it can work together on several functions.

Within the study of administrative law, the creation of legislative powers of the administrative authorities in the form of delegated legislation occupies a very significant role. Consequently, the issue of delegated legislation controls takes on significance if the executive is not to be permitted to act arbitrarily. This paper attempted to discuss all types of mechanisms of control over delegated legislation and the judicial approach to it.

1. International Journal: A Comparative study on Parliamentary Control over Delegated Legislation by Mishika Bhargava.
   The concept of delegated legislation states When the function of legislation is entrusted to organs other than the legislature by the legislature itself, the legislation made by such organs is call delegated legislation. It is therefore, of utmost importance that there should be proper control on exercise of legislative power by the executive. There are certain safeguards which are laid down to be followed which operate at two levels: firstly, when legislature is delegating such power in favour of executive; and secondly, there should be ‘control mechanism’ so that the power is not abused by the executive it can be said that the safeguards which are laid down can be efficiently followed
    
2. Control and safeguards (delegated legislation) C.K. Takwani
   It has been said that whenever there is a delegation of power to the administrative authority there should be a control over it. As the rule making power are conferred on the administration and to keep a check whether it is misused by authority or misapplied. Therefore, control over delegated comes into picture and is divided into 2 parts i.e. judicial and legislative control over delegated legislation and various circumstances through which it is tried to keep the control effective.
    
3. International Journal of Creative Research Thoughts: Control Mechanism over Delegated Legislation Aparajita Kumari
   This power of delegation is a constituent element of the legislative power as a whole. So long as the Legislature indicates in the operative provisions of the statute the policy and purpose of the enactment, the mere fact that the legislation is skeletal or the fact that a discretion is left to those entrusted with administering the law, is no basis for a contention that there has been excessive delegation of legislative power, if the power or discretion has been conferred in a manner which is legal and constitutional. All those have to be done in India to achieve an efficient system of delegated legislation, in order to ensure that the power of delegated legislation is not misused in the hands of executive it is necessary to adopt effective modes of control.

Introduction
Constitution of Indian allows Legislature to make laws for the country. The significant legislative functions are to introduce a legislative policy and frame it as rule of conduct. But while keeping in mind the various diverse activities of welfare country, it will not be possible for the legislature alone to perform all the functions in a perfect manner so, due to these situations, the delegated legislation came into picture. At present time delegated legislation is an essential element of the administration where executive has to perform some legislative functions. Delegated legislation is a process through the executive authority is given powers by legislature to make by laws in order to implement law.

This power of delegation is a constituent element of the legislative power as a whole.[1] As the Legislature indicates in the operative provisions of the statute the policy and purpose for which it is enacted, the mere fact that the legislation is skeletal or the fact that a discretion is left to with administrating law, & is of no basis for a contention that there has been excessive delegation of legislative power, if the power or discretion has been conferred in a manner which is legal and constitutional.[2]

The application of law to changing circumstances was made practical through instruments of ‘rules’ framed through executive. During the year 1973 -77 a period of 4 years, the Parliament enacted around 300 statutes but the statutory rules and by-laws were reached more than 25000.[3]

As the delegated legislation is bureaucratic legislation and it include a shift legislative powers from the legislature to administrative authority. As the no democratic safeguards or control in administrative rule-making as there is in the legislature, So, a control mechanism had become a necessary so to check the powers which are provided to the administration are not misused. This Control mechanism involves 2 types Judicial control, Legislative control.

Objective Of Study:

• To describe the Control Mechanism over legislative functions
• To study the power the court and parliament and the ways they control the delegated legislation
• To Study the grounds to check the validity and legality of delegated legislation.

Scope Of Study:

• The scope of the study is to get brief knowledge about how the control and safeguards keeps a check on the powers given to the administrative bodies and what are the types of control of that keeps a watch on delegated legislation and how effective they are to control these functions.

Significance:

• This study is significant endeavour to understand the control on the Delegated Legislation on the basis of how Judiciary & legislative keeps check on the power and how it is effective on the legislative functions performed by administrative authority.

Research Methodology:

• Research Design: The study has been done on the basis of doctrinal research design.
• Research Type & Sources Of Data: Explanatory Study & Secondary Sources such as research articles, internet and books
• Research Question:
  
  1. What are the types of Control Mechanism and when they come into use?
  2. What are the grounds on which these controls are exercised?
  3. Are these controls being effective over the delegated legislation?

Delegated legislation
Meaning
Delegation of powers that is the powers passed on by the higher authority to the lower authority to make law.

But it is very difficult to have a precise definition of expression delegated legislation. Therefore, it is equally difficult to state the nature and scope of such legislation.

Mukherjee J[4] rightly stated that:
Delegated legislation is an expression which covers a multitude of confusion it is an excuse for the legislators, a shield for the administrators and a provocation to the constitutional jurists.
The Jain and Jain also stated the definition of Delegated legislation[5], i.e. the term Delegated legislation is used in two sense: 1) exercise by a subordinate agency of the legislative power delegated to it by the legislature, or 2) the subsidiary rules themselves which are made by the subordinate authority in pursuance of the power conferred on it by the legislature.

A simple meaning of the expression ‘delegated legislation’ may be given as under:
When the function of legislation is entrusted to organs other than the legislature by the legislature itself, the legislation made by such organs is called delegated legislation.[6]

Therefore, it clears means that the authority making the legislation is subordinate to the legislature.

Parliamentary Control Over Delegated Legislation
This is up to Parliament to give anyone the powers that it possesses, just as parliament transfers legislative powers to some other entity, e.g. executive, they must ensure that such powers are duly exercised by the government and there is no abuse of authority that the executive is provided with.

In Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab[7], Krishna Iyer J. rightly stated that parliamentary control over delegated legislation should be a living continuity as a constitutional necessity.
As the control of the legislature over delegated legislation, Jain and Jain[8] state:
In a parliamentary democracy, it is the function of the legislature to legislate. If it seeks to delegate its legislative powers to the executive because of some reasons, it is not only the right of the legislature, but also its obligation, as principal, to see how its agent i.e. the executive carries out the agency entrusted to it. Since it is the legislature which grants legislative power to the administration, it is primarily its responsibility to ensure the proper exercise of delegated legislative power, to supervise and control the actual exercise of this power and ensure against the danger of its objectionable, abusive and unwarranted use by the administration.

Objective of parliamentary control
The primary aim of parliamentary oversight is to regulate the rule-making of authorities and, if they see an undue exercise of power or misuse of authority, it gives Parliament an opportunity to take action against them[9].

The fact that the board delegation of legislative powers and general control requirements are also wide-ranging, judicial control over delegated legislation alone is not enough to regulate it, and maintaining administrative agencies within delegation limits has increased the need for parliamentary regulation that Parliament can exercise effectively.

Forms of parliamentary control over delegated legislation
Legislative power over administrative rule-making in India is tacit as a constitutional function because the executive is responsible to parliament. There are three forms of parliamentary control exercised over delegated legislation which are:
Direct general control
This form of parliamentary control is exercised at the time of passing the enabling act. The proceedings which are initiated in the parliament.

1. It is exercised in various methods such as debates on the act which involve delegation. Members discuss about delegation which includes aspects such as necessity, extent, type of delegation and the authority to whom power is delegated.
2. Furthermore, by means of questions and any Member may ask questions on any aspect of delegation of legislative powers and, if dissatisfied, may give notice of discussion pursuant to Rule 59 of the Lok Sabha Rules of Procedure and Conduct.
3. Where notices in house moving resolutions, any member may pass a resolution on motion, if the matter regarding delegation of power is urgent and immediate & reply of the government is unsatisfactory[10].

However, these approaches, are rarely used in India That is merely due to a lack of practice. Moreover, scholars thought that this approach could be used widely and efficiently to nip the vices of delegation in the bud[11].

Direct special control
This control mechanism is practiced by way of the "laying" techniques on the table of house rules and regulations introduced by the administrative body. The use of this laying technique can in in the 1939 to 1969 Reorganization Act, authorizes the president to reorganize the executive government by administrative rule making.

The most common form clause states that the delegated legislation will take effect immediately, but will be subject to annulment by either house's adverse resolution.

Laying on table
The legislature's procedure of 'laying on the table' practice is practiced in almost all the country. This has two purposes: firstly, this allows the legislature to know of all the laws that the executive authorities have made in the exercise of delegated legislation. Secondly, it provides the lawmakers with the opportunity to criticize or challenge the laws that have been made or being proposed to be made.

Types of laying
The select committee on delegated legislation summarised the laying procedure under following heads[12]:

1. Laying without further provision for control
   In this type of laying the rules and regulations come into effect as soon as they are laid. It is simply to inform the house about the rules and regulations.
    
2. Laying with immediate effect but subject to annulment
   Here the rules and regulations come into operation as soon as they are laid before the parliament. However, they cease to operate when disapproved by the parliament.
    
3. Laying subject to negative resolution
   In this process the rule come into effect as soon as they are laid before the parliament, but shall cease to have effect if annulled by a resolution of the house.
    
4. Laying subject to affirmative resolution
   This technique takes two forms: firstly, that the rules shall have no effect or force unless approved by a resolution of each house of parliament. Secondly, that the rules shall cease to have effect unless approved by an affirmative resolution.
    
5. Laying in draft subject to negative resolution
   Such a provision provides that when any act contains provision for this type of laying the draft rules be placed on the table of the house and shall come into force after forty days from the date of laying unless disapproved before that period.
    
6.  Laying in draft subject to affirmative resolution
   In this type of laying the instrument or draft rules shall have no effect unless approved by the house. In India, there is no statutory provision requiring ‘laying of’ of all delegated legislation. In the absence of any general law in India regulating laying procedure, the scrutiny committee made the following suggestions:
   
   1. All acts of parliament should uniformly require that rules to be laid on the table of the house as soon as possible
   2. The laying period should uniformly be thirty days from the date of final publication of rules and
   3. The rule will be subject to such modifications as the house may like to make[13].
       

Legal consequences of noncompliance with the laying provisions
In India, the laying provision shows the implications of non-compliance based on whether the relevant provision in the act is mandatory or a directory.

In Narendra Kumar v. Union of India[14], the Supreme Court held that the provisions of section 3(5) of the Essential commodities Act, 1955 which provided that the rules framed under the act must be laid before both houses of parliament, are mandatory and therefore clause 4 of the non-ferrous control order, 1958 has no effect unless laid before parliament.

Further in Jan Mohammad v. State of Gujarat[15], the court deviated from its previous judgement. Section 26(5) of the Bombay agricultural produce markets Act, 1939 contained a laying provision but the rules framed under the act could not be laid before the provincial legislature in its first session as there was then no functioning legislature because of World War II emergency. The rules were placed during the second session. Court held that the rules remained valid because the legislature did not provide that the non-laying at its first session would make rules invalid.
And though the laying requirement were just a directory and not a mandatory requirement, rules adopted by the administrative authority without compliance with the laying requirement would not be permissible if the rules were violated.

Indirect control
Parliament exercises this form of indirect control through its committees. Given the strengthening of parliamentary control over delegated legislation, the of scrutiny committees were established[16]. There are standing committees of parliament in India to scrutinise the delegated legislation on 1 December 1953 such a committee known as Lok Sabha's Subordinate Legislation Committee was formed.

The main functions of the committee are to examine:

1. Whether the rules are in accordance with the general object of the act,
2. Whether the rules contain any matter which can be appropriately dealt with in the act,
3. Whether it is retrospective, etc.
4. Whether it is directly or indirectly bars the jurisdiction of the court.

The particularly committee between 1953 and 1961, scrutinized about 5300 orders and rules has submitted 19 reports. Similar committee of the Rajya Sabha which was constituted in 1964. It discharges the same functions as that of the Lok Sabha committee.

Recommendations by the committee on subordinate legislation
The committee on subordinate legislation has made the following recommendations in order to streamline the process of delegated legislation in India which are as follows:

1. Rules do not take away or restrict the powers of judicial review.
2. Rules do not impose a financial levy or a tax.
3. The language in which rules are written should be plain, clear and ambiguous.
4. Legislative policy must be drafted by the legislature and information may be left to the executive and provide.
5. The Administration does not frame discriminatory laws.
6. The rules should not confer by the parent act should not be laid down behind the law.
7. Administration should not hesitate unnecessarily in drawing up regulations.

The committee's work is satisfactory on the whole. The delegated legislation in India has proved to be fairly effective in properly functioning, updating and improving effectively. Sir Cecil aptly remarks: it is evidently a vigorous and independent body[17].

Effectiveness of parliamentary control over delegated legislation
Is Parliamentary control really effective in India?
In India the legislative control over administration is more theoretical than practical. The control is not effective as it ought to be. Basically, Parliamentary control cannot be that effective as the Judicial control is due to various reasons and even the Parliament has to perform many other functions which are also necessary for the welfare of country.

So, the delegation of powers to administrative authority was a good option by the legislature and the control exercised by them i.e. Direct Special Control and Direct General Control can be used in an effective and efficient way in their field as if we remove it the legislature will not come to know is administrative authority is doing. It helps us to avoid the future litigation in form of Judicial Control and try to save the nation from the harassment of people from the bad law.

The Separation of powers has really failed the importance and effectiveness of Parliamentary Control as a control mechanism on excessive delegation.

There are many factors responsible ineffectiveness of Parliamentary Control over delegated legislation:[18]

1. Parliament neither have the enough time nor the expert person to have proper control on the administration which is now complex and have growth in volume.
2. The executive in Parliament holds the majority of the support which reduces the chances of effective criticism.
3. There is a lack of strong and steady parliamentary opposition which has also led to the ineffectiveness of legislative control over the Indian administration.
4. The parliamentary control of delegated legislation is general, and often political in nature.
5. There is no automatic process for effective review on behalf of the parliament as a whole and the complexities are becoming very difficult to rely on such scrutiny.
6. Parliament is too large and too unmanageable to be effective.
7. Parliament is very much dependent on court for each and every single matter as the members of does not have the deep knowledge of legal skills.

Judicial Control Over Delegated Legislation

The legislation that has been delegated does not fall beyond the reach of the Judicial Review and in almost all countries the courts are allowed to decide on the validity of delegated legislation. Despite the presence of parliamentary control, judicial control of delegated legislation is recognized as an integral form of control mechanism.

The fundamental justification for judicial review is based on the Courts' constitutional obligation to obey the rule of law principle. In a constitutionally controlled state, maintaining that the laws made by Parliament are not Ultra vires under the Constitution is the essential function of the judiciary, and that the delegated legislation enacted under the statute falls within the limits of both the parent statute and the constitution.

Judicial control is considered to be a more effective form of control, since the courts have the power to strike down a law if it is ultra vires with the parent statute or the Constitution. Term Ultra virus means that beyond power or authority or lack of power. An act may be said to be Ultra Virus when it has been done by a person or a body of persons which is beyond his, it’s or their power, authority or Jurisdiction.[19]

Need For Judicial Control Over Delegated Legislation

The rule of majority in democratic systems had basically made legislative controls ineffective. Since these observations were pointed out on the view that legislative control over delegated legislation is not so effective, so due to the ineffectiveness of the legislature, there was a need for judicial control over delegated legislation. hence Justice control has now become an inevitable need to prevent executives from acting as super-legislatures or as aspiring dictators.[20]

A significant change from control of delegated legislation was noticed by pre-constitutional control to post-constitutional judicial control. "Legislatures cannot delegate their legislative powers which are essential. Essential legislative powers are concerned with determining the legislature's policy and rendering it a binding rule of conduct..[21] In other words, delegation of legislative power is limited to ‘non-essentials’ or subsidiary matters. Legislative power when delegated of essential nature would be held invalid. It came as a first principle developed in the field of judicial control and subsequently expanded to a number of principles developed by the judiciary.

In Indian Express Newspapers (Bom) (P) Ltd. v. Union of India,[22] the grounds on which subordinate legislation can be questioned were outlined by the Supreme Court. E. S. Venkataramiah, J. observed thus:
75. A piece of subordinate legislation does not carry the same degree of immunity which is enjoyed by a statute passed by a competent legislature. Subordinate legislation may be questioned on any of the grounds on which plenary legislation is questioned. In addition, it may also be questioned on the ground that it does not conform to the statute under which it is made. It may further be questioned on the ground that it is contrary to some other statute. That is because subordinate legislation must yield to plenary legislation. It may also be questioned on the ground that it is unreasonable, unreasonable not in the sense of not being reasonable, but in the sense that it is manifestly arbitrary.

1. Constitutionality of the Parent Act
   It is first requirement that the parent Act or enabling statute by which legislative power is conferred on the executive authority must be valid and constitutional If the enabling act is ultra vires the constitution that prescribes the limits under which the legislature can operate, then the rules and regulations laid out in it will also be invalid. The enabling act may contravene the constitution's implied or express limitation.[23]
   
   In case of Chinataman Rao vs. State of M.P.,[24] The parent Act authorised discretionary powers to the Deputy Commissioner to fix agricultural season and prohibit the manufacture of Bidis in some areas for certain periods. The court held the CP Regulation of Manufacturers of Bidis Act, 1948 and the rules framed there under as ultra vires Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution which guarantees freedom of trade and profession. Supreme Court this amounted to unreasonable restriction on the exercise of fundamental right and hence both the Commissioner's order and the Act were held ultra vires the Constitution.
    
2. Constitutionality of the delegated legislation
   A Parent Act or delegating statute may be constitutional and valid and delegated legislation may be consistent with the parent Act, yet the delegated legislation may be held invalid on the ground that it contravenes the provision of the constitution.
   
   In Dwarka Prasad vs. State of U.P.,[25] Section 3(1) of the U.P Coal Control Order issued under Section 3 of the Essential Supplies Temporary Powers Act, 1946 provided that no one can carry on business in coal except under a license. Rule 3(2)(b) further laid down that the State Coal Controller can exempt any person from the license requirement. The court held the rule as ultra vires Article 19(1)(g) as it placed unreasonable restriction by giving arbitrary powers to the executive in granting exemptions.
    
3. Where delegated legislation is inconsistent with the parent Act.
   The validity of delegated legislation can be challenged on the ground that it is ultra-virus the parent Act or enabling statute. It is an accepted principle that delegated authority must be exercised strictly within the authority of law. Delegated legislation can be held valid only if it conforms exactly to the power granted.
   
   The Supreme Court in case of Kunj Bihari Lal Butail v. State of HP[26] In this case the HP Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, had delegated to the State Government the power to make rules for the purpose for carrying out the purpose of this Act. Though the Act by section 5 had excluded 'Tea Estates and land subservient. However, rules framed by the State Government had put embargo on the transfer of the land subservient to tea estates. Thus, the rules were held ultra vires the enabling Act being inconsistent and repugnant thereto.
    
4. Where parent act delegates essential legislative functions
   It is well settled principle of administrative law that primary and essential legislative functions must be performed by the legislature itself and they cannot be delegated to any other organ of the state. A legislature cannot create, constitute or establish a parallel legislature. [27]
    
5. Delegated Legislation is mala-fide
   Administrative law making can be challenged on the grounds of bad faith or ulterior purpose. It has been stated by the Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Union of India[28], that a presidential proclamation under Article 356 of the Constitution can be challenged if power is exercised malafide. As Bhagwati, J. has observed, If satisfaction is mala fide or is based wholly on extraneous and irrelevant grounds the court have jurisdiction to examine it.[29]
   
   Power to make delegated legislation cannot claim immunity from judicial review if the power has been exercised by the rule-making authority mala fide or with dishonest intention.
6. Delegated legislation in inconsistent with general law.
   A subordinate legislation, apart from being intra virus the constitution and consistent with the parent Act, must also be in consonance with general law i.e. any other law enacted by the legislation.
   
   In Hindustan Times v. State of U.P.[30] Parliament by an Act provided pension to working journalists. The state government advertisements on newspaper and deducted such levy from pension fund of working journalists. The directive of the state Government was held beyond legislative competence and ultra-virus the constitution.
    
7. Delegated is arbitrary, unreasonable
   All powers are exercised by public authorities are liable to be misused. Work constitute of misuse of public power is the subject matter of the judicial review and the Courts intervene in case of such misuse of power. Ultra vires doctrine confines public authorities to those powers granted by the parent Act. But the courts are also concerned to see that not only whether power exercised exists but also whether it has been exercised reasonably.[31]
   
   While applying the doctrine of substantive ultra vires to delegated legislation, the courts do not look merely at the express words of the enabling provision in the parent statute, but go beyond them and also imply certain restrictions therein. This approach to some extent helps in preservation of individual liberty, strengthening of judicial control over delegated legislation and giving a somewhat broader dimension to the doctrine of ultra vires.[32]
    
8. Delegate further delegates (Sub delegation)
   The maxim Delegatus non potest delegare (a delegate cannot further delegate) applies to delegated legislation also and it is not possible for the delegate to sub-delegate the power conferred on him unless the parent Act authorises him to do so either expressly or by necessary implication
   
   Section 4 of essential Supplies (temporary Powers) Act, 1946 certain powers were sub delegated by the Central Government to the Provincial Government subject to the Condition that before making any order, concurrence of the Provincial Government without obtaining concurrence of the Central Government. The Order was held ultra vires as the condition was not satisfied.[33]
    
9. Delegated Legislation excludes Judicial review
10. Delegated legislation operates retrospective

Effectiveness Of Judicial Control Over Delegated Legislation

The weakness of Administrative Law's "cure and remedy" feature would lead directly to administrative lawlessness and arbitrariness. According to WADE, "Judicial review is also a critical tool for maintaining the rule of law and keeping public authorities within the permissible limits."[34]

The major problem to-day is to bring these bodies under the discipline of public law. This can be done to a large extent by bringing these bodies within the compass of Judicial Control so that those bodies are subjected to the discipline of Rule of Law.

The Judicial Control main function is to uphold the Principle of Rule of law and to check that the Laws made by the Parliament are not ultra vires under constitution specifically it should not violate the fundamental rights of person and principle of natural justice.

An Action which is ultra-vires is without jurisdiction null & void but same it not applicable in the parliamentary control.

The court cannot take upon itself the task of statutory authorities. It can act as an examiner or the Selection Board and examine discrepancies and inconsistencies in question papers and the evaluation thereof. It was not permissible for it to examine question papers and answer sheets itself, particularly when the State Public Service Commission had assessed inter alia merit of the candidates.

Effectiveness of Judicial Control over Delegated legislation.

1. If bodies affecting rights of the people are kept outside judicial control, then the danger is that the country may be spotted with petty caesers and despots all over the place.
2. Effective control against the abuse of delegated powers of legislation must come from the legislature itself, primarily at the time of delegation, and secondarily in the supervision of the manner in which they are exercised.
3. apex court will frame rules relating to its power of review in the sphere of delegated legislation, so that it could serve as guidelines to all High Courts and also to the Govt., to keep in mind while framing rules as well to the legislatures, while enacting laws.
4. Judicial form of control is said to be more effective form of control because the courts have the power to strike down a law if it is ultra vires to the parent statute or to the Constitution.
5. The implementation of the procedural form of control is also entrusted to the judiciary who determine the legality of the subordinate law-making process through the rules of procedural ultra vires.
6. The Court can ensure that the statutory functions are not carried out at the whims and caprices of the officers of the government/local body in an arbitrary manner.
7. Delegated legislation may be struck down on the ground of nonapplication of mind on the part of delegatee to the relevant facts in taking decisions.[35]

Which Control Is Effective?

So, it is well known that null of control is alone effective to take the charge control and safeguards both are required & necessary to be present. Both the control is having ineffectiveness also. But Judicial Control is more effective then Parliamentary control as it has a direct power to make law void or invalid.

Conclusion
The Indian Constitution requires delegated legislation as his helps the Legislature to concentrate on more important matters and frame policies regarding it. There are bye-rules, orders, bye laws, etc. Present legislation needs technicality & professional knowledge of topics from various areas, and the lawmakers, such as politicians who do not adequate knowledge over the subject or they are not expertise. So, Delegated legislation is versatile, easier to amend, and revocable than ordinary law when there is excess use or failure to enforce it.

However, Parliamentary power over delegated legislation is regarded as weak, undeveloped in the current legal system. The reasons for its failure are that for every single matter too much reliance on the judiciary, lack of legal skills with the parliamentarians, etc., as India being a Quasi-federal system & division of power had failed to understand the importance of parliamentary control as control over excessive delegation. Furthermore, the court on which the parliamentary proceedings are heavily reliant is caught in the web of lack of common rules, as they decide cases on different grounds differently. In that case, a specific direction has not been given by the judiciary.

But, the judicial control over delegated legislation in India is complete. constitutional position of judiciary is such that its right to examine legislation, whether emanating directly from Parliament or from subordinate authorities, cannot be restricted. A law purporting to confer the statutory finality on subordinate legislation would not bind the court. But it is stated that judicial control from its very nature, may be of limited effectiveness. The court may step in to prevent the abuse of power or its exercise for purpose other than those for which it is delegated.

Protection against the misuse of delegated legislative powers must come from the legislature itself, mainly at the time of delegation, and secondly to look after the way they are exercised. In a democratic system the government has to respond to the wishes and opinions of those who would be influenced by its laws. There is no sure measure of a policy's success except that it is in line with people's real interests, gaining support, gratitude and satisfaction from them. Finally, we need to formulate strategies that will make the rapidly increasing subordinate legislation readily available to those concerned, in an intelligible way. In India all these must be achieved to achieve an effective structure of delegated legislation.

Bibliography
For the completion of this research paper following sources are referred
Books

1. C.K. Takwani, Administrative Law.
2. S.P. Sathe, Administrative Law

End-Notes:

1. Vasanlal Maganbhai Sanjanwala and the Pratap Spinning and Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. the State of Bombay, A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 4; M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd. v. Workmen of M/s. Tata Iron and Steel Co. Ltd., A.I.R. 1972 S.C. 1917.
2. Jyoti Parshad v. Union Territory of Delhi, A.I.R. 1961 S.C. 1602
3. Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1979 SC 321.
4. Sir Cecil Carr, Delegated Legislation (1921) I.
5. Principles of Administrative Law (2013) 44; See also, Yardley, A source Book of English Administrative Law (1970) 36.
6. C.K Takwani, Lectures on Administrative law, Eastern Book Company,2019 6th edition
7. Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab AIR 1979 SC 321
8. Principles of Administrative law (2007) 175 See also, Wade & Forsyth, Administrative Law (2009) 764 – 766.
9. Lohia Machines Limited v. Union of India AIR 1985 SC 421
10. http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essay/constituional-law/parliamentary-control-of-administrative-rule-making-constituional-law-essay, last accessed on 10 April 2018
11. http://www.linkedin.com/pulse/effectivenss-parliamentary-control-over-delegated-legislation-bharat-kumar-singh accessed on 10 April 2018
12. Delegated legislation in India, ILI 1964, Pg. no. 166-169
13. C.K Takwani, Lectures on Administrative law, Eastern Book Company,2010
14. AIR 1960 SC 430
15. AIR 1966 SC 385
16. Treatise on Administrative law,1996 Vol 1 Pg. no. 136
17. Parliamentary control of delegated legislation, Public law, 1956 Pg. no. 200
18. Laxmikanth, Public administration, Tata Mc-graw-hill education, Pg no. 212,
19. Concise Oxford English Dictionary (2002) 1555; P.R. Aiyar, Advanced Law Lexicon Vol. IV (2005) 4796; Justice C.K. Thakkar, Encyclopaedic Law Lexicon, Vol. IV (2009) 4838- 4839.
20. C.K.Takwani, Lectures on Administrative Law, 5th edn., 2012, Eastern Book Company, p.172.
21. Ibid.
22. (1985) 1 SCC 641.
23. I.P. Massey, Administrative Law, 6th edn., 2005, Eastern Book Company, p. 118.
24. AIR 1951 SC 118.
25. AIR 1954 SC 224.
26. (2000) 3 SCC 40.
27. Lectures on administrative law C.K. TAWANI 6th edition. EBC
28. AIR 1977 SC 1361.
29. M.P. Jain & S.N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law, 6th enlarged edn., 2007, Wadhwa and Co. Law Publishers, p.146.
30. (2003) I SCC 591: AIR 2003 Sc 250.
31. Bhagabati Prosad Banerjee & Bhaskar Prosad Banerjee, Judicial Control of Administrative Action, 1st edn., 2001, Wadhwa and Company Law Publishers, p. 120.
32. Id 32, p.147.
33. Radhakisan Laxminarayan v. State, AIR 1952 Nag 387.
34. WADE & FORSYTH, Administration Law, 34. (VIII Ed. 2000).
35. Vasu Dev Singh v Union of India, (2006) 12 SCC 753

Written By: Prateek Kumar Patel, 2nd Year Student - Presidency university Bangalore