Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Requirement to lay down the Rules before the Legislature is not mandatory:- The question arose as to whether the failure to lay the rules before the legislature would invalidate the rules or not. It was held by a full Bench in Megha Singh & Co. v. State, AIR 1977 P & H 297 that this infirmity will not invalidate the rules. Reliance was placed on a Supreme Court decision in Jag Mohd. v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1966 SC 385 , where in the Supreme Court did not pronounce the rules to be ineffective simply because there was failure to place the rules before the House of the State Legislature. In this connection reference may also be made to Krishan v. R.N.O., AIR 1956 Andhra 129 and Madhav Rao v. State of A.P , 1967 (2) And. W.R. 366 Where similar view was expressed by the Andhra pradesh High court. In this connection reference may be made to the case reported as Regin v. Immigration Appeals Tribunal, which was quoted by the Ful Bench in Mehga Singh Con v. State , AIR 1977 P & H a t page 30 (para No. 16) Mr. Justice O Chinnapa Reddy ( now Judge , Supreme Court of India ) who delivered the judgment of the Full Bench observed as under,- "Recently, in Regin v. Immigration Appeal Tribunal the question arose whether certain immigration rules had been laid before Parliament as required by the Immigration Appeals Act. The Lord Chief Justice or England and two of his companion judges. went into the matter and, on the evidence held that there was compliance with the requirement regarding laying. The question was not brushed aside on the ground that non-laying was of no consequence. In a case which came before the Court of Error of Barbados, Collymore, C.J was reported by Megarry have said:- "Where the Legislature delegates its law- making power to a subordinate authority and reserves the right to review the regulation made by such subordinate body, and if necessary to disallow them, and attaches conditions to secure that it shall have the opportunity to exercises its power of review as the supreme legislative authority such condition are man datory". It was further observed.- " Academic Lawyers like sir C.K Allen, Barnard Schwartz, R.R. Megarry (now Justice Megarry) and Prof. Kersell have all been greatly agitated about the problem of non-laying and very rightly too. One of the major problems of any liberal democracy, particularly a modern welfare State is that of controlling excessive executive action. The desire to attain the objection of securing 'social economic and political justice' necessarily results in intense activity in the legislative and the executive fields. 24 Haryana [S. 1] Unable to deal with matters of detail the legislature is too often content to lay down the guidelines and leave the details to be worked out by expert executives. It may perhaps be said that in recent years subordinate legislate has grown in geometrical progression to legislation as such. With the growth of subordinate legislation has grown the possibility of abuse in the making of such subordinate legislation, not because of any evil design on the part of the executive but because of the well known tendency on the part of the executive to get on with the job with out any possible interference. In fact a well inmentioned executive armed with power may turnout to be the most arbitrary of men. There is thus a danger of the expert executives becoming masters of the people they are employed to serve. There is an even greater danger of indifferently made delegated legislation wrecking parent legislation as effectively as by design. We are quite familiar with such delegated legislation . So it is necessary for the legislature to control the executive and laying before the Legislatures is one of the devices by which such control is exercised. But then is it for the Courts to declare delegated legislation as invalid on the ground of non-laying when the legislature itself attached or prescribe no consequence to non-laying" . *The Punjab Cinemas (Regulation) Rules, 1952 Part I Introductory