Delegated legislation, also known as subsidiary or subordinate legislation, refers to laws made by executive authorities or other bodies under the authority granted to them by an Act of Parliament. While essential for the efficient functioning of modern governance due to the complexity and volume of legislative tasks, it carries the inherent risk of administrative discretion being misused. The statement rightly emphasizes the need for clarity and adherence to legislative limits to prevent such misuse.

Misuse of administrative discretion can manifest in various forms, including arbitrary decision-making, acting beyond the scope of delegated powers (ultra vires), discrimination, mala fide intentions, or failure to consider relevant factors. To check such misuse, several mechanisms are employed:

1. Legislative Control: The parent Act itself can impose limits on the scope of delegated powers. Parliament exercises control through:

   • Laying Procedures: Requiring delegated legislation to be laid before Parliament, allowing members to scrutinize and, in some cases, annul it.
   • Scrutiny Committees: Parliamentary committees (e.g., Committee on Subordinate Legislation) review delegated legislation for clarity, consistency, and adherence to the parent Act.
   • Consultation Requirements: Mandating consultation with affected parties or expert bodies before making rules.

2. Judicial Control: Courts play a crucial role in ensuring that delegated legislation and administrative actions remain within legal bounds. This is primarily done through:

   • Judicial Review: Courts can review the legality of delegated legislation and administrative decisions. Grounds for review include ultra vires (acting beyond powers), procedural impropriety (failure to follow fair procedures), irrationality (decisions no reasonable authority would make), and proportionality.
   • Constitutional Validity: Ensuring that delegated legislation does not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions.

3. Procedural Safeguards: Administrative procedures themselves can act as checks:

   • Publication: Requiring delegated legislation to be published ensures public awareness and transparency.
   • Reasoned Decisions: Mandating that administrative bodies provide reasons for their decisions helps prevent arbitrary actions.
   • Right to be Heard (Audi Alteram Partem): Ensuring affected parties have an opportunity to present their case.

4. Internal Administrative Controls: Within the executive branch, mechanisms exist to ensure proper use of discretion:

   • Codes of Conduct and Ethics: Guiding principles for civil servants.
   • Hierarchical Control: Superior officers reviewing decisions of subordinates.
   • Ombudsman/Vigilance Commissions: Independent bodies investigating complaints against administrative actions.

5. Public and Media Scrutiny: An informed public and vigilant media can expose instances of misuse, creating pressure for accountability and reform.

By combining these legislative, judicial, procedural, and internal controls, the potential for misuse of administrative discretion in delegated legislation can be significantly mitigated, ensuring that governance remains fair, transparent, and within the rule of law.