Honble SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J.–Meaningful question that arises for our consideration in the instant matters is whether provisions contained in Section 79 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act 1959 are open to attack on the ground of excessive delegation.

(2). The prayer of the petitioners in D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 772/2000, is as under :

(i) to declare the provisions of Section 79 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 (in short 1959 Act) to be ultravires of the Constitution.

(ii) to declare the appointment of the Managing Committee consisting of respondents 2, 3, and 4 to be illegal and null and void and action of the managing committee be struck down.

(iii) to restrain the respondents 2, 3 and 4 from interfering in the management affairs of Shri Dadu Dayalu Mahasabha and its elected managing committee consisting of respondents 6 to 16.

(3). Three other writ petitions related to management of Shri Dadu Dayalu Mahasabha bearing Nos. 5559/99, 936/2001 & 6361/2002 pending before the Single Bench were also ordered to be tagged together.

(4). Section 79 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959 (for short 1959 Act) authorises the State Government to provide by order for removal of difficulties in giving effect to the provisions of the Act. It reads as under-

``If any difficulty arises in giving effect to the provisions of this Act, the State Government may, as occasion may require, by order, give such directions, not inconsistent with such provisions, which appear it to be necessary for the purpose of removing the difficulty.

(5). The main grounds of challenge of the validity of Section 79 of 1959 Act are-

(i) The provisions of Section 79 of 1959 Act are nothing else but abdication of legislative power by the State Legislature which under the Constitutional law is not permissible.

(ii) It amounts to exercise of Legislative powers which cannot be delegated.

(iii) This section, by providing that the order must not be inconsistent with the other provisions of the Public Trusts Act, is not saved by the vide of the delegation of the legislative authority.

(iv) This section authorities the State Government to determine for itself what purpose of the Act is and to make provisions for removal of doubts and difficulties, normally such functions is of the legislature to remove any difficulties or doubts.

(v) Exercise of the legislative authority cannot be delegated to executive authority.

(vi) Wordings of Section 79 conferring such a wide power on the State Government so as to act in any manner it may think necessary even though the same may not be inconsistent.

(6). Mr. B.P. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners canvassed that Section 79 is ultravires to the Constitution as it amounts to excessive delegation. Reliance is placed on M/s. Jalan Trading Co. Private Ltd. vs. Mill Mazdoor Sabha (1) and State of Tamil Nadu vs. K. Sabanayagam and another (2).

(7). Constitution Bench of Honble Supreme Court in M/s. Jalan Trading Co. Private Ltd. vs. Mill Mazdoor Sabha (supra) had occasion to consider the validity of section 37 of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965 which authorises the Government to provide by order for removal of doubts or difficulties in giving effect to the provisions of the Act. It was observed by their Lordships of the Supreme Court that it is for the Legislature to make provisions for removal of doubts and difficulties but Section 37 of the Act contains a provision that the order must not be inconsistent with the purposes of the Act and another provision in the section made the order of the Government final. Their Lordships therefore held that there was the vice of delegation of legislation to executive authority. Two reasons were given by their Lordships. First, the section authorised the Government to determine for itself what the purpose of the Act were and to make provisions for removal of doubts or difficulties. Secondly, the power to remove the doubt or difficulties by altering the provisions of the Act would in substa

Click Here to Read the rest of this document