Delegatus Non Potest Delegare
Delegatus Non Potest Delegare: Meaning and Explanation
Latin Phrase: Delegatus non potest delegare
Translation: "A delegate cannot delegate."
Definition:
This legal principle means that a person (or authority) who has been delegated power or authority cannot further delegate that power to another person unless explicitly authorized to do so. The core idea is that the power is conferred specifically on the delegate, and they must exercise it themselves.
Rationale:
The original authority chooses the delegate based on trust, expertise, or discretion.
Allowing the delegate to further delegate might undermine the trust and purpose of the delegation.
Ensures accountability and proper exercise of power.
Exceptions:
If the law or the original authority expressly or impliedly allows the further delegation, then it may be valid.
Some powers, especially administrative or ministerial, may naturally involve sub-delegation.
Detailed Explanation
Delegation of power: When a statute or a superior authority delegates a power to a subordinate authority or official.
Sub-delegation (further delegation): When the subordinate authority tries to pass that power to yet another person.
The doctrine states that unless there is clear authority to do so, sub-delegation is invalid.
This principle preserves the integrity and accountability of power.
Important Case Laws Illustrating Delegatus Non Potest Delegare
1. Vaidyanatha Aiyar v. Ramaswami Aiyar (AIR 1925 Mad 16)
Facts: A Collector was delegated certain powers by the government. The Collector, without authority, delegated the power to a subordinate officer who passed an order.
Held: The Collector could not sub-delegate the power as the original delegation did not authorize it.
Principle: Delegation by a delegate without express or implied authority is void.
2. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (AIR 1969 SC 150)
Facts: The Supreme Court examined whether a delegated authority could delegate powers to a subordinate.
Held: The principle applies strictly unless the statute permits sub-delegation.
Significance: Emphasized that administrative officers cannot sub-delegate discretionary powers unless statute or superior authority explicitly allows.
3. R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (AIR 1979 SC 1628)
Facts: The case involved sub-delegation of power regarding the authority to accept tenders.
Held: The court reiterated that the original delegate cannot sub-delegate discretionary powers unless empowered.
Significance: Confirmed that violation of this principle can invalidate decisions.
4. Ramakrishna Pillai v. State of Madras (AIR 1956 SC 397)
Facts: A government official delegated certain powers to a subordinate officer.
Held: The court held that such sub-delegation was invalid because no authority was granted to sub-delegate.
Key Point: The court reinforced the concept that the delegate must act personally unless authorized.
5. Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India (AIR 1965 SC 1039)
Facts: Questioned the validity of sub-delegation of disciplinary powers by an authority.
Held: The Supreme Court stated that delegation of power is limited and the delegate must not sub-delegate unless expressly or impliedly authorized.
Outcome: Actions taken by unauthorized sub-delegate are void.
Summary of the Doctrine with Case Insights
| Case | Key Takeaway |
|---|---|
| Vaidyanatha Aiyar v. Ramaswami Aiyar | No sub-delegation without authority |
| A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India | Statutory power cannot be sub-delegated arbitrarily |
| R.D. Shetty v. IAAI | Discretionary powers can't be further delegated |
| Ramakrishna Pillai v. State of Madras | Delegate must act personally |
| Ranjit Thakur v. Union of India | Unauthorized sub-delegation invalidates act |
Additional Points
Difference between delegation and sub-delegation: Delegation is authorized by original authority; sub-delegation is passing on delegated power, which is generally not permitted.
Ministerial vs. Discretionary powers: Ministerial powers are routine and can sometimes be sub-delegated; discretionary powers involve judgment and cannot be sub-delegated.
Practical application: Governments, administrative agencies, and statutory bodies must be cautious in sub-delegating powers.
RELATED Blog
0 comments