ALO Law Office- IDT Tax I Arbitration I Litigation

Date: 29.01.2026

Judicial Review of Delegated Legislation under the Customs Act and Allied Rules vis a vis The Constitutional framework

​​ ​​  ​  ​ ​​ ​

Summary

This Article examines the constitutional discipline of delegated legislation in the context of customs law. It argues that while modern governance requires administrative agility, the legitimacy of subordinate legislation depends on fidelity to legislative policy, legality under the Constitution, and adherence to judicially crafted standards of review. The study constructs a unified framework for assessing customs notifications, rules, regulations, and circulars through four constitutional lenses: legislative policy, rights‑compatibility, standards of review, and institutional accountability.

The first chapter situates delegated legislation within India’s constitutional architecture and explains its growing centrality to customs administration. The second chapter surveys classical and Indian scholarship—Dicey, Wade & Forsyth, De Smith, Seervai, M.P. Jain, and I.P. Massey—together with doctrinal commentary on leading cases, to isolate the core standards of control. The third chapter elaborates the legal framework—Articles 13, 245–246, 265; Sections 25 and 156–159 of the Customs Act; and allied statutes—demonstrating that subordinate instruments are both enabled and constrained by constitutional and statutory design. The fourth chapter applies these standards to key judgments, presenting a comparative analysis that confirms a consistent judicial insistence on statutory fidelity, reasonableness, and competent authority. The fifth chapter consolidates findings and proposes reforms: guidance clauses in enabling provisions, pre‑notification consultation, statements of reasons and impact, stronger parliamentary scrutiny, and structured proportionality for burdensome measures.

The dissertation concludes that delegated legislation in customs can achieve both legality and effectiveness when drafted with clear statutory authority, supported by reasons, and implemented with transparency and proportionality. The proposed reforms align with the National Logistics Policy’s goals of predictability and facilitation without compromising constitutional discipline.

This Article also includes a short Non-Doctrinal Data survey done in an online mode using Google Form and the responses were received from across India. It has not been published here due to the Non-Disclosure agreed between the Author and the Participants.

Abstract

This Article evaluates the constitutional limits of delegated legislation under the Customs Act, 1962 and allied rules. It develops an integrated framework for judicial review based on Articles 13, 245–246, and 265 of the Constitution and the ultra vires, arbitrariness, proportionality, and legitimate‑expectation doctrines. Drawing on classical administrative‑law theory and Indian constitutional scholarship, the study maps enabling provisions (Sections 25, 156–159) and interfaces with allied statutes. A comparative analysis of landmark Supreme Court decisions—ranging from In re Delhi Laws Act (1951) to Canon India (2021) and recent cases—shows a consistent insistence on legislative policy supremacy, statutory fidelity, and competent authority.

The dissertation also focuses on specific questions raised in the Empirical Data Survey which glaringly points out to the reality of “Arbitrariness” in Executive orders being pronounced by Competent Authorities in the Customs Department.

The participants were located across India and participated in an online survey through Google Form. The Data is verifiable with the details of the participants mentioned in the Empirical survey report. The Empirical Data survey report is placed as Annexure-A at the end of this research Paper.

The dissertation proposes reforms in legislative drafting, administrative process, and judicial oversight to enhance transparency, accountability, and rights‑compatibility in customs rule‑making.

List of Cases and Statutes

• In re Delhi Laws Act, 1951 SCR 747

• Harishankar Bagla v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1954 SCR 380

• Raj Narain Singh v. Chairman, Patna Administration Committee, 1954 SCR 1279

• Avinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (1979) 1 SCC 137

• Kunj Behari Lal Butail v. State of Himachal Pradesh, (2000) 3 SCC 40

• Canon India Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, 2021 (376) E.L.T. 3 (S.C.)

• Constitution of India: Articles 13, 14, 19(1)(g), 21, 245–246, 265 • Customs Act, 1962: Sections 25, 156–159; General Clauses Act, 1897: Sections 21, 23, 24

Source: Judicial Orders, CBIC Website, Constitution of India

Disclaimer

Handy Download:

Write to us at office@aadrikaalaw.com

Tel: +91-11-4999 2707 I +91-9999005379

www.aadrikaalaw.com