Examine the role of judicial review in ensuring procedural compliance in delegated legislation, with reference to the recent Supreme Court directive on aviation rules.

Q. Examine the role of judicial review in ensuring procedural compliance in delegated legislation, with reference to the recent Supreme Court directive on aviation rules. (15 marks, 250-350 words)

Delegated legislation lets the executive frame detailed rules under a parent statute, but its democratic legitimacy rests on procedure — prior publication, public consultation and laying before Parliament. Judicial review is the mechanism that keeps these safeguards from becoming a formality, as the Supreme Court's recent directive on rules under the Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024 illustrates.

Procedural safeguards that judicial review enforces - Parent-Act conformity: rules must stay within the powers conferred — the Adhiniyam (Act No. 16 of 2024) empowers the Centre to regulate the operation and use of aircraft, and rules must trace to that mandate [2]. - Prior publication and consultation: where the statute requires it, stakeholder consultation before finalisation is a condition of validity, not a courtesy. - Parliamentary laying: rules must be tabled, preserving legislative oversight over executive law-making.

The aviation rules directive - The Act, which came into force on 1 January 2025, replaced the colonial-era Aircraft Act, 1934 and re-established the DGCA, BCAS and the Aircraft Accidents Investigation Bureau as statutory bodies [1][3]. - Hearing a PIL on volatile airfares, ancillary charges and predatory pricing, a Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta directed the Centre to place the draft rules before it in a sealed cover within two weeks [4]. - The petitioner argued that public consultation is mandatory before tabling; the Court's willingness to examine draft rules shows review extending to the rule-making process, not merely the finished rule.

Limits - Courts test legality and procedure, not policy wisdom — fare-fixing remains an executive choice. - Sealed-cover scrutiny secures compliance but limits public transparency; intervention is also episodic, depending on litigation reaching the Court.

Judicial review thus supplies the missing accountability layer between an enabling Act and the rules that give it effect. Institutionalising pre-legislative consultation and time-bound tabling would reduce dependence on litigation, making participatory rule-making the norm and advancing the constitutional promise of fair procedure under Article 14.

(~315 words)

Sources: 1. Bill Summary — The Bharatiya Vayuyan Vidheyak, 2024, PRS Legislative Research — replacement of the Aircraft Act, 1934; DGCA, BCAS and AAIB as statutory authorities 2. The Bharatiya Vayuyan Adhiniyam, 2024 (Act No. 16 of 2024), India Code — scope of the Act and the Centre's rule-making powers 3. Year End Review 2024: Ministry of Civil Aviation, PIB — commencement of the Act from 1 January 2025 4. "SC asks Centre to place on record new aviation rules," The Hindu, 14 July 2026 — Bench composition, sealed-cover direction within two weeks, and the public-consultation contention