Statutory delegation and sub-delegation limits bar unauthorised recovery orders under a quasi-judicial damages power.

Section 94-A permitted delegation by the Corporation to an officer or authority subordinate to it, but not a further sub-delegation unless the statute expressly or by necessary implication allowed it. The Court treated the power to levy damages under Section 85-B as quasi-judicial, requiring hearing of the employer and consideration of objections before imposition. It therefore held that the resolution authorising the Director General to empower another officer was beyond Section 94-A, and the office order issued under that invalid sub-delegation could not sustain the impugned orders. Relief was limited: amounts already recovered were not reopened, while unrecovered claims could still be pursued afresh.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Corporation's resolution authorising the Director General to levy and recover damages under Section 85-B and to permit another officer to exercise that power was valid under Section 94-A, and whether the impugned orders made by Regional Directors pursuant to such sub-delegation were sustainable.

Analysis: Section 94-A permitted delegation by the Corporation to an officer or authority subordinate to it, but the text did not support a further sub-delegation by the delegate to another officer. The power under Section 85-B was treated as quasi-judicial because the employer had to be heard and objections had to be considered before damages were imposed. Applying the principle against sub-delegation, the Court held that the resolution dated 28-2-1976 was beyond the scope of Section 94-A to the extent it allowed the Director General to authorise any other officer. The office order issued on that basis also fell with the invalid portion of the resolution. At the same time, the Court declined to unsettle amounts already realised during the relevant period and protected the settled position, while leaving open fresh proceedings where damages had not yet been recovered.

Conclusion: The sub-delegation was invalid and the Regional Directors could not rely on it for the impugned orders, but the relief was confined so that amounts already recovered were not reopened and unrecovered claims could be pursued afresh.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory power may be delegated only to the extent authorised by the enabling provision, and a further sub-delegation is impermissible unless the statute expressly or by necessary implication permits it.

---