Retrospective delegation cannot validate a void quasi-judicial order without express statutory authority.

A statutory power to delegate executive authority under the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 could not be read as permitting retrospective delegation to validate an earlier order. The High Court held that delegation under Section 41(1) was an executive or administrative power, not a legislative one, and that retrospective operation could not be implied from general wording. Because the order under Section 42 was quasi-judicial and had been made before the notification, the later notification could not ratify a void act. The retrospective delegation was therefore invalid, and the earlier order remained without jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the State Government could, by notification, delegate its powers under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948, to the Additional Director with retrospective effect so as to validate an order made before the notification.

Analysis: The power under Section 41(1) to delegate functions under the Act was held to be an executive or administrative power, not a legislative one. A retrospective operation was not to be implied from the general language of the delegation provision, because retrospective validation of an order made without authority would require clear and express words. The statutory scheme of the Punjab General Clauses Act, 1898, showed that when the legislature intended particular ancillary powers such as issuing, amending, or rescinding notifications, it made specific provision, and no such express provision existed for retrospective delegation. The order under Section 42 was quasi-judicial in nature, and the later notification could not be treated as a ratification of an earlier void act.

Conclusion: The retrospective delegation was invalid and the order made before the notification was without jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: A statutory power to delegate executive authority does not include, by implication alone, power to confer that authority retrospectively so as to validate an order that was void when made; such validation requires express legislative authorization.

---