Introduction:

During the last 300 years or more in Indian History law reform has been a continuing process.
Reform process had been ad hoc and not institutionalized through duly constituted law reform
agencies in the ancient period, when religious and customary law occupied the field. However,
Law Commissions were constituted by the Government from time to time and it recommended
legislative reforms with a view to consolidate, clarify and codify particular branches of law
where there is a vacuum and Government felt the necessity for it, since the third decade of the
nineteenth century. The first Commission of similar type was established in 1834 under the
Charter Act of 1833 under the Chairmanship of Lord Macaulay through which codification of the
Penal Code, the Criminal Procedure Code and a few other matters were recommended. During a
span of fifty years the second, third and fourth Law Commissions were constituted in 1853, 1861
and 1879, which contributed much to enrich the Indian Statute Book with a large variety of
legislation on the pattern of the then prevailing English Laws adapted to Indian conditions.

After independence, the Constitution of India with its Fundamental Rights and Directive
Principles of State Policy demanded to reform the laws as per the needs of a democratic legal
order in a plural society. Though the Constitution of India stipulated the continuation of pre-
Constitution Laws (Article 372) till they are amended or repealed, the parliament and the society
demanded to establish a Central Law Commission for the purpose of recommending revision and
updating the inherited laws to serve the emerging and dynamic needs of the country. The result is
that the Government of India established the First Law Commission of Independent India in
1955 by an executive order with the then Attorney-General of India, Mr. M. C. Setalvad, as its
Chairman. Since then twenty-one law Commissions have been formed, each with a term of three-
years and with different terms of reference.

The Ministry of Law in consultation with the concerned administrative Ministries considers the
reports of the Law commission and are submits to Parliament from time to time. The Courts,
academic and public discourses cites them and acts upon by the concerned Government
Departments depending on the Government's recommendations. Till now the Law Commission
of India has forwarded 262 Reports on different subjects.
It acts as an advisory body but has been a key instrumentality in the process of law reform in
India. In order to face new situations and problems and to amend law which calls for an
amendment, a body like the Law Commission is absolutely essential as it is a body which is not
committed to any political party and it consists of judges and lawyers, who are expert in the field
and who would bring to bear upon the problems purely judicial and impartial minds. The
parliament is very busy in day-to-day debates and discussions, therefore its members do not have
the necessary time to consider legal changes required to meet the new situations and problems in
a constructive manner.

The main function of the law commission is to study the existing laws, suggest amendments to
the same if necessary, and to make recommendations for enacting new laws. The
recommendations for amendment of the existing laws are made by the commission in two ways
i.e., either suo motu or on the request of the government.

The Law commission through its various reports has reformed many laws relating to
Administrative Law. However, the author restricts her review on three of such reports issued by
the Law commission that are mentioned below,

i. Government and Public Sector Undertaking Litigation Policy and Strategies Report No:
126, 1988.
ii. Need for creating office of Ombudsman and for evolving legislative administrative
measures inter-alia to relieve hardships caused by inordinate delays in settling Provident
Fund claims of beneficiaries. Report No:137, Year:1990.
iii. Review of functioning of Central Administrative Tribunal, Customs, Excise and Gold
(Control) Appellate Tribunal and Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal. 162, 1998.

Government and Public Sector Undertaking Litigation Policy and Strategies Report No:
126, 1988: