top of page

Regulating Act 1773

This Section is designed to help Students Understand Quickly and Easily all Relevant Facts and the backstory associated with the Regulating Act of 1773 brought in by the British Crown in India. This Article will be all a student will need about the act for clearing UPSC or any State Civil Services Examination.


A Brief Backstory that led to the passing of the Act:

  • East India Company landed in severe Financial Crisis and had to ask for a loan of one Million Pounds

  • Corruption and Nepotism was plaguing the Management of the EIC

  • Terrible Famine in Bengal which caused a huge population to perish

  • The Dual System of Governance introduced by Robert Clive was a Magnificent Failure

  • All this resulted in absolute Lawlessness in Bengal

  • Finally Defeat of the Company by Mysore's Hyder Ali was the last straw.

The Various Provisions of the Act were as follows:

  • The Act permitted the Company to retain its possessions in Indian subcontinent but decided to begin regulating its activities.

  • The Act provided for the appointment of a Governor General along with Four counsellors in Calcutta Presidency jointly called Governor General in Council

  • Warren Hastings was appointed as the first Governor General of India (do not confuse with governor general of India)

  • Governor in Council at Madras and Bombay were brought under the control of Bengal especially about matters related to Foreign Policy (not permitted to wage wars)

  • The Company Directors were now elected for a period of Five Years and One Fourth had to retire every year and could not be reappointed.

  • The Company Directors had to make public all their correspondence on revenue, civil and military matters with Indian authorities before the British authorities.

  • The Supreme Court was established at Calcutta. Judges were from England and they could try on matters of Civil and Criminal jurisdiction over British subjects only and not Native subjects.

The Major Drawbacks of the Act:

  • The Governor General had no veto powers

  • The Act did not address the concerns of Indians who were paying revenue to the company

  • The Act did nothing to stop corruption

  • The Supreme Court's powers were not well defined

  • The Parliamentary controls that was sought in the activities of the company proved to be ineffective as their was no mechanism to study the reports of Governor General in Council


bottom of page