Natural Justice and Its Principles

The concept of natural justice though not provided in Pakistan’s Constitution but it is considered
as necessary element for the administration of justice. Natural justice is a concept of common
law which has its origin in ‘Jus Natural’ which means a law of nature. In its layman language
natural justice means natural sense of what is right and wrong and in its technical sense it is
synonymous with fairness. Natural justice has a very wide application in administrative
discretion. It aims to prevent arbitrariness and injustice towards the citizens with an act of
administrative authorities.

In its initial, the concept of natural justice was confined to the Judicial proceeding only but with
the advent of welfare state the powers of administrative authorities have considerably increased
as a result it becomes impossible for law to determine the fair procedure to be followed by each
authority while adjudicating any disputes or any quasi-judicial proceedings.

Therefore, courts have made a remedy by establishing a norm to be follow by administrative

authorities while exercising theirs powers and performing their functions. Administrative
authorities being a law executer must provide benefits to the people but such objective cannot be
fulfill in absence of effective control on the powers given to them.

Court in order to prevent abuse of power and to check on their limits has evolved the principles
of natural justice as important safeguards against injustice. The object of natural justice is to
secure justice to the citizens and prevent contempt of justice. Decisions which violate the natural
justice shall stand null and void. [i]

Principles of Natural Justice

According to traditional English law natural justice classified into two principles i.e

1. Nemo judex in causa sua (rule against bias)

2. Audi alteram partem (rule of fair hearing)

Nemo judex causa in sua means rule against bias. It is the first principles of natural justice
which says no man shall be judge in his own cause or a deciding authority must be impartial and
neutral while deciding any case. Thus the principle signify that in a circumstances where a judge
or deciding authority is suspected to be bias and partial then he/she shall be disqualify from
determining any case before them. It formulates that justice should not only be done but seen to
be done. Proceedings before any adjudicating authority must be according to the principles of
natural justice.

Where it is found that a judge who is deciding any dispute has its own interest or some outcome
derived from such case then the decision given by the authority shall not be execute or it remains
void. It is said that impartiality is the best characteristics for good administration. Human nature
is such that a person ordinarily cannot take an objective decision in a case when he himself found
an interest, as very rarely can person take decision against his own interest. A person can apply
his mind effectively when he follows impartiality. The rule against bias thus avoids possibility of
partial decisions. It also ensures public confidence in legal system of a country. [ii]

Different types of Bias

a) Personal Bias- This is a most common bias that arises out of certain relationship between
decision making authority and the parties. Here a judge may be a friend, relative or business
associate of a party. He may have an enmity or rivalry against one of the party. In view of these
factors there is likelihood that judge may be biased towards one party or prejudiced toward other.

In Cottle vs Cottle, the chairman of the bench was a friend of the wife’s family who had
instituted matrimonial proceedings against her husband. The wife had told the husband that
chairman would decide the case in her favor. The divisional court ordered rehearing. It later
turned out that the chairman was a friend of wife’s family.

b) Pecuniary bias- Pecuniary bias arises when the adjudicator has monetary or financial interest
in the subject matter of the dispute. Least pecuniary interest in the subject matter of litigation
will disqualify any person from acting as a judge.

c) Subject matter bias- Subject matter simply means the “issue in question” or “the issue in
controversy” or “issue before the Judge”. Bias as to subject matter may arise when the Judge has
general interest in the subject matter in dispute. It may arise also when the deciding authority is
directly or otherwise involved in subject matter of the case.

Audi alteram partem (rule of fair hearing)

It means “hear the other side” or “let the other side heard as well”. This is the second most
fundamental rule of natural justice that says no one should be condemned unheard. In a
circumstances where a person against whom any action is sought to be taken and his right or
interest is being affected, shall be given an equal opportunity of being heard and defend himself.

It gives right the party to respond to the evidence against them and to choose legal representative
of their own choice. Any adjudicating authorities while deciding a dispute between parties the
principles of natural justice forms a fundamental fair procedure among the parties. It is the duty
of every person or body exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions to act in good faith and to
listen fairly both the sides before passing any order.

No party will made to suffer in person without giving not only fair opportunity of being heard
but to correct any relevant statement made, which is prejudicial to any of them.[vii] While
deciding any case fairly it is not mandatory for any decision making authority to follow the same
procedure as that followed by a Court.

In case if the Legislature specifically authorizes an administrative authority to proceed without

giving an opportunity of heard, then except in case of recognised exceptions, the law would be
violative of the principles of fair hearing which is now read into Articles 14 and 21 of the
Constitution. The sole purpose of rule of fair hearing as to the Apex Court was to avoid the
failure of justice. Thus, the essence of this principle is “the right of fair hearing” or “the right to
be heard”. Therefore any decisions which violate the principle of audi alteram partem such can
be quashed by court as against the principles of natural justice.

Components of fair hearing

There are some essential requirements in order to constitute the principle of fair hearing. These
are as follow:

A) Notice:

The term notice is derived from the Latin word “notifia” which means “being known”. It thus
means knowledge of circumstances or to make something known, of what a man was or might be
ignorant of before. In order to constitute a legal proceeding against any person the first
requirement of fair hearing is to serve notice to the affected person to show cause against the
proposed action and seek his explanation. Hearing starts with the issuance of notice to the
affected person.
Any order passed without giving notice to the person is against the principles of natural justice
and is void ab initio.
Even if the Statue does not provide any provision about giving of notice, and if such order
adversely affects the rights of an individual, in such cases also the notice is required to be given.
A notice must be adequate and contain:

 the time, place and nature of hearing

 a statement of specific charges or grounds and proposed action which the person has to
meet
 must be clear and unambiguous
 must afford the party sufficient time, to prepare his case
 not only provide the sufficient information relating to the case, but he ----- must also be
informed of the penalty proposed to be imposed in case of his failure to meet the case
against him
 legal authority under which hearing is to be held

The manner in which the notice is to be served is prescribed under statute. E.g Negotiable
Instrument Act, 1881 requires that if a cheque is dishonored proper notice must be given by post
or courier. Personal information held not proper.

Exceptions to Notice
In certain circumstances the requirement as to giving notice to the concerned person may not be
said to be mandatory.
Some of such cases may be:

1. When the affected person suo motto makes the representation without receiving the
notice.
2. Where the knowledge of the matter in dispute is imputable to the concerned person.
3. Where no prejudice caused to the party

B) Right to know the evidence against him:

The principle of fair hearing requires that there must be full disclosure of evidential facts and of
all documents. It means to know the materials on which the authority is going to make a
decision. It is a part of right to defend oneself. The general principle is that the adjudicating
authority must base its decision on the material known to the parties. No evidence can be taken
into consideration which has not material known to the party concerned. It would be violative of
natural justice to take evidence behind the back of the concerned person.

C) Cross Examination:

Cross examination is one of the effective methods of establishing truth and exposing falsehood.
While in administrative adjudications it is not necessarily mean that the right of cross
examination of witness should be given to the person concerned. It depends upon the facts and
circumstances of the case i.e unless the circumstances demand that in the absence of the right to
cross examination, the party cannot put up an effective defence in his favor.

D) Representation by a lawyer:

The fourth requirement as to the fair hearing is legal representation or representation by a lawyer.
Everyone should be given a chance to represent himself or herself in the court of law through
lawyer of their own choice.
In administrative proceedings the right of representation by a lawyer is not ordinarily considered
as an important part of natural justice [xvii] and as such is not claimable as a matter of right,
unless the said right is conferred by the statute.

In cases where statute is silent, the courts have in certain situations recognized that some
professional assistance must be given to the party to make his right to defend himself
meaningful. Such situation may arise when the affected party is illiterate or a question of law is
involved or the matter is complicated or technical or where expert evidence is on record.

E) Right to know evidence:

In the matter of administrative adjudication, the party must have a right to know the materials
upon which the authority is going to make a decision. No evidence should be taken at the back of
other party. There are so many judicial or quasi-judicial pronouncements where non-disclosure
of evidence to the affected person has been held to be fatal to hearing proceedings. Adjudicating
authority must base its decisions on the material known to the parties. It would be violative of
natural justice to take evidence behind the back of the concerned person.

When Natural can be claimed?

Natural justice can be claimed where the proceedings is judicial or quasi-judicial like panchayat
and tribunals etc. It envisaged the concept of fairness, just and basic moral principles. In a
present welfare state with complex socio economics problems the functions of the government
has been increase and in the same manner administrative authorities has acquired vast powers
which might affect private rights without any adequate safeguards or some protection. Due to
this factor procedural fairness is regarded as an integral part of administrative authorities.

Reasoned Decisions:
A reasoned decision means a decision which must contain reasons in support of it. Natural
Justice required that the party has a right to know not only the decision but also the reasons. This
is not a universally established law although it might provide in statute. Where the duty is
required by the statute then the authority is bound to give reasoned decisions in all cases to
which the provision applies. But in absence of statutory requirement, the courts advise the
judicial or quasi-judicial bodies to assign reasons, so that it justify the order. It is called as
speaking orders.

Basically, it has three grounds on which it relies:

1. The aggrieved party has the chance to demonstrate before the appellate and revisional
court that what was the reason which makes the authority to reject it.
2. It is a satisfactory part of the party against whom the decision is made.
3. The responsibility to record reasons works as obstacles against arbitrary action by the
judicial power vested in the executive authority.

Conclusion:
The principles of natural justice have been adopted by the judiciary to protect public rights
against the arbitrary decision by the administrative authorities. At all the stages of the
proceedings the main motive of the principles of natural justice is to prevent miscarriage of
justice. One must keep in mind that in order to held the decision of the adjudicating authorities as
valid principles of natural justice is equally important in procedure.