Administrative law

Principles of Natural justice

Submitted to lovely professional university
In the proper fulfillment of requirements for the award of the degree of Bachelors of Arts
Course Code: LAW314
CLASS: B.A LLB
SECTION: L1701
Roll no.:A20

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Mr. Anant faujdar Priya garg

(11718820)

1|Page
Acknowledgement

Working on the topic principles of natural justice was a very knowledgeable experience. The
documentation has actually helped me in enrichment my knowledge on the case and the
subject. The case along with relevant sections and case laws was discussed at deep lengths in
the class which helped me in making this project.
I feel highly privileged to work under the guidance of Sir and sincerely acknowledge his
efforts in directly and indirectly contributing of this piece of work.

Thank you Sir !

# Mr Anant Faujdar

2|Page
 Index

S.no Particulars Pg.no

1 Introduction 4
2 Natural justice 4-5
3 origin 5-6
4 Two principles 6
5 Purpose 6
6 When it can claimed 7
7 Brief of principles 7-10
8 Exceptions 11
9 Equity and natural justice 12-13
10 Conclusion 13

Introduction

The principles of natural justice are supposed to be as old as Adam and Eve. When Adam
disobeyed God by eating the forbidden fruit from the tree of knowledge, God did not punish

3|Page
Adam without giving him an opportunity. It is said, God called him and asked him,”Hast thou
eaten of the tree where I commanded thee that thou should not eat?; There are innumerable
facets of natural justice. Suffice to say the law has been developed in the twentieth century by
many historical decisions. In ordinary parlance it means such principles which govern the
justice to be done in natural manner or principles which are adhered to when justice is done
by the nature. In statutes, such principles are specifically provided and even if unprovided,
are read into a statute, to save it from the vice of arbitrariness, inequality, unfairness and bad
conscience. Such principles are inherent and back bone of the judicial system as well as
administrative, quasi-judicial or disciplinary action. It is rather the soul of an order or
judgment. Where the statute itself provides for a particular form of opportunity, it has to be
strictly followed, else in a manner well defined by the judgements and the precedents. It is
trite, justice not only should be done, it should appear to have been done, to avoid criticism,
doubt and suspicion.

Natural justice-

Principle of Natural Justice is derived from the word ‘Jus Natural’ of the Roman law and it
is closely related to Common law and moral principles but is not codified. It is a law of
nature which is not derived from any statute or constitution. The principle of natural justice is
adhered to by all the citizens of civilised State with Supreme importance. In the ancient days
of fair practice, at the time when industrial areas ruled with a harsh and rigid law to hire and
fire, the Supreme court gave its command with the passage of duration and establishment of
social, justice and economy statutory protection for the workmen.

According to De Smith, the term “natural justice expresses the close relationship between the
common law and moral principles and it has an impressive ancestry. It is also known as
sustainable justice, fundamental justice, universal justice, fair play in action”

Natural justice simply means to make a sensible and reasonable decision-making procedure
on a particular issue. Sometimes, it doesn’t matter what is the reasonable decision but, in the
end, what matters is the procedure and who all are engaged in taking the reasonable decision.
It is not restricted within the concept of ‘fairness’ it has different colours and shades which
vary from the context. Basically, natural justice consists of 3 rules.

4|Page
  The first one is “Hearing rule” which states that the person or party who is affected
by the decision made by the panel of expert members should be given a fair
opportunity to express his point of view to defend himself.
 Secondly, “Bias rule” generally expresses that panel of expert should be biased free
while taking the decision. The decision should be given in a free and fair manner
which can fulfil the rule of natural justice.
 And thirdly, “Reasoned Decision” which states that order, decision or judgement of
the court given by the Presiding authorities with a valid and reasonable ground.

In India, the principles of natural justice are firmly grounded in Article 14 &21 of the
Constitution. With the introduction of concept of substantive and procedural due process in
Article 21, all that fairness which is included in the principles of natural justice can be read
into Art. 21. The violation of principles of natural justice results in arbitrariness; therefore,
violation of natural justice is a violation of Equality clause of Art. 14.

Origin-

The principle of natural justice is a very old concept and it originated at an early age. The
people of Greek and roman were also familiar with this concept. In the days of Kautilya,
arthashastra and Adam were acknowledged the concept of natural justice. According to the
Bible, in the case of Eve and Adam, when they ate the fruit of knowledge, they were
forbidden by the god. Before giving the sentence, eve was given a fair chance to defend
himself and the same process was followed in the case of Adam too.

Later on, the concept of natural justice was accepted by the English jurist. The word natural
justice is derived from the Roman word ‘jus-naturale’ and ‘lex-naturale’ which planned the
principles of natural justice, natural law and equity.

“Natural justice is a sense of what is wrong and what is right.”

In India, this concept was introduced at an early time, the court said that the concept of
fairness should be in every action whether it is judicial, quasi-judicial, administrative and or
quasi-administrative work1.
1
Mohinder Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Commissioner

5|Page
The two limbs of the principles of natural justice:

The principles of natural justice comprise of the following two limbs:

 Nemo judex in causa sua - No one should be made a judge in his own cause or the

rule against bias.

 Audi Alteram Partem - Hear the other party or the rule of fair hearing or the rule

that no one should be condemned unheard.

Purpose of the principle- Natural justice

 To provide equal opportunity of being heard.

 Concept of Fairness.
 To fulfil the gaps and loopholes of the law.
 To protect the Fundamental Rights.
 Basic features of the Constitution.
 No miscarriage of Justice.

The principles of natural justice should be free from bias and parties should be given fair
opportunity to be heard and all the reasons and decision taken by the court should be
informed by the court to the respective parties.

Supreme court said that arriving at a reasonable and justifiable judgement is the purpose of
judicial and administrative bodies. The main purpose of natural justice is to prevent the act of
miscarriage of justice.

When it can be claimed?

Natural justice can be claimed when acting judicially or quasi-judicial like panchayat and
tribunals etc. as well. It includes the concept of fairness, basic moral principles and various
different kinds of biases and why the natural justice is required and what all special cases or
situation it includes where the principles of natural justice will not be applicable.

6|Page
In the case of the Province of Bombay vs. Khushaldas Advani, 2 it was said that natural justice
will be applicable on statutory as it is a basic principle of Natural justice which leads to
fairness and justice.

Nemo Judex In Causa Sua

The main aim of this rule is that the principles of fairness and impartiality must be observed
by treating all the parties to dispute fairly and equally. Here by fairness is meant that all the
parties to dispute be given equal opportunities to participate in the decision-making process
without favouring anyone. The requirement under impartiality is that a judge should approach
an issue without predisposition of a character or strength which prevents him/her from a
conclusion against his/her previous position. This principle has qualifications and is not
absolute. The requirement of the principle is that the decision-maker should be opened to
persuasion but don’t require that he/she must be with a bank mind .The rule against bias has
its origin in the following principles, which are:

1). No one should be a judge in his own cause;

2). Justice should not only be done but manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.

Types of Bias

1. Personal bias
2. Pecuniary bias
3. Official bias

 Personal bias arises from a relation between the party and deciding authority. Which
lead the deciding authority in a doubtful situation to make an unfair activity and give
judgement in favour of his person. Such equations arise due to various forms of
personal and professional relations. In order to challenge the administrative action
successfully on the ground of personal bias, it is necessary to give a reasonable reason
for bias.

2
1950 SCR 621

7|Page
 In Ramanand Prasad Singh & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors 3Supreme court held that
one of the members of the panel of selection committee his brother was a candidate in the
competition but due to this, the whole procedure of selection cannot be quashed.Here, to
avoid the act of biases at the turn of his brother respective panel member connected with the
candidate can be requested to go out from the panel of the selection committee. So, a fair and
reasonable decision can be made.

 Pecuniary bias

If any of the judicial body has any kind of financial benefit, how so ever small it may be will
lead to administrative authority to biases.

In Mohapatra vs. State of Orissa 4it was held that when the author of a book was a member
of the committee set up for selection of books, and his book was also under consideration by
that committee, the possibility of bias could not be ruled out and the selection by that
committee cannot be upheld. Thus, in addition to the direct personal interest, the test laid
down by the court is to consider the real likelihood of bias. In other words, probability of bias
is sufficient to invalidate the right to sit in judgment and there is no need to have the proof of
actual bias

 Official bias

The third type of bias is official bias or bias as to subject-matter. This may arise when the
judge has a general interest in the subject-matter. Only rarely will this bias invalidate
proceedings. A mere general interest in the general object to be pursued would not disqualify
a judge from deciding the matter. There must be some direct connection with the litigation.5

Audi Alteram Partem

This is the second long arm of natural justice which protects the ‘little man’ from arbitrary
administrative actions whenever his right to person or property is jeopardized. The expression
“Audi Alteram partem” simply implies that a person must be given an opportunity to defend
3
1996 SCC (4) 64, JT 1996 (4) 39
4
(AIR 1984 S.C. 1572),
5
Viraj vs. State of Orissa 1967 SC 158)

8|Page
himself. In the celebrated case of Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works 6the principle was
thus stated:-

“Even God did not pass a sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his
defence. “Adam” says God, “where art thou? Hast thou not eaten of the tree whereof I
commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat”

Right to fair hearing is a code of procedure and covers the following stages through which an
administrative adjudication is properly performed:

a) Right to notice-Valid and proper notice should be given to the required parties of the
matter to further proceed with the procedure of fair trial method. Even if the statute
does not include the provision of issue of notice then it will be given prior to making
decisions7
b) Right to present case and evidence-The notice must clearly indicate material on the
basis of which the proposed action is being taken. The right to know such material is
part of the right to defend oneself. Then only the person will have a fair opportunity to
defend, correct or contradict them8
c) Reasonable time to file Reply -After the notice has been received by the person, he
must be given opportunity to make a representation in reply thereto. This opportunity
must be real and effective. This right to make representation also involves grant of
sufficient time to prepare the reply9
d) Personal Hearing and Decision by the same officer -The requirement of fair hearing
involves decision being taken by the officer who heard the case. If after hearing, that
particular officer is transferred, normal rule would be that the successor must hear the
arguments afresh before he could pass an order10
e) Right to Cross Examination– Right of fair hearing includes the right to cross-
examination the statement made by the parties. If tribunals denied the right to cross-
examination then it will violate the principles of natural justice. And all the necessary
copies of documents should be given and failure of that will also encroach the
principle. The department should make available officers who are involved in the
procedure of investigating and do cross-examination.

6
[(1863) 143 ER 414],
7
 Fazalbhai vs. custodian. AIR 1961 SC 284
8
Kanda vs Govt. of Malaya 1962 A.C. 322)
9
(Jeramandas Punjabi Vs. UOI 1992 (57) ELT 36 BOM).
10
(Amir Singh AIR 1965 Punj 84).

9|Page
In certain exceptional cases, the right to cross-examination can be denied or rejected. Hari
Nath Mishra vs. Rajendra Medical College 11, under this case a male student was charged off
some indecent behaviour towards a female student. So, here the right to cross-examination
was denied for the male student as it will lead to embracement for the female student and it
will not also lead to violation of natural justice

Reasoned Decision

Basically, it has 3 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.

Exceptions of the Rules of Natural Justice

In the following grounds, there may be exclusion to the rules of natural justice:

 Exclusion in exceptional cases of emergency: Where a company has to be wound up

to save the depositors or a trade dangerous to society is to be prohibited or a
dangerous building is to be demolished or in such other exceptional cases of
emergency, where urgent action, preventive or remedial, is needed the application of
the rule of fair hearing may be excluded.

11
(1973) 1 SCC 805

10 | P a g e
  Exclusion in cases of Dire Public Interest: In Mohinder Sing Gill vs. Chief
Ellection Commissioner 12the Supreme court of India held that ‘Rule of Fair Hearing’
can be obviated in administrative adjudication or in a decision making process to save
greater public interest.
 Exclusion in cases of confidentiality: If application of the rule of fair hearing breaks
any confidentiality which is detrimental to national interest or public order, in that
case this rule may be excluded.
 Exclusion in case of Academic Adjudication: A student of the University was
removed from the rolls for unsatisfactory academic performance without giving any
pre-decisional hearing. The Supreme Court of India held that where the competent
academic authorities examine and assess the work of a student over a period of time
and declare his performance unsatisfactory, application of the rule of fair hearing is
not needed.
 Exclusion based on Impracticability: In R. Radhakrishna vs. Osmania University
13
it was found that the entire M.B.A, entrance examination was cancelled by the
University authority because of mass copying. The court held that notice and hearing
to all candidates is impossible, since assumed national proportions.
 Exclusion is cases of Interim Preventive Action: If any order taken by an
administrative authority is a sustention order being preventive in nature and not final
order, in that case application of rules of natural justice may be excluded.
 Exclusion in case of Legislative Action: Exclusion is justified if the nature of
administrative action is legislative. If any administrative action, taken in violation of
natural justice, does not apply to a single individual or a few specified person and is
of general nature, it may be called legislative.

Post Decisional Hearing

Post decisional hearing means hearing after the decision is reached. The idea of post
decisional hearing has been developed by the SC in Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India 14 to
maintain the balance between administrative efficiency and fairness to the individual.

Maneka Gandhi case

12
(AIR 1984 S.C. 1572),
13
 1967 SCR (2) 214
14
1978 SCR (2) 621

11 | P a g e
In this case the passport dated 01.06.1976 of the petitioner, a journalist, was impounded `in
the public interest; by an order dated 02.07.1977. The Govt. declined to furnish her the
reasons for its decision. She filed a petition before the SC under article 32 challenging the
validity of the impoundment order. She was also not given any pre-decisional notice and
hearing.

The SC held that though the impoundment of the passport was an administrative action yet
the rule of fair hearing is attracted by the necessary implication and it would not be fair to
exclude the application of this cardinal rule on the ground of administrative convenience. The
court did not outright quash the order and allowed the return of the passport because of the
special socio-political factors attending the case. The technique of post decisional hearing
was developed in order to balance these factors against the requirements of law, justice and
fairness.

The court stressed that a fair opportunity of being heard following immediately the order
impounding the passport would satisfy the mandate of natural justice

Equity and the Rules of natural Justice

“Equity” may be defined to be natural right or justice, as addressed to the conscience,

independent of express or positive law; a system of jurisprudence, the object of which is to
render the administration of justice more competent, either by the application of rule to cases
not provided for by positive law, or by adopting remedies more exactly to the exigencies of
particular cases. Equity is based on good conscience, fair dealing and justice. It does not
interfere when law provides adequate remedy. It only denotes the spirit and the habit of
fairness and justness. It desires to give to each man his dues according to natural law.

Now, it is observed from the forgoing discussion that the concept of equity is wider than the
concept of rules of natural justice. The concept of equity actually covers the doctrine of
reasonableness, the concept of striking down mala-fide action and also the concept of rules of
natural justice. the concept of natural justice comes within the ambit of the concept of equity.
The exclusion to the rules of natural justice are also based on the concept of equity. In fact
both these concept are not contrary to each other rather conducive and complementary

Conclusion

12 | P a g e
Finally we can say that natural justice is basically a concept of fair adjudication by following
some rules. Natural justice is the price of rule of law. Natural justice is a branch of public
law. It is the formidable weapon which can be wielded to secure justice to citizens. It
describes what is right and what is wrong.
The principle of natural justice is not confined to restricted walls the applicability of the
principle but depends upon the characteristics of jurisdiction, grant to the administrative
authority and upon the nature of rights affected of the individual.

13 | P a g e