Principles Of Natural Justice With Landmark Cases
Principles Of Natural Justice With Supreme Court Judgement
The principle of natural justice are those fundamental rules of judicial procedure, the breach of which will prevent justice from being seen to be done. They provide minimum protection to the rights of individuals against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by the judicial or quasi-judicial authority while making an order affecting those rights.
The term "natural justice" is derived from the Latin word jus naturale which means natural law. It refers to a system of law that is believed to be inherent in human nature and discoverable through reason. It is not created by humans or governments, but rather is thought to come from universal moral principles that apply to all people.
Natural justice is a great humanising principle intended to invest law with fairness, to secure justice and to prevent miscarriage of justice. It is not possible to define precisely and scientifically the expression "natural justice”, yet the principles of natural justice are accepted and enforced in civilized states. Lord Reid in Ridge v Baldwin observed in the context of natural justice that “it is a perennial fallacy that just because something cannot be cut and dried or nicely weighed or measured therefore it does not exist”.
Principles of Natural Justice
The following are the key principles of natural justice:
- Audi Alteram Partem (Right to a fair hearing)
- Nemo Judex in Causa Sua (No one should be a judge in their own case)
- Reasoned Decisions (Speaking orders that disclose reasoning)
Nature and Scope of Natural Justice
Natural Justice is a fundamental concept in administrative law that ensures fairness, impartiality, and reasonableness in decision-making processes. Though not codified in legislation, it holds a significant place in legal systems around the world due to its universal application and moral foundation.
- Uncodified Law - Natural justice is not written in any statutory law but is derived from common law traditions and the universal sense of fairness inherent in human nature.
It has been developed through judicial interpretations and is considered an essential element of fair procedure. Courts have often read the principles of natural justice into laws even when statutes are silent on them.
- Procedural Fairness - Natural justice is a key component of procedural law. It ensures that every individual affected by a decision has the opportunity to be heard, and that decisions are made by unbiased authorities. It sets basic procedural requirements such as:
Notice of the case against a person
Right to present one’s case
Right to an impartial adjudicator
- Universal Application - The principles of natural justice are universally recognized and form an integral part of the legal systems in all civilized nations. These principles are not limited to administrative law but extend across civil, criminal, constitutional, and international law. Their wide acceptance reflects their foundational role in upholding justice.
- Controls Actions of Public Authorities - Natural justice acts as a check on arbitrary use of power by public officials and administrative bodies. It ensures that decisions are made with fairness, reasonableness, and in good faith. Authorities are expected to act based on justice, equity, and good conscience, and avoid any abuse of power.
- Protection Against Arbitrary Actions - One of the key purposes of natural justice is to provide protection against arbitrary or unfair actions by ensuring that no person is condemned unheard or punished without a fair procedure. It prevents misuse of discretionary powers and reinforces the rule of law.
- Ensures Impartiality and Transparency - Natural justice ensures that decision-makers are unbiased and do not have any personal interest in the matter. It fosters transparency in decision-making processes, builds public trust, and upholds the integrity of the justice system.
Applicability of Natural Justice to Administrative Authorities
Traditional View vs Modern Legal Approach
Traditionally, the principles of natural justice were viewed as applicable primarily to judicial and quasi-judicial authorities, where formal procedures resembling a courtroom trial were followed. However, modern administrative law has evolved significantly, especially in India, to broaden the scope of these principles to administrative authorities as well.
Administrative Authorities and their powers to impact civil right of individuals
Although administrative authorities are not courts, they often exercise powers that directly impact the civil rights and interests of individuals (e.g., decisions related to licensing, employment, education, property, etc.).
- When such authorities perform functions that determine rights, obligations, or impose liabilities, they are duty-bound to follow the principles of natural justice.
- The goal is to ensure fairness, prevent arbitrariness, and protect individual dignity in administrative decision-making.
Judicial Endorsement of Natural Justice in Administrative Decisions
Indian courts have consistently upheld the application of natural justice to administrative actions, as demonstrated in the following landmark cases:
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), passport was impounded without a hearing by the passport authority(an administrative body).
The Supreme Court ruled that natural justice must be read into administrative actions, even when the statute is silent. The right to be heard is fundamental.
In A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969), A board member involved in the selection was also a candidate. The court quashed the decision due to bias, asserting that administrative decisions must adhere to natural justice if they affect individual rights.
In Mohinder Singh Gill v. Chief Election Commissioner (1978), Election results were nullified without hearing the winning candidate by election commission (an administrative authority). The Court emphasized that any administrative order affecting rights must follow a fair procedure, irrespective of whether it is a judicial proceeding.
In Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985), Employees were dismissed without inquiry citing national security. The Court accepted that natural justice can be excluded in exceptional situations (e.g., national security), but reiterated that this is an exception, not the rule.
Statutory Recognition and Exclusion of Natural Justice Principles
Statutory Incorporation of Natural Justice
In many cases, statutes expressly incorporate principles of natural justice by mandating procedural safeguards such as:
Notice to affected parties
Opportunity of hearing
Right to present one’s case
Right to cross-examine witnesses, etc.
In such situations, the observance of natural justice becomes a binding legal requirement. Non-compliance can lead to the invalidation of the decision made.
When the Statute is Silent on Natural Justice
A critical question arises when statutes are silent on procedural safeguards: Is the adjudicating authority still bound to follow natural justice?
Judicial consensus, supported by leading jurists, holds that natural justice must be implied even in the absence of express statutory provisions.
Judicial and Scholarly Views:
H.W.R. Wade, a noted scholar, states: The rules of natural justice operate as implied mandatory requirements, non-observance of which invalidates the exercise of power... the presumption is, it (natural justice) will always apply, however silent about it the statute may be.”
Indian Judiciary has embraced this approach:
In A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, Justice Hegde held:
The aim of the rules of natural justice is to secure justice or to prevent miscarriage of justice. They do not supplant the law but supplement it.”
In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, Chief Justice Beg observed:
Even where there is no specific provision in a statute, the duty to give reasonable opportunity to be heard will be implied from the nature of the function to be performed.”
In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation:
The Court examined Section 314 of the Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, which allowed demolition without notice. The Court upheld the principle that natural justice cannot be dispensed with unless justified under special circumstances.
Statutory Exclusion of Natural Justice
Principles of natural justice may be expressly excluded by legislation in exceptional situations such as:
National security
Public interest or public order
Emergencies
Example: Second Proviso to Article 311(2) of the Indian Constitution excludes the right to hearing in cases involving national security.
Judicial Scrutiny of Exclusion Clauses:
Courts have held that even when statutes exclude natural justice, such exclusions must stand the test of fairness, reasonableness, and non-arbitrariness under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. If exclusion is found to be unjust, unreasonable or arbitrary, it may be declared unconstitutional.
Judex Tutorials
Judex Tutorials is a premier Judiciary coaching institute dedicated to prepare law students for judicial services exams. Whether you prefer online judicial classes, offline sessions, or need access to recorded lectures, we offer flexible preparation options. If you like our blog as class notes, follow and subscribe our social media platforms on Facebook, Instagram and YouTube as well.
