Skip to main content

Supreme court on natural justice



      Maneka Gandhi vs Union Of India 1978 AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 621 ; There can be no distinction between a quasi-judicial function and an administrative function for the purpose of principles of natural justice. The aim of both administrative inquiry as well as the quasi-judicial inquiry is to arrive at a just decision and if a rule of natural justice is calculated to secure justice or to put it 'negatively, to prevent miscarriage of justice, it is difficult to see why it should be applicable to quasi- judicial inquiry and not to administrative inquiry. It must logically apply to both. It cannot be said that the requirements of fair play in action is any the less in an administrative inquiry than in a quasi-judicial one. Sometimes an unjust decision in an administrative inquiry may have far more serious consequences than a decision in a quasi-judicial inquiry and hence rules of natural justice must apply, equally in an administrative inquiry which entails civil consequences. ………… The rigid view that principles of natural justice apply only to judicial and quasi-judicial acts and not to administrative acts no longer holds the field. …………… The principle of audi alteram partem, which mandates that no one shall be condemned unheard, part of the rules of natural justice. In fact, there are two main principles in which the rules of natural justice are manifested, namely, Nemo Judex in Sua Causa and Audi alteram partem. ……………



Court in Suresh Koshy George v. The University of Kerala and Ors. (1969)1 S.C.R. 317 the rules of natural justice are not embodied rules. What particular rule of natural justice should apply to a given case must depend to a great extent on the facts and circumstances of that case the framework of the law under which the inquiry is held and the constitution of the Tribunal or body of persons appointed for that purpose. Whenever a complaint is made before a court that some principles of natural justice had been contravened the court has to decide whether the observance of that rule was necessary for a just decision on the facts of the case."

Court in D.F.O. South Khari v. Ram Sanehi Singh [1973] 3S.C.C.864. The law must, therefore, now be taken to be well settled that even in an administrative proceeding, which involves civil consequences, the doctrine of natural justice must be held to be applicable.

Supreme Court in Union of India v. J. N. Sinha, [1971] 1 S.C.R. 791. that "Rules of natural justice are not embodied rules nor can they be elevated to the position of Fundamental Rights. Their aim is to secure justice or to prevent miscarriage of justice.These rules can operate only in areas not covered by any law validly made. They do not supplant the law but supplement it. If a statutory provision can be read consistently With the principles of natural justice, the courts should do 'so. But if a statutory provision either specifically or by necessary implication excludes the application of any rules of natural justice then the court cannot ignore the mandate of the legislature or the statutory authority and read into the concerned provision the principles of natural justice."

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

INDUSTRIAL HEMP LEGISILATION IN KARNATAKA

The serial advent of international conventions over drug and its illicit trafficking pressured India to implement its provisions and objects at the federal level and hence The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was enacted. Section 14 of the said act provides special provision relating to cannabis for the purpose of industry and horticulture. Recently the Government of Uttarakhand providing licenses for farmers to grow hemp or cannabis for industrial purposes under the above provision of law. Prior to the enactment of NDPS Act, 1985, the majority of states in India have adopted the policy of prohibition and excise over the intoxicating drugs and intoxicating drinks. The policy of prohibition and Excise in Karnataka is governed by the Karnataka Prohibition Act, 1961 and The Karnataka Excise Act, 1965 respectively. The prohibition act imposes prohibition over intoxicating drinks and drugs and formulate exceptions to certain reasonable other purposes such as sc
1 comment
Read more

Legal maxim

                     A Legal Maxim is an established principle or proposition. The Latin term, apparently a variant on maxi-ma, is not to be found in Roman law with any meaning exactly analogous to that of a legal maxim in the Medieval or modern sense of the word, but the treatises of many of the Roman jurists on Regular definitions, and Sententiae juris are, in some measure, collections of maxims. Most of the Latin maxims developed in the Medieval era in European countries that used Latin as their language for law and courts. A A mensa et thoro - From bed and board. A vinculo matrimonii - From the bond of matrimony. Ab extra - From outside. Ab initio - From the beginning. Absoluta sententia expositore non indiget - An absolute judgment needs no expositor. Abundans cautela non nocet - Abundant caution does no harm. Accessorium non ducit sed sequitur suum principale - An accessory does not draw, but follows its principal. Accessorius sequitur - One who is an acc
1 comment
Read more