Natural Justice- Meaning and Principles | Law Optional Notes for UPSC PDF Download

Introduction

• The Principle of Natural Justice originates from the Roman law concept of 'Jus Natural' and is closely linked to Common law and moral principles. It is not codified and is considered a law of nature, not derived from any specific statute or constitution. The principle of natural justice holds great significance and is followed by all civilized societies. In the past, when industrial practices were marked by harsh and rigid employment laws, the Supreme Court played a pivotal role in establishing statutory protections for workers, emphasizing social justice and economic fairness.
• Natural justice aims to establish a fair and rational decision-making process for specific issues. It emphasizes that the procedure and the individuals involved in making a reasonable decision are often more critical than the decision itself. Natural justice is not limited to the concept of 'fairness' but encompasses various aspects that can vary depending on the context.
• Fundamentally, natural justice consists of three key rules:
  • The "Hearing rule" mandates that any person or party affected by a decision made by a panel of experts must be provided a fair opportunity to express their viewpoint and defend themselves.
  • The "Bias rule" underscores that the panel of experts making the decision should be impartial and free from bias. The decision should be reached in an objective and equitable manner, upholding the principles of natural justice.
  • The "Reasoned Decision" rule requires that orders, decisions, or judgments issued by the court or presiding authorities must be accompanied by valid and rational justifications.

Origin

• The principle of natural justice has ancient origins, dating back to early civilizations. Even the Greeks and Romans were familiar with this concept. It can be traced back to the days of Kautilya and his work Arthashastra. The Bible also offers an early example of natural justice in the case of Eve and Adam. When they partook of the forbidden fruit of knowledge, God gave them a fair opportunity to defend themselves before passing judgment, following the principles of natural justice.
• The concept of natural justice gained acceptance among English jurists. The term "natural justice" is derived from the Roman words "jus-naturale" and "lex-naturale," which encompassed the principles of natural justice, natural law, and equity. In essence, natural justice represents an innate sense of right and wrong.
• In India, this concept was introduced early on, with cases like Mohinder Singh Gill vs. Chief Election Commissioner emphasizing that the principles of fairness should apply to all actions, whether judicial, quasi-judicial, administrative, or quasi-administrative.

Purpose of the Principle

The principles of natural justice serve several important purposes:

• To ensure equal opportunities for all parties to be heard.
• To uphold the concept of fairness in decision-making.
• To address gaps and loopholes in the law.
• To protect fundamental rights, which are considered basic features of the Constitution.
• To prevent miscarriages of justice.

These principles require that proceedings be free from bias, provide parties with a fair opportunity to be heard, and that all reasons and decisions of the court be communicated to the respective parties.
The Supreme Court has emphasized that the aim of judicial and administrative bodies is to arrive at reasonable and justifiable judgments. The primary objective of natural justice is to prevent miscarriages of justice.
A committee known as the "Ministers Power" outlined three essential procedures related to the principles of natural justice:

• No one should be a judge in their own case.
• No one should be condemned without being heard.
• The concerned party is entitled to know all the reasons behind the decision made by the authority.

When Can Natural Justice Be Invoked? 

The principles of natural justice can be invoked when acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity, including bodies like panchayats and tribunals. These principles encompass the notions of fairness, fundamental moral principles, and various forms of bias. It is essential to understand when and why natural justice is required and the specific cases or situations where these principles may not apply.

In the case of the Province of Bombay vs. Khushaldas Advani, it was established that natural justice applies to statutory bodies as it represents a fundamental aspect of ensuring fairness and justice.

Application of Natural Justice

Natural justice comes into play in various scenarios, including:

• Administrative actions.
• Actions with civil consequences.
• The doctrine of legitimate exception.
• Ensuring fairness in actions.
• Disciplinary proceedings.

For instance, in the case of Board of High School vs. Ghanshyam, a student caught cheating in an examination hall was subsequently debarred by the examination board. The Supreme Court ruled that the student could not file a Public Interest Litigation against the examination board.
In the landmark case of Eurasian Equipment and Company Limited vs. State of West Bengal, all executive engineers were blacklisted. The Supreme Court emphasized that blacklisting someone without providing a valid and reasonable basis and without affording them a fair opportunity to be heard is not permissible.

Key Rules of Natural Justice

Several key rules underpin the principles of natural justice, including:

• Nemo Judex In Causa Sua: This rule dictates that "no one should be a judge in their own case" to prevent biases. Bias refers to any action, whether conscious or unconscious, that leads to unfairness in relation to a party or a particular case. This rule ensures that judges remain impartial and base their judgments on the evidence presented in the case.
• Audi Alteram Partem: This Latin phrase means "hear the other side." It emphasizes the importance of giving all parties involved a fair opportunity to present their side of the case and be heard before a decision is made.
• Reasoned Decision: This rule requires that decisions made in a judicial or quasi-judicial context be well-founded, rational, and supported by valid reasons. It ensures transparency and accountability in decision-making processes.

Types of Bias

• Personal Bias
• Pecuniary Bias
• Subject Matter Bias
• Departmental Bias
• Policy Notion Bias
• Bias Due to Obstinacy

Personal Bias

• Personal bias arises when there is a relationship between the party involved and the deciding authority. This relationship may lead the deciding authority to make an unfair decision in favor of the person with whom they have a connection. Such relationships can be of personal or professional nature.
• To successfully challenge administrative action on the grounds of personal bias, it is necessary to provide a reasonable explanation for the bias. For example, if one of the members of a selection committee has a brother participating in a competition, it may not necessarily lead to the entire selection procedure being invalidated. Instead, measures can be taken, such as requesting the panel member connected to the candidate to recuse themselves from the committee, ensuring a fair and reasonable decision-making process. This principle was upheld in the case of Ramanand Prasad Singh vs. UOI.

Pecuniary Bias

Pecuniary bias occurs when a member of a judicial body has a financial interest, regardless of how small, which may influence the administrative authority's impartiality.

Subject Matter Bias

Subject matter bias arises when the deciding authority is directly or indirectly involved in the subject matter of a particular case. For instance, if the chairman's wife is a member of a political party, and a petitioner defeats that party, it may not be sufficient grounds to quash a decision, as seen in the case of Muralidhar vs. Kadam Singh.

Departmental Bias

Departmental bias is a common issue in administrative processes where biases within a department can negatively affect the perception of fairness in proceedings.

Policy Notion Bias

Issues stemming from preconceived policy notions can be a significant concern. Expecting judges to provide a fair trial and decision without any preconceived notions is challenging when policies influence their decisions.

Bias Due to Obstinance

This category of bias emerged when a judge of the Calcutta High Court upheld their own judgment in an appeal, which directly violated the rule against bias. Judges should not sit in judgment over their own cases.

Audi Alteram Partem

• It simply includes 3 Latin word which basically means that no person can be condemned or punished by the court without having a fair opportunity of being heard.
• In many jurisdictions, a bulk of cases are left undecided without giving a fair opportunity of being heard.
• The literal meaning of this rule is that both parties should be given a fair chance to present themselves with their relevant points and a fair trial should be conducted.
• This is an important rule of natural justice and its pure form is not to penalize anyone without any valid and reasonable ground. Prior notice should be given to a person so he can prepare to know what all charges are framed against him. It is also known as a rule of fair hearing. The components of fair hearing are not fixed or rigid in nature. It varies from case to case and authority to authority.

Components of Natural Justice

• Issuance of Notice:
  • Valid and proper notice should be provided to all relevant parties involved in the matter to ensure a fair trial process. Even if the statute does not explicitly require notice, it should be given before making any decisions. This was established in the case of Fazalbhai vs. Custodian.
  • In the case of Kanda vs. Government of Malaya, it was held that the notice must clearly specify the matter, bias, facts, and circumstances against which it is issued. Individuals have the right to defend themselves, so they must be aware of the relevant details to counter the allegations and protect themselves.
  • The notice should pertain to the specific charges framed against the accused person, and they can only be punished for the charges mentioned in the notice, not for any other offenses.
• Right to Present the Case and Evidence:
  • After receiving notice, the individual must be given a reasonable amount of time to prepare and present their case effectively. Refusals should not be based on unreasonable or arbitrary grounds.
• Right to Cross-Examination:
  • The right to a fair hearing includes the right to cross-examine statements made by the parties involved. Denying the right to cross-examination would violate the principles of natural justice. Copies of necessary documents should be provided, and the failure to do so would also breach this principle.
  • In certain exceptional cases, the right to cross-examination can be denied. For example, when there is a threat to the safety of life and property, as seen in the case of Gurubachan Singh vs. the State of Bombay.
  • In cases involving attorney-client privilege, no one can force a lawyer to reveal information provided by the client regarding the case.
  • The court held in the Ludhiana Food Product case that if a party itself refuses to cross-examine a witness, it does not constitute a miscarriage of natural justice.
• Right of Legal Representative:
  • In the process of an inquiry, every party has the right to be represented by a legal representative. Each party can be represented by legally trained individuals. Similarly, the department has the right to direct its officers, even if there are investigating officers conducting an adjudicating proceeding.

Exceptions to Natural Justice

• During an Emergency period
• In the interest of public welfare
• When there is an express statutory provision
• In cases of a non-serious nature
• When it does not affect the individual's status

Applicability of Natural Justice

• Natural justice is applicable to various entities, including courts (except in ex-parte cases), tribunals, and authorities entrusted with discretion but subject to legal limitations.

Reasoned Decision

A reasoned decision relies on three key grounds:

• The aggrieved party has the opportunity to demonstrate the reason behind the authority's decision.
• It provides a satisfactory explanation to the party against whom the decision is made.
• Recording reasons acts as a safeguard against arbitrary actions by executive authorities vested with judicial powers.

Conclusion

The principles of natural justice have been embraced by the judiciary to protect public rights from arbitrary decisions by administrative authorities. These principles uphold the concept of fairness and aim to prevent miscarriages of justice. Any decision or order that violates the principles of natural justice is deemed null and void. Therefore, it is crucial to understand that these principles are essential for the validity of any administrative settlement. The applicability of the principle of natural justice depends on various factors, including the jurisdiction's characteristics, the authority granted to administrative bodies, and the nature of the individual's affected rights.