Understanding Natural Justice

• Natural Justice refers to the minimum standards administrative authorities should follow when making consequential civil decisions.
• There are two main principles of natural justice to be followed by administrative authority.
• No one should be the judge in their own case.
• Each party should be given the opportunity to be heard.

Key Objectives of Natural Justice

• Define natural justice.
• Discuss aspects of the 'Rule Against Bias'.
• Analyse the 'Rule of Fair Hearing'.
• Understand 'Speaking Order'.
• Identify ‘exceptions’ to Natural Justice.

Concept of Natural Justice

• It implies fairness, reasonableness, equity, and equality.
• It is a concept of Common Law, the counterpart to the American concept of 'procedural due process'.
• It represents higher procedural principles developed by judges that agencies must follow when making consequential decisions.

Principles in the Constitution

• Grounded under various Articles of the Constitution.
• Article 21 includes fairness and principles of natural justice relating to life and personal liberty.
• Article 14 incorporates the principles of natural justice.

Rule Against Bias

• Bias is an operative prejudice, conscious or unconscious, related to a party or issue.
• "Rule Against Bias" strikes against factors that improperly influence a judge's decision.
• Judges must be impartial and decide objectively based on evidence.
• Disqualification ensures public confidence in the administrative process.

Personal Bias

• Arises from relationships which influence the deciding authority.
• Personal or professional hostility or friendship can cause personal bias.
• It is essential to prove a “reasonable suspicion of bias" or a "real likelihood of bias” to challenge administrative action.
• Courts consider whether there is reasonable ground for believing that the deciding officer was likely to have been biased.

Pecuniary Bias

• Financial interest, however small, would vitiate administrative action.
• Disqualification is not avoided by non-participation of the biased member if he/she was present.

Subject Matter Bias

• Cases where the deciding officer is directly or otherwise involved in the subject matter.
• Here again, mere involvement alone would not vitiate the administrative action unless there is a real likelihood of bias.

Departmental Bias

• 'Departmental bias' is inherent in the administrative process that can be mitigated.
• Conflicts can arise where functions of judge and prosecutor are combined in the same department.

Preconceived Notion Bias

• Concerns 'bias' arising out of preconceived notions
• It is understood judges are not expected to sit as a blank sheet of paper
• Preconceived notions would vitiate a fair trial.
• Bias arising from preconceived notions is an inherent limitation of the administrative process.
• Bias does not disqualify an officer if no other person is competent to act in their place, limitations are grounded on the doctrine of necessity.
• 'Bias' must be confined to its proper place.
• Administrative action would not be vitiated, unless the strength of preconceived notions forecloses the mind of the judge.

Rule of Fair Hearing

• Guarantees a person opportunity to defend themselves.
• The rule implies a need to provide a fair opportunity to be heard.
• It is a ‘sine qua non' of every civilized society.
• The principle states "he who shall decide anything without the other side having been heard although he may have said what is right will not have done what is right"

Right to Notice

• 'Notice' is the starting point of any hearing.
• Adequacy of notice is a relative term that is decided with reference to each case.
• Notice gives sufficient information and material to enable the person concerned to put up an effective defence.
• Contents, recipients, and timing of giving notice are important to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice.

Right to Present Case and Evidence

• Adjudicatory authority should provide an opportunity to present a case.
• Parties are allowed to adduce all relevant evidence.
• It can be done through writing or orally at the discretion of the authority, unless the statute explicitly directs otherwise.

Right to Rebut Adverse Evidence

• The person has the right to rebut adverse evidence.
• The right presupposes that the person has been informed about the evidence against him.
• A summary of content of the adverse material can be sufficient in place of the provision of the original, if not misleading.
• To rebut adverse evidence involves cross-examination and legal representation.

Cross Examination

• Cross-examination is a powerful weapon to elicit and establish truth.
• It may not be insisted upon, unless the case cannot be made valid defense is otherwise not possible in administrative adjudication.
• When witnesses have orally disposed, a refusal to cross-examine would be a violation.

Legal Representation

• Representation through a lawyer is not an indispensable part of the rule of natural justice and an oral hearing is not often a part of a fair hearing.
• Lawyers complicate, prolong, and destroy informality of proceedings.
• Aid by the agency is useful because it gives an edge to the reach over the poor and may at times be a ‘mistaken kindness’ to the poor.
• India Courts in situations where the person is illiterate, or there is a point of law involved, professional assistance is needed to defend himself.

Report of the Inquiry

• When action is entrusted to someone else, there is a question about supplying the report to charged employee before final decision is taken.
• Any action with civil consequences cannot be taken without complying with natural justice.
• It must adhere to Article – 311(2) of the Constitution of India
• The inquiry supplies material for the consideration of the government by the inquiry officer.

Post Decisional Hearing

• 'Pre-Decisional Hearing' is standard for rule of audi alteram partem.
• 'Post-Decisional Hearing' gives opportunity to person aggrieved.
• It is often allowed if original decision does not cause prejudice, if there is need for action, and when it is impracticable to afford the pre-decisional hearing.
• The Supreme Court in ‘Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India’ developed ‘Post-Decisional Hearing'.

Reasoned Decisions or Speaking Orders

• The order passed affecting the rights of an individual must be issued.
• Needed to exclude possibility of arbitrariness in the action
• Conveys, in fair play, the reasons that the order was passed
• Orders must specify the reasons for action, howsoever briefly they may be stated, that is passed.
• A non-speaking order deprives a party of the right to appeal.

Exceptions to the Rule of Natural Justice

• Application of the Principles of Natural Justice can be excluded subject to Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution.
• The Statute, expressly or by necessary implication, precludes the rules of natural justice and will not suffer invalidation on the grounds of arbitrariness.

Exclusion in Emergency

• Requirement of notice and hearing may be obviated in exceptional cases.
• Courts may review the determination of such a situation.
• “Natural Justice must be confined within their proper limits and must not be allowed to run wild."

Exclusion in Cases of Confidentiality

• Maintenance of surveillance register by the police is a confidential document.
• Observance of natural justice defeats the purpose of surveillance.

Exclusion in Case of Routine Matters

• Students can be held to disciplinary policy without requiring a prior action that could undermine educational progress.

Exclusion Based on Impracticability

• Laws can be enacted that are impossible to administer in practice that allow for alternative implementation due to real-world conditions.

Exclusion in Cases of Interim Preventive Action

• The rules of natural justice for administering an action may be suspended in the case of a preventive action.

Exclusion in Cases of Legislative Actions

• Legislative action is not subjected to the rules of natural justice because it lays down policy without referencing a particular individual.

Where No Right of the Person is Infringed

• Common Law states that if no right has been conferred on a person by any statue the rules of Natural Justice are not applicable.

Exclusion in Case of Statutory Exception or Necessity

• Exception to disqualification may be invoked if the person is the only one designated eligible and the need is genuine and real.

Exclusion in Case of Contractual Arrangement

• The principles of natural justice are not attracted in case of termination of arrangement in any contractual field.