“The principles of natural justice are not cast in stone and there is always a possibility of deviation from stated principles of law in view of overall demands of justice." Explain citing decided cases on the subject.
-
Core Legal Answer & Context: The statement is accurate. Principles of natural justice, primarily 'audi alteram partem' (hear the other side) and 'nemo judex in causa sua' (no one should be a judge in their own cause), are fundamental to fair decision-making. However, they are not absolute and can be modified, excluded, or relaxed by statute or in exceptional circumstances where the demands of justice, public interest, or practical necessity outweigh their strict application. This flexibility ensures that justice is not defeated by rigid adherence to procedure.
-
Relevant Statutes and Sections: These principles are not codified in specific statutes but are inherent in the rule of law, Article 14 (equality before law), and Article 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution, which mandate fair procedure.
-
Important Landmark Cases:
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Supreme Court held that the procedure established by law under Article 21 must be fair, just, and reasonable, implicitly incorporating natural justice. It emphasized that even in administrative actions, the right to be heard is crucial unless expressly excluded by law and such exclusion is reasonable.
- A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969): Extended the applicability of natural justice to administrative actions, stating that the dividing line between administrative and quasi-judicial functions is blurred. However, it also acknowledged that the content and reach of natural justice depend on the facts and circumstances of each case.
- Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985): This case discussed exceptions to natural justice, particularly in disciplinary actions against government employees under Article 311(2) proviso, where national security or practical difficulties may justify exclusion.
- Clear Conclusion: While natural justice is a cornerstone of fair administration, its application is pragmatic. Courts balance the need for procedural fairness with other considerations like public safety, urgency, or statutory mandates. Any deviation, however, must be justified, non-arbitrary, and not lead to a miscarriage of justice, ensuring that the essence of fairness is preserved.