Pros And Cons Of Law

PRE-DECISIONAL HEARING VIS-a-VIS POST-DECISIONAL HEARING

TENTATIVE CHAPTERIZATION

• INTRODUCTION

• CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF NATURAL JUSTICE PRINCIPLE

• PRE-DECISIONAL HEARING

• POST-DECISIONAL HEARING

• MENAKA GANDHI vs. UNION OF INDIA

• OTHER LANDMARK CASES

• CONCLUSION

• REFERENCES

INTRODUCTION:

CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF NATURAL JUSTICE PRINCIPLE:

In India certain procedures must be followed while exercising the decision making powers of the administrative agencies. The principles of natural justice are the procedures refered. Natural justice is a concept of common law. The quasi-judicial, judicial and administrative agencies must follow the principles of natural justice while taking any decisions adversely affecting the rights of a private individual. Natural justice implies equality and fairness. In a democratic country like India, the role of administrative agencies is rising and the concept of Rule of law will slowly disappear if these instruments of states does not perform in a fair and just manner. Articles 14 and 21 of the constitution of India consist of the principles of natural justice. Article 21 says about the concept of substantive , procedural due process and the fairness of natural justice principles. Article 14 gives the equality clause and violation of natural justice principles are the violation of equality mentioned in article 14 and it results in arbitrariness. The application of principles of natural justice differs from one case to

• Audi alterm partem – hear the other party.

NEMO JUDEX CAUSA SUA:

Rule against bias. No one should be made a judge in his own cause. Bias means a favoured judgement in favour of a party regarding an issue. Rule against bias flows from two principles:

• No one should be a judge in his own cause

• Justice should not only be done but manifested and undoubtedly be seen to be