Email This Page

*Denotes are mandatory fields.

Your Name : *
 
Your Email : *
 
Friend's Email : *
 
Friend's Name : *
 
Page URL : *
 
Message : *
 
Enter Captcha : *
 
 
Captcha

Try another one

 

Sending Mail Please Wait ...

Infraction of principles of natural justice per se does not lead to invalidity of the orders passed unless prejudice is caused - Supreme Court   Oct 16, 2020

In a case involving an ex-parte enquiry into allegations financial irregularities in the issuance of an E-0tender, on analysing a catena of judgments on breach of the principles of natural justice, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India summarised the legal position as under:


(1)Natural justice is a flexible tool in the hands of the judiciary to reach out in fit cases to remedy injustice. The breach of the audi alteram partem rule cannot by itself, without more, lead to the conclusion that prejudice is thereby caused. 

(2)Where procedural and/or substantive provisions of law embody the principles of natural justice, their infraction per se does not lead to invalidity of the orders passed. Here again, prejudice must be caused to the litigant, except in the case of a mandatory provision of law which is conceived not only in individual interest, but also in public interest. 

(3)No prejudice is caused to the person complaining of the breach of natural justice where such person does not dispute the case against him or it. This can happen by reason of estoppel, acquiescence, waiver and by way of non-challenge or non-denial or admission of facts, in cases in which the Court finds on facts that no real prejudice can therefore be said to have been caused to the person complaining of the breach of natural justice. 

(4)In cases where facts can be stated to be admitted or indisputable, and only one conclusion is possible, the Court does not pass futile orders of setting aside or remand when there is, in fact, no prejudice caused. This conclusion must be drawn by the Court on an appraisal of the facts of a case, and not by the authority who denies natural justice to a person. 

(5)The “prejudice” exception must be more than a mere apprehension or even a reasonable suspicion of a litigant. It should exist as a matter of fact, or be based upon a definite inference of likelihood of prejudice flowing from the non-observance of natural justice  


Kindly refer to the text of the judgment for details.

Copy of the judgment is attached   

 

NEWS

POLL
No Poll Created
Close

Name : *
Email : *
Comment : *

(Max characters allowed 522.)
File Upload :
 
Captcha

Try another one

Enter Captcha Code*