Principles of Natural Justice: Definition, Nature and Scope

In one line

Natural justice means that before a decision is taken against you, the person deciding must be impartial and must let you put your side.

In the words a student can write in an exam: the principles of natural justice are the minimum standards of fair procedure which the law requires of any authority deciding a matter affecting the rights or interests of a person. They rest on two maxims, nemo judex in causa sua, that no one shall be a judge in his own cause, and audi alteram partem, that both sides shall be heard, to which Indian law has added a third requirement, that a decision be supported by reasons. They are not embodied rules, they are not a fixed code, and what they require in a given case depends on the facts, the framework of the statute and the constitution of the body deciding.

The two maxims, translated

Nemo judex in causa sua means "no one should be a judge in his own cause". Sometimes written nemo judex in re sua, "no one a judge in his own matter". It is the rule against bias, and it is treated in [The Rule Against Bias].

Audi alteram partem means "hear the other side". It is the right to notice and a hearing, and it is treated in [Audi Alteram Partem].

Natural justice itself is a phrase of some age and no precision. It does not mean the law of nature, and it has nothing to do with natural law in the philosophical sense. In modern English and Indian usage it means simply fair procedure, and courts increasingly use the phrase "the duty to act fairly" to say the same thing without the misleading adjective.

Where the principles come from

Three sources, and an answer should name all three because the Indian position uses all three.

1. The common law. English courts developed the rules to control inferior tribunals and, later, administrative bodies. The old cases put it picturesquely, saying that even God heard Adam before expelling him from Eden.

2. The Constitution. In India the principles have a constitutional home, which they do not have in England, and this is the difference to emphasise.

• Article 14 forbids arbitrary State action. A decision taken without hearing the person affected is arbitrary, so unfairness of procedure is a breach of Article 14.
• Article 21 requires that a person be deprived of life or personal liberty only by a procedure established by law, and that procedure must be fair.
• Article 311 writes a specific hearing requirement into the Constitution for civil servants, requiring an inquiry in which the officer is informed of the charges and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard: [Civil Services in India: Nature, Organisation, Powers and Functions].