Principles of Natural Justice
&
Labour Law
Introduction
Principles of natural justice are those rules which have been laid down by the Courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of the individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights
For the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Labour Law or to empowered to decide whether an infringement or contravention has taken place and
whether penal action is called for. Such procedures are known as adjudication
proceedings and are also followed when the questions of classification, valuation, grant of
refund, drawback, etc. are to be decided. Such proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature and
do not require adherence to rigid court room proceedings. However, principles of
natural justice have to be strictly followed.
The term ― Principles of Natural Justice (PNJ), derived from the expression "Jus Natural” of the Roman Law, does not have force of law as they may or may not form part of statute but they are necessarily to be followed. The adherence to principles of natural justice as recognized by all civilized States is of supreme importance when a quasi judicial body embarks on determining disputes between the parties, or any administrative action involving civil consequences is in issue. These principles are well settled.
Principles of Natural Justice are those rules which have been laid down by the Courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of the individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights. These rules are intended to prevent such authority from doing injustice.
The rules of natural justice do not supplant the law of the land but only supplement it. It is now firmly established that in the absence of express provisions in any statute dispensing with the observance of the Principles of Natural Justice, such principles will have to be observed in all judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative proceedings which involve civil consequences to the parties. (A.K Kraipak vs. Union of India (AIR 1970 S.C.150) & Maneka Gandhi (AIR 1978 S.C.597).
Natural justice is the essence of fair adjudication, deeply rooted in tradition and conscience, to be ranked as fundamental. The purpose of following the principles of natural justice is the prevention of miscarriage of justice.
Natural Justice recognizes three principles:
(i) Nemo debet essc judex in propria causa - means nobody shall be a judge in his own cause or in a cause in which he is interested. This principle is more popularly known as the Doctrine of Bias. That is the authority sitting in judgment should be impartial and act without bias. To instill confidence in the system, justice should not merely be done but seen to be done.
(ii) Audi alterem partem - means to hear the other side. This is necessary for providing a fair hearing and no doubt the rule against bias would also be a part of the procedure. A corollary has been deduced from the above two rules and particularly the "audi alteram partem" rule, namely "qui aliquid statuerit parte inaudita alteram actquam licet dixerit, haud acquum facerit" that is, 'he who shall decide anything without the other side having been heard, although he may have said what is right, will not have been what is right or in other words, as it is now expressed, justice should not only be done but should manifestly be seen to be done'.
The concept has gained significance and shades with time. When the historic document was made at Runnymede in 1215, the first statutory recognition of this principle found its way into the ―Magna Carta.
The classic exposition of Sir Edward Coke of natural justice requires to "vocate, interrogate and adjudicate".
In the celebrated case of Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works [(1863) 143 ER 414], the principle was thus stated:-
"Even God did not pass a sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his defence. “Adam” says God, “where art thou? Hast thou not eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that thou shouldest not eat."
(iii) Speaking orders or reasoned decisions - It is now universally recognized that giving reasons for a certain decision is one of the fundamentals of good administration and a safeguard against arbitrariness. The refusal to give reasons may excite the suspicion that there are probably no good reasons to support the decision. Hence reasons are useful as they may reveal an error of law, the grounds for an appeal or simply remove what might otherwise be a lingering sense of injustice on the part of the unsuccessful party. When the order to be passed is an appeal-able order, the requirement of giving reasons would be a real requirement. Thus, reasons are also required to be given when the appellate or re-visionary authority affirms the order of the lower authority.
I. Why principles of natural justice to be followed
(1) A domestic or departmental enquiry is meant to find out whether an employee has committed a misconduct alleged against him on the basis of the evidence brought on record. Therefore the domestic enquiry proceedings are quasi judicial in nature and are fraught with civil consequences affecting the rights of the delinquent employees. Thus they cannot be conducted arbitrarily or with any malafide intention by the employer. The delinquent should be put on fair trial by the domestic tribunal. Therefore, in order to ensure justice and fair play and to prevent miscarriage of justice, the procedures followed in the departmental/domestic proceedings are to be governed by the principles of natural justice.
(2) This apart, the proceedings in service jurisprudence are not like proceedings in criminal jurisprudence and are not conducted by people conversant with law and therefore they need to be made free from legalistic process and can not be subjected to the time consuming and strict rules of Evidence Act in respect of degree of proof. This also makes domestic enquiry proceedings expeditious unlike criminal trial.
D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries Ltd., 1993 II LLJ 696 : 1993 (83) FJR 271 : 1993 (67) FLR 111 : 1993 II LLN 575 : 1993 II CLR 116 : 1993 LLR 584 : 1993 SCC (L&S) 723 : 1993 (3) SCC 259 (S.C.3J)
(3) After introduction of Sec. 11-A of the Industrial disputes Act 1947, the Industrial courts were empowered with to put under scrutiny not only decision but decision making process. Therefore, it is necessary for the employers to scrupulously follow the principles of natural
II. Principles of Natural Justice – What are they
a) Principles are at the base of constitutional/statutory provisions
b) How the standing orders / service rules incorporated the principles
1. Standing Orders
2. Article 311 of constitution
3. Second showcause notice
4. Whether second showcause notice manadatory under industrial law
c) What if the standing orders/service rules do not prescribe disciplinary procedures or dispense with the principles
III. Bias – What it is
a) How to prove bias
b) Some examples of bias:
c) Bias – When cannot be
1. Whether a positive finding recorded in the preliminary enquiry against the employee by the disciplinary authority as member of the enquiry committee amounts to bias
IV. How to comply with the Principles of Natural Justice
a) List of important principles for employer’s guidance and compliance
1. Chargesheet and enquiry necessary
2. Chargesheet should not be vague
3. Delinquent employee to be made known of relevant conduct rules
4. Opportunity to reply to chargesheet
5. Notice of enquiry to be properly served on the delinquent
6. Delinquent’s request for defence assistance to be permitted
7. Subsistence allowance not to be denied
8. Traveling expenses for witnesses of employee to be paid
9. Documents to be supplied to employee when relied up on
10. Documents not to be merely read to workman
11. Inspection of original documents to be given
12. Enquiry to be held in the language of employee
13. Adequate notice for producing witnesses to be given
14. Enquiry officer to be properly authorized to conduct enquiry
15. Workman not to be examined first
16. Presenting officer not to act as enquiry officer
17. Enquiry officer not to act as presenting officer
18. Disciplinary authority not to act as a witness
19. Not to record fresh evidence after closure of case
20. Key witness to be examined
21. Witnesses to be examined in the presence of delinquent
22. Delinquent to cross-examine witnesses
23. Second show cause notice on enquiry findings
24. No double standards in granting adjournments by enquiry officer
25. Enquiry officer not to be appointed prior to show cause notice
V. Burden of proof
a) Plea as to violation to be specific
VI. Importance of Principles of Natural Justice in the light of Sec. 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947
a) Some examples where omissions led to violation
1. If no notice of enquiry to the employee
2. If termination is without enquiry
3. If misconduct not enumerated in standing orders
4. If no intimation of date time and place to employee
5. If opportunity of taking copies of documents denied
6. If enquiry officer is below the rank of complainant
7. If enquiry not conducted as per the principles
8. If enquiry findings based on hearsay evidence
VII. Whether a whipping baton in the hands of courts to discipline the employer
a) Some examples where omissions will not amount to violation of principles of natural justice
1. Though written complaint absent
2. Though notice of enquiry displayed on notice board
3. Though terminated without enquiry
4. Though notice of enquiry not given
5. Though enquiry was held in English
6. Though enquiry officer has changed
7. Though enquiry was defective
8. Though complainant can be presenting officer
9. Though delinquent was examined first
10. Though delinquent workmen cross examined
11. Though solitary witness
12. Though preliminary enquiry report not supplied
13. Though enquiry officer poses questions
14. Though workman’s plea not recorded
15. Though workman denied assistance of Advocate
16. Though workman refused adjournment
17. Though presenting officer is a witness
18. Though subsistence allowance not paid
19. Though second show cause notice not issued
20. Though management consulted bout the date of enquiry
21. Though a charge is not specified
22. Though request for examination of witness denied
23. Though workmen with same misconduct treated differently
24. Though no cross-examination
25. Though defence witness not examined
Comments