Comprehension
The Supreme Court affirmed that it is a well-established principle of administrative law that an adjudicatory body cannot base its decision on any material unless the person against whom it is sought to be utilized has been apprised of it and given an opportunity to respond to it. The court noted from MP Jain & SN Jain’s treatise on Principles of Administrative Law that if the adjudicatory body is going to rely on any material, evidence or document for its decision against a party, then the same must be brought to his notice and he be given an opportunity to rebut it or comment thereon. It is regarded as a fundamental principle of natural justice that no material ought to be relied on against a party without giving him an opportunity to respond to the same... The right to know the material on which the authority is going to base its decision is an element of the right to defend oneself. If without disclosing any evidence to the party, the authority takes it into its consideration, and decides the matter against the party, then the decision is vitiated for it amounts to denial of a real and effective opportunity to the party to meet the case against him.
On the issue of the impact of such non-disclosure the Court referred to its earlier pronouncements and summarised the principles thus – A quasi-judicial authority has a duty to disclose the material that has been relied upon at the stage of adjudication. The actual test is whether the material that is required to be disclosed is relevant for purpose of adjudication. If it is, then the principles of natural justice require its due disclosure. The aggrieved person must be able to prove that prejudice has been caused to him due to non-disclosure. To prove prejudice, he must prove that had the material been disclosed to him the outcome or the punishment would have been different.
(Extract with Edits taken from in Deepak Ananda Patil v. State of Maharashtra, (2023) 11 SCC 130)
Question: 1

Which principle is applied in the judgment?

Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
  • Nemo judex in causa sua
  • Audi alteram partem
  • Ignorantia juris non excusat
  • Jus necessitatis
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

The principle applied in the judgment is Audi alteram partem. This principle of natural justice is central to ensuring fairness in legal proceedings. It mandates that no party should be judged without being given an opportunity to present their side of the case. Here's how it applies based on the provided comprehension:
  1. Disclosure of Material: The court emphasized that any material, evidence, or documents that the adjudicatory body intends to use against a party must be disclosed to that party. This ensures transparency and allows the party to prepare a defense.
  2. Right to Respond: After receiving the relevant information, the party must be given a chance to rebut or comment on it. This is crucial for maintaining a fair hearing process and is a basic right within the framework of natural justice.
  3. Impact of Non-Disclosure: The Supreme Court noted that non-disclosure of critical material could lead to prejudice. The affected party should demonstrate that the lack of disclosure altered the outcome, thus proving that the decision was unjust.
  4. Quasi-Judicial Obligations: Any quasi-judicial authority has a duty to disclose relevant material during adjudication. The essence of applying this principle lies in safeguarding the right to defend oneself effectively.
This principle underscores the importance of fairness in the legal process, ensuring all parties have the opportunity to be heard and participate fully in their defense.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2

Non-Disclosure of material invalidates the order if:

Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
  • The authority has not relied on the material
  • No prejudice is caused to the party
  • The material was relevant for the purpose of adjudication
  • The outcome would not have been any different if it was disclosed
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

When determining the effect of non-disclosure of material in legal adjudication, the key concept revolves around principles of natural justice. The Supreme Court has emphasized that any decision-making process by an adjudicatory body requires that the involved party must be aware of and have the opportunity to respond to all materials and evidences that could potentially be used against them. If material is deemed relevant for the adjudication process, its non-disclosure invalidates the order. Here are the core principles extracted from the given context:
  • Principles of Natural Justice: A decision-making body must not rely on undisclosed material against a party. It is crucial for fairness that all relevant information is made available for both parties to comment on, thus upholding the right to a fair defense.
  • Relevance of Material: For non-disclosure to invalidate an order, the material must be relevant to the adjudication process. This relevance is pivotal for determining whether principles of natural justice have been breached.
  • Right to Defend: Being informed of the materials being considered in a decision allows the affected party to rebut or provide comments, ensuring a fair opportunity to defend themselves.
  • Prejudice to the Party: The aggrieved party must demonstrate that their case has been prejudiced due to the non-disclosure of relevant material, and that knowledge of this material could have influenced the outcome differently.
Therefore, when material is relevant for the purpose of adjudication, its non-disclosure vitiates the process as it contravenes the party's right to a fair hearing. The correct answer from the options provided is: "The material was relevant for the purpose of adjudication."
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3

‘Real and effective opportunity’ in the context of this judgment refers to:

Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
  • Personal hearing
  • Right to rebut the evidence supplied to the party
  • Right to adduce evidence
  • Right to know the evidence against oneself
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is D

Solution and Explanation

The concept of ‘Real and effective opportunity’ within the context of the provided judgment primarily refers to the Right to know the evidence against oneself. This is grounded in the principles of natural justice, which assert that an adjudicatory body must not rely on any material or evidence in its decision-making process without adequately informing the affected party. Such disclosure ensures that the party is granted a fair chance to counter or offer comments on the evidence being used against them. The Supreme Court highlights that the denial of access to the evidence results in a lack of a real and effective opportunity for defense, potentially leading to an unjust decision. Thus, the term underscores the necessity for transparency in legal proceedings, where all relevant materials are disclosed to the concerned party, allowing them to comprehensively address and rebut the evidence during adjudication.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4

Which of the following requires compliance with the rule of fair hearing?

Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
  • A notification bringing an Act into operation
  • Price Control Order under Essential Commodities Act
  • Notice issued by a Disciplinary Authority
  • Reasoned Decision by competent authority
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is C

Solution and Explanation

The principle of fair hearing is a crucial aspect of administrative law, ensuring that individuals affected by decisions have the opportunity to present their case. This aligns with the broader principles of natural justice, which demand transparency and the opportunity for individuals to counter any allegations or evidence against them before a decision is made. In this context, the need for fair hearing primarily surfaces in scenarios where decisions affect the rights or interests of individuals. Let's evaluate the options:
  • A notification bringing an Act into operation: This is a legislative action and generally applies universally, not addressing any individual's specific rights or duties. Hence, it does not necessitate a fair hearing.
  • Price Control Order under Essential Commodities Act: Similar to the notification of an Act, this is regulatory for the public or a large sector, typically not requiring a fair hearing.
  • Notice issued by a Disciplinary Authority: This affects an individual directly by potentially impacting their employment or standing. Natural justice principles necessitate that the person has the right to a fair hearing to defend themselves before any actions are taken.
  • Reasoned Decision by competent authority: While reasoned decisions are an element of transparency, they don't inherently involve an interactive process before the decision is made, making fair hearing principles less immediately applicable.
In conclusion, a Notice issued by a Disciplinary Authority requires compliance with the rule of fair hearing as it affects an individual's rights and interests directly, necessitating an opportunity for that individual to respond to allegations or charges.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5

Which of the following statements is false?

Updated On: Sep 10, 2025
  • Proving prejudice to the party concerned is necessary to quash a quasi-judicial order on the ground of non-disclosure of evidence
  • Principles of natural justice do not have exceptions
  • Speaking order is a third principle of natural justice
  • Legal representation can be validly disallowed before a quasi-judicial proceeding
Hide Solution
collegedunia
Verified By Collegedunia

The Correct Option is B

Solution and Explanation

To determine which statement is false, let's analyze each option based on principles of natural justice:
  • Proving prejudice to the party concerned is necessary to quash a quasi-judicial order on the ground of non-disclosure of evidence. This statement is true. It aligns with the principle that an aggrieved person must demonstrate prejudice caused by non-disclosure to have a decision invalidated.
  • Principles of natural justice do not have exceptions. This statement is false. There are recognized exceptions to the principles of natural justice, especially when public interest demands swift decisions without procedural delays.
  • Speaking order is a third principle of natural justice. This statement is true. An order stating its reasons, or a "speaking order," is often considered a part of natural justice to ensure transparency and understanding of the decision-making process.
  • Legal representation can be validly disallowed before a quasi-judicial proceeding. This statement is true. While legal representation is a significant right, it may be restricted under certain conditions by specific legislative provisions or the nature of the proceedings.
Thus, the false statement is: Principles of natural justice do not have exceptions.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0

Questions Asked in CLAT PG exam

View More Questions