UILS, Panjab University

UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH

“RIGHT TO NOTICE AS PART OF FAIR HEARING”

A project report submitted as a part of internal assessment of the course B.Com. LL.B.
(Hons.) in the subject of ADMINISTRATIVE LAW for the session 2021-22.

1|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The detailed project on “Right to Notice as part of Fair Hearing” would not have been
possible without the kind support and help of many individuals. I would like to extend my
gratitude to all of them.
I am highly indebted to Ms. Tania Singh for her guidance and constant help as well as for
providing necessary information regarding the project and also for her support in completing
the project.
I would also like to express my gratitude to my parents and friends for their kind cooperation
and encouragement which helped me in completion of this project.
A sincere thanks to all of them.
-MEHAK

2|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................4
MEANING OF NATURAL JUSTICE...............................................................................................4
PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE..........................................................................................4
AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM.............................................................................................................4
RIGHT TO NOTICE..........................................................................................................................5
KINDS OF NOTICES.........................................................................................................................5
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF NOTICE...........................................................................................6
WHEN NOTICE IS OPTIONAL?.....................................................................................................7
CONSEQUENCES OF NON-ISSUANCE OF NOTICE..................................................................7
SCOPE OF NOTICE..........................................................................................................................8
SIGNIFICANCE OF LEGAL NOTICE............................................................................................8
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................9

3|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

INTRODUCTION
Natural justice is an expression of English common law, and involves a procedural
requirement of fairness. The principles of natural justice have great significance in the study
of Administrative Law. It is also known as substantial justice or fundamental justice or
Universal justice or fair play in action. The principles of natural justice are not embodied
rules and are not codified. They are judge made rules and are regarded as counterpart of the
American procedural due process.

MEANING OF NATURAL JUSTICE

There is no precise and scientific definition of natural justice. However, the principles of
natural justice are being acceptable and enforced. Different Judges, lawyers and scholars
define it in various ways. In Vionet v. Barrett, Lord Esher M.R has defined it as “the
natural sense of what is right and what is wrong”. Justice PN Bagwati has defined it as “fair
play in action under Article 14 and Article 21 of Indian Constitution which has strengthened
the concept of natural justice”.
In its initial, the concept of natural justice was confined to the Judicial proceeding only but
with the advent of welfare state the powers of administrative authorities have considerably
increased as a result it becomes impossible for law to determine the fair procedure to be
followed by each authority while adjudicating any disputes or any quasi- judicial
proceedings.
The object of natural justice is to secure justice to the citizens and prevent contempt of
justice. Decisions which violate the natural justice shall stand null and void.

PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE

The principles of natural justice, originated from common law in England are based on two
Latin maxims (which were drawn from jus natural).
In simple words, English law recognizes three principles of natural justice as stated below:
1. Nemo Judex in causa sua or Nemo debet esse judex in propria causa or Rule against
bias (No man shall be a judge in his own case).
2. Audi Alteram partem or the Rule of fair hearing (hear the other side).
3. Reasoned decision

AUDI ALTERAM PARTEM

It means “hear the other side” or “let the other party be heard as well”. In a circumstance
where a person against whom any action is sought to be taken and his right or interest is
being affected, shall be given an equal opportunity of being heard and defend himself. This
principle is a ‘sine qua non’ of every civilized society. The principle of hearing is basically a
code of procedure and thus covers every stage through which an administrative jurisdiction
passes that is from notice to final determination. Before any order is passed against any
person, sensible chance of being heard must be given to him. In this maxim two principles are
considered that is fundamental justice and equity. Any decision which violates the principle

4|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

of audi alteram partum such can be quashed by court as against the principles of natural
justice.
This maxim includes two elements:
1. Notice
2. Fair Hearing
The condition of fair hearing may be complied by the authority by providing written or oral
hearing which is the discretion of the authority, unless the statute under which the action
being taken by the authority provides otherwise. The concept of fair hearing also includes
that the authorities shall not make “undue haste” while making decisions. In the landmark
case of Harbans Lal v. Commissioner, it was held by the hon’ble court that getting a
reasonable opportunity of being heard is an indispensable element of fair trial. Further, the
mode of hearing can be oral or written.

RIGHT TO NOTICE
The term ‘notice’ originates from the Latin word ‘notitia’ which means ‘being known. The
hearing starts with the notice by the authority concerned to the affected person.
Consequently, notice may be taken as the starting point of hearing. Unless a person knows
the case against him, he cannot defend himself. Several statutes expressly provide for giving
of it before passing certain orders. However, even if there is no such provision in the Act, if
an order is likely to affect the rights of an individual, a clear specific and unambiguous notice
should be given to him before taking any action against that person. The proceedings started
without giving notice to the affected party, would violate the principles of natural justice.
J.B. Parikh v. University of Bombay, AIR1987 Bom 332
An action was taken against a student Jayesh Bhupatri Parikh for having copied the answer
from the answer book of another student Milan Parikh. On the basis of similarity of both the
answers, an action was taken against Jayesh without giving him notice and without giving
him an opportunity to be heard.
Held- It was held that there was a violation of natural justice in this case and struck down the
action taken by the University.

KINDS OF NOTICES
Actual Notice – It is sometimes called direct notice.  The notice is in its physical or actual
form handed over to the concerned party in a written form.  Sometimes under certain
circumstances, it is required that, the receiver of the notice must sign an acknowledgement  
that he received the notice and understands the content of the same. 

Constructive Notice – Under this form of notice it is assumed that the party concerned has
the knowledge of an event or transaction, as such matter is already in the public domain.  It is
sometimes called legal fiction, because it is presumed by the court.  e.g.  If the notice of
property dispute is printed on a newspaper but the concerned party has left the state, in such
case court presumes that the party is aware of such notice.

5|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

Judicial Notice – This form of notice is taken by court, when it declares a fact presented as
evidence as true without a formal presentation of evidence. A court can take judicial notice of
indisputable facts. Sec 56-58 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 deal with doctrine of judicial
notice i.e.  facts which can be noticed by the court need not be proved. 

Public Notice – It is a notice given to the public regarding certain types of legal proceedings. 
It is information alerting citizens of government’s activities, usually such notice is given
though the newspapers. 

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF NOTICE

In India, there are no statutory requirements of notice but the courts insist the compliance
with the following requirements in order to treat it as reasonable and adequate. It must give
sufficient information so as to enable the person concerned to prepare his defence effectively.
For this purpose, the contents and the time of giving notice, etc. are taken into account.
It must mention the time, place and nature of hearing;
It must mention legal authority under which hearing is to be held;
It must mention the statement of specific charges and proposed action which the person has
to meet;
It must be clear, simple and unambiguous;
It must mention the action proposed to be taken;
It must mention the evidence to be used against him;
It must give a reasonable opportunity to the person to comply with its requirements.
In Laxmi Narain Anand C.S.T. (1980) 46 S.T.C. 41 and Cooperative Society v. A.P.
Govt., A.I.R. 1977 SC 313 cases the court held that the notice is required to be served on the
concerned person properly.
In Public Prosecutor v. K.P. Chandrashekhran, (1957) 8 S.T.C. 6 (Mad) case, the Court
held that the notice must give sufficient time to the person concerned to his case.
In Satish Chandra v. Union of India, AIR 1983 Delhi case the Court held that whether the
person concerned ahs been allowed time or not, depends upon the facts of each case.
In Punjab National Bank v. All India Bank Employees Federation, AIR 1960 SC 16 case,
the notice contained certain charges but the penalty was imposed on the charges other than
those mentioned in the notice. Thus, the charges on which the penalty was imposed were not
contained in the notice served on the person concerned. The notice was not proper and,
therefore, the imposition of penalty was invalid.
A notice must mention the evidence to be used against him. In Dhakeshwari Cotton Mills
Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax, 1955 SCR (1) 941 case, the appellate income tax
tribunal did not disclose the information supplied to it by their department. The Supreme
Court held that it is against the principle of natural justice and every person has the right to
know the evidence to be used against him.

6|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

A notice must give a reasonable opportunity to the person to comply with its requirements. In
State of Jammu and Kashmir v. Haji Wali Mohd. AIR 1972 C 2358 case, the Court held
that a notice giving twenty-four hours to demolish a structure alleged to be in the dilapidated
condition is not a proper or valid notice.
The rules of natural justice are flexible if no prejudice is caused. In Ravi Naik v. Union of
India, AIR1994 SC1558 case, a member of the Goa Legislative Assembly was disqualified
by the Speaker for certain reasons. The rules provided that, in such cases, the person should
be given a notice period of seven days or such further period as Speaker may deem fit. In this
case, a period of three days was given to the disqualified member. The Court held that the
rules of natural justice are flexible and if no prejudice was caused to the member, the action
need not be set aside. The Court said, “whether the requirements of natural justice have been
complied with or not has to be considered in the context of the facts and circumstances of a
particular case.”

WHEN NOTICE IS OPTIONAL?

The omission to serve notice would not be fatal if the person receiving the notice is at fault.
L. P. Singh v Board of Governors, M. A. C. T. AIR1982 M.P. 59
Some students were guilty of gross violence against other students. The notice could not be
served on them because they had absconded.
Held- The action of the authority was held to be valid as a notice could not be served on the
students on account of their fault.
The requirement of notice will not be insisted upon as a mere technical formality, when the
concerned party clearly knows the case against him, and is not thereby prejudiced in any
manner in putting up an effective defence.
1. Keshav Mills v. Union of India AIR 1973 Punj. 263 33
The court did not quash the order of the government taking over the mill for a period of 5
years on the technical ground that the appellants were not issued notice before this action was
taken, because, at an earlier stage, a full-scale hearing had already been given and there was
nothing more which the appellant wanted to know.
2. Maharashtra State Financial Corpn. V Suvarna Board Mill, 1994 5 SCC 566
The court held that a notice calling upon the party to repay dues within 15 days failing which
factory would be taken over is sufficient for taking over the factory and no fresh notice is
required for pulling down an unauthorised structure when notice for removing such structure
has already been given.

CONSEQUENCES OF NON-ISSUANCE OF NOTICE

Since the issue of notice is component of fair hearing, the decision made in furtherance to
such will be void. In India, is fairly well settled that, whenever there is a violation of the rule
of fair hearing, the order is null and void.  If Prejudice has been caused by non – issuance of
notice, the proceeding will be vitiated. But it is to be noted that, irregular service of notice
would not render the proceedings invalid.

7|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

1. R v. University of Cambridge, 1723 1 Str757: 93 ER 698

In this case the University without giving any notice cancelled the degree of Dr. Bentley on
the ground of misconduct.
Held- University’s action was held to be violative of principle of natural justice.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
The passport of the petitioner was impounded by the Government of India in public interest.
No opportunity was afforded to the petitioner before taking the impugned action.
Held- The act of government was held to be violative of principles of Natural justice.

SCOPE OF NOTICE
1. Common Law: notice is furnished by delivery of a set of court documents called
process to the person served. Service of process makes the defendant aware against
the allegation against him in the pleading of the petitioner. If notice is not served to
the defendant, it can be raised as a defence by the defendant before the court of Law.
2. Civil Law: in civil cases the summons is sent by the courts of law to the defendant.
He has to abide by the summons issued by the court and appear before the court to
present his side of the story.
3. Right to know the evidence against him: every person against whom proceedings
are initiated need to know the evidence to be used against him. No one should be
taken by surprise and there should be full disclosure of evidence and documents on
which a decision is to be taken against a person.

SIGNIFICANCE OF LEGAL NOTICE

1. Umanath Pandey v State Of UP, 2009 12 SCC 40-33 
It was held in this case that, “Notice is the first limb  of the principle of natural justice.  It
further laid down that notice should be precise and unambiguous. It should appraise the
party determinatively the case he has to meet. time given for the purpose should be adequate
so as to enable him to make his representation. In the  absence of the notice of a kind and
such reasonable opportunity, order passed become wholly vitiated. Therefore, it become
essential to serve a party with a notice, before any adverse order is passed against him”. 

2. Biecco Lawrie Ltd v. State of West Bengal, 2009 10 SCC 32 

It was held by the Supreme Court that, “One of the essential ingredients of fair hearing is
that a person should be served with a proper notice. Notice should be clear and precise so as
to meet and make an effective defence. Denial of notice makes the administrative decision as
vitiated. The adequacy of notice is a relative term and must be decided with reference to each
case”.
 
3. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2010) 192 Taxman 317, Delhi 
It was held that a cryptic order sheet noting would not amount to a proper show cause
notice to a party to defend his case, such action would be failure to adhere to principle of
natural justice.

8|Page
 UILS, Panjab University

CONCLUSION
The Rule of natural justice has advanced by human progress. It has not developed from the
Indian Constitution but rather from mankind itself. Each individual has the privilege to talk
and be heard when charges are being put towards the person in question. Natural justice
implies that equity ought to be given to both parties in a simple, reasonable and sensible way.
Notice is an important element of principle of natural justice. Such must be duly served to the
party concerned failure of which make the action void. Party to whom such notice is served
must reply to such notice within reasonable time.

9|Page