Natural justice

  1. It is a settled principle of law that principle of natural justice is supposed to be the part of every statute having the force of law — It is the demand of natural justice that before condeming any person in any judicial or quasi judicial proceedings the concerned persons, whose interest is involved, must be heard. M. Azim Zia v. Nazir Ahmed Qadri & others 2003 SCR 44 (A)
  2. Natural justice known in law as audi alteram partem shall be presmed to be the part of every enactment — No order can be passed against any person without providing the right of hearing — In the Rules of 1995 the right of hearing to the employees of the Development Authority Muzaffarabad is provided like the other Government servants. Development Authority Muzaffarabad  v. Shahid Qureshi & 7 others 2004 SCR 80 (B)
  3. Right of hearing — Show cause notice — Before cancelling the appointment order the department should have served with a show cause notice that on account of absence from his place of posting, why his appointment order should not be cancelled — Right of hearing is recognized in every statute unless and until its application is specifically excluded in any statute — In almost all service laws in force in Azad Kashmir right of hearing of civil servants of all the departments is recognized — Held: The department was not justified to depart from this provision and act in arbitrary and unguided manner. Muahammad Ishaque v. Azad Govt. & 5 others 2005 SCR 9 (B)
  4. Inquiries were conducted at the back of the accused persons — According to law in all judicial and administrative proceedings the principle of natural justice is to be followed — It means that all proceedings must be conducted in presence of the accused persons — They must be provided a fair opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or to rebut the material brought against them. University of AJK & others v. Kamran Niaz 2005 SCR 33 (B)
  5. Nomination Board cancelled the nomination on the ground that respondent has applied for admission on open merit of Punjab — She was nominated against the seat of open merit — She was not entitled for admission — No notice prior to cancellation of admission was issued — Held: After being nominated against a seat reserved for refugees settled in Pakistan a right has been vested — This right cannot be taken away without hearing and without notice — The cancellation of nomination offends the principle of natural justice — Held further: If an order is passed by an authority which is against the interest of person or by this order right vesting in a person is snatched then it is mandatory to hear the person. Abdullah Yuousaf  v. Miss Kishwar Tasleem and 4 others 2009 SCR 586 (C)
  6. Art. 178 — See Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.VII, R.2. Safdar Ali Khan v. Azad Government of the State of J&K 2012 SCR 331 (A)
  7. —Doctrine of—See Azad Govt. & others  v. Kh. Muhammad Saleem Bismal & others 2022 SCR 430 (H/1)
  8. —Two inquiries in same subject against same person by two different investigating agencies were being conducted—Declared as against natural justice. Tariq Pervaiz v. The State & others 2022 SCR 1625 (B)
error: Content is protected !!