Skip to main content

PROCEDURAL LAPSES/BREACH OF PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE


Nature of grievance:

Where the Court / Tribunal / Quasi judicial body / administrative authority discharging judicial function, have passed an Order without following the procedure / or in breach of the procedure established under the law; or have passed an Order without affording opportunity of hearing, or opportunity of hearing contemplated under the law;

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, including powers of superintendence of High Courts recognized under Article 227 of the Constitution, may be invoked in such cases.

There had always been confusion amongst the lawyers as whilst challenging the Orders passed by Civil Courts, Criminal Courts, Tribunals and quasi Judicial bodies, whether Writ jurisdiction is to be invoked under Article 226 or Supervisory jurisdiction of High Court under Article 227 is to be invoked. The judgment of Apex court in the case of Radhey Shyam Versus Chhabi Nath [2015] appears to have settled this controversy. The essence of the judgment is, all Orders passed by Civil and Criminal Courts may only be challenged under Art.227 of the Constitution and not under Article 226. And, all Orders passed by Tribunals or by any other Quasi judicial bodies may be challenged under Article 226, or preferably may be under Revisional Jurisdiction of High Courts under Section 115 of CPC, 1908.


Reliefs prayed for:

[As may be applicable to facts of the case]

a)     That the impugned Order / action at Exhibit “____” to the Petition be quashed and set aside;

b)     All actions, if any, emanating from impugned Order / action be declared null and void;

c)     The Respondent authority be directed to pass speaking and reasoned order, and strictly in accordance with law;

d)     (Where hearing is contemplated under the law) The Respondent authority be directed to grant personal hearing to the Petitioners, as contemplated under the law, and pass, a speaking and reasoned order.

e)     The Hon’ble Court may dispose of the Petition, without touching upon the merits of the case;

f)      Any other relief as this Hon’ble Court deems fit and expedient, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case.



Grounds for Reliefs

[As may be applicable to facts of the case]

a)     That, the impugned Order / action is contrary to law of the land, in force;

b)     That, the impugned Order was passed without complying to essential requirements of provisions of law;

c)     That, the impugned Order was passed without following the procedure established under the law;

d)     That there is complete misreading / misunderstanding of the express mandate of law / law declared in HC / SC Rulings, in the impugned Order;

e)     That, considering the very limited nature of relief prayed, no prejudice of any nature would cause to the Respondents, if the Court grants relief in terms of prayer clause (___) even without hearing the Respondents at length. The Petitioners would submit that it is the concern of the Writ Courts that Subordinate Courts and Tribunals act within the limits of their respective jurisdiction.

f)      The issue which is raised in this Petition is unambiguously and categorically decided by various decisions of this Hon’ble Court / Apex court, stated hereinbefore; and whereas the said decisions were expressly brought to the knowledge of the Respondent No.1 herein, yet Respondent No.1 acted contrary to the law so laid down.

g)     Whereas the Hon’ble Apex Court have time and again said that even if an alternative remedy is available to an aggrieved party, Writ jurisdiction should be exercised by High Courts in cases (i) where the Writ petition seeks enforcement of any of the fundamental rights; (ii) where there is failure of principles of natural justice or (iii) where the orders or proceedings are wholly without jurisdiction or the vires of an Act is challenged. [M.P. State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd Versus Jahan Khan; Whirpool Corporation V/s. Registrar of Trade Marks; Harbanslal Sahnia & Anr. V/s. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors.; State of H.P. V/s. Gujarat Ambuja Cement Ltd; Sanjana M. Wig V/s. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd; Satwati Deswal Versus State Of Haryana.]


Material facts of the case:

The Petitioners, most respectfully submit that, having regard to the nature of reliefs prayed for in this Petition, the following facts become germane to the controversy herein; And, the reasonable satisfaction of the existence or the non existence, as the case may be, of these facts, may entitle the Petitioners the judgment in their favour.

The chronology / chain of events, which has led to the present situation, and has constrained the Petitioners to seek certain Reliefs from this Hon’ble Court. In the chronology / chain of events, the following facts should be set out in clear terms, at appropriate juncture.

The required averments, as may be applicable to the facts of the case, and depending upon the grounds on which the Petition is founded, are:


The ground: That the impugned Order was passed without following the procedure established under the law, the required averments:

1.      The Procedure, which is established under the relevant law, and which is to be followed, before passing of impugned Order:

2.      The procedure, if any, which is followed in the instant case whilst passing of impugned Order:

3.      The submissions made before the Court / Tribunal / Quasi judicial body / administrative authority discharging judicial function, before passing of impugned Order; and the substance of the said submissions:


The grounds: That the impugned Order was passed without affording opportunity of hearing / opportunity of hearing contemplated under the law; the averments:

1.      The Procedure, which is established under the law, which requires that personal hearing should be given before passing of impugned Order:

2.      The procedure, if any, which is followed in the instant case whilst passing of impugned Order:

3.      The prejudice which has caused due to non furnishing of opportunity of hearing before passing of Orders:

4.      Demonstrate that no prejudice would have caused to anyone if opportunity of hearing was granted:

5.      The submissions made before the Court / Tribunal / Quasi judicial body / administrative authority discharging judicial function, before passing of impugned Order; and the substance of the said submissions:



Please find updated draft at:

https://www.litigationplatform.com/




Important Links
Imposing Accountability: http://www.satyamevajayate.info/rtibook

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Application before Supdt. of Jail for signing Vakalatnama by accused

LETTER HEAD OF THE ADVOCATE To, The Superintendent of Jail _______ Jail Mumbai. FORWARDING THE VAKALATNAMA FOR THE SIGNATURE OF MY CLIENT / ACCUSED NAMED _______ Dear Sir, I am concerned for my Client (Name of the Accused) who is presently in your judicial custody and I will be defending the said accused in the criminal case. I herewith annex the Vakalatnama and my ID card for your reference. It is therefore, most humbly, requested that the signature of the said Accused be obtained on the said enclosed Vakalatnama and be returned the same to the bearer of the copy of this letter. Thanking you.    Yours truly, XYZ Encl: As above.  Note: The said letter may be handed over to the Police official standing outside the Jail and may be collected later on. Find updated draft at / and any other  Legal issues !! If you are facing any of these issues like (a) Recovery of Moneys (b) Immovable property

Discharge Application u/ss 227, 239, 245 CrPC

A broad approach to drafting of any Application / Petition / Complaint may be undertaken in three chronological “Heads” – 1.       Reliefs prayed for / claimed; 2.       Grounds for Reliefs prayed for / claimed; (both factual and legal); 3.       Narration of facts substantiating the said grounds. Further, there may be narration of such facts in the   beginning of the draft, which would lay foundation for “material facts of the case”. Grounds for Reliefs prayed for / claimed implies (a) the essence / conclusion of material facts; and (b) other legal provisions which supports the reliefs prayed for / claimed. IN THE METROPOLITANS MAGISTRATES _____COURT AT ESPLANADE, MUMBAI C.C. No. ________/ SS / 2015 ______________________                                        ..Complainant Versus ___________________                                              ..Accused                    APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR Acc

APP FOR DISCHARGE OF SURETY U.S.444

BEFORE THE METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATES             COURT AT ………. C.R. No.    /  20__           ABC                                                           Applicant                                                                                   Versus           The State of Maharashtra           (through XYZ Police station)                     Respondent APPLICATION FOR DISCHARGE OF SURETY U/S 444 OF CrPC, 1973 MAY IT PLEASE YOUR HONOUR The Applicant beg to state as under – 1.      That the Applicant is the Surety for ………., the accused in the above case. 2.      That the Applicant, for the past 2 months, requesting the said accused to arrange for fresh surety in place of the present Applicant, for, the Applicant has lost control over the movement of the said accused. 3.      That the Applicant would not be able to cause the presence of said accused on the coming dates of hearing because of Accused’s such behaviour. 4.      That t