Table of Contents

01.Principles of Natural Justice

The provision crafted in the doctrine of the principle of natural justice is the binding principles to all the courts, quasi judiciary forums as well as the administrative office.

It has the three main Aspects

  1. No one should be a judge in his own matter.
  2. No one can be condemned unheard.
  3. The party is entitled to know every reason and the decisiontaken by the authority.
Any order or judgement passed in violation of the principles of natural justice is considered as ab initio void.
The same is also held in the judgement of ;
  1. Uma Nath Pandey & Ors. Vs State of UP, 2007
  2.  Vishnu Agarwal Vs State of UP, 2011
    • Recall Application
  3. Siemens Engineering VS UOI, 1976
    • Not to pass reasoned order / judgement
  4. Manoj Kumar Khokhar Vs State Of Rajasthan, 2022
    • Not to pass cryptic order / judgement

Exception to the National Justice;

  • Empty Formality Theory.
  • In some cases, the Supreme Court had held that if the
    admitted and indisputable facts only one conclusion is possible and under the law only one penalty is permissible court may not compel the observance of natural justice.
  • The law on the point is very well-settled that where the conclusion is controversial natural justice with all its rigours is indispensable.

02.Recall of the Order / Judgement

Any order / judgement is passed in violation of the principles of natural justice can be recall

Recall application is different than the review application.

The same is also held in the judgement of ;
  1.  Vishnu Agarwal Vs State of UP, 2011
  2. Asit Kumar Kar Vs State of WB., 2009

03.Audio Video mode of hearing by Courts,Tribunals, commission etc.

The use of technology by the Bar and the Bench is no longer an option but a
necessity. Members of the Bench, the Bar and the litigants must aid each other to create
a technologically adept and friendly environment. The above directions must be
implemented by all concerned stakeholders in letter and in spirit. 

The same is also held in the judgement of ;
  1. Sarvesh Mathur versus The Registrar General High Court of Punjab and Haryana
  2. Kishan chand Jain VS UOI, WP(Civil) 360 of 2023

04.Uploading of signed and original copy of the judgement

Any order passed by a court, quasi judiciary or tribunal should be ; 

  1.  Digitally Signed
  2.  Avoid Uploading of scanned copy
State Bank of India Vs Ajay Kumar Sood-2021

05.writ petition should be discourage by high court if alternative remedies are available.

No one can invoke the writ jurisdiction of a constitutional court of the alternative remedy is available to him as per the provision of law, for example

  1.  A writ petition directing the registration of FIR cannot be filed as the remedies available with the SP office u/s 154(3) of CrPcC1973, office of the senior police officer us 36 of CrPC.,1973, with magistrate court u/s 156(3).
  2.  if the provision of review or appeal etc. are available.
  3. Complainant Must Show Sufficient Cause For Bypassing Magistrate, Directly Approaching HC For Registering FIR  :  Pubjab and Haryana High Court-2024

06. Any order passed in contravention to the law is ab initio void.

It is a  settled rule of law that any order passed in contravention to the provision of law is void ab initio.

Case Laws;

01.  Official Liquidator Vs Dayanand & Ors, 2005
02.  State of Odisha Vs Sulekh chandra Pradhan, SLP (civil) ,22987-23015 of 2019.


07. Stop Sexual Harassment at work Place

Every Office or institution public or private having more than 10 workers/ officers is bound to constitute the Vishakha committee or Internal complaint Committee to redress the complaints of the sexual harassment at work place.

01. The same is function at the District administrative office / collectorate under the very supervision of the collector / DM.

Case Laws;

01.  Vishaka & Ors. Vs State of Rajasthan, 1997


08. Illegal and arbitrary closing of case.

It has been seeing many times that cases are closed illegally and arbitrarily by taking vague grounds such as;

  1. The complainant no longer wants to prosecute the accused.
  2. The complainant no longer wants to follow his case.
  3. The matter is ancient one, etc.
  4. The complainant is adopting dilatory tactics with an intention to harass the Opp. party.

It is only done for Statistical purposes of removing Docket from the Rack’

It has been seen that where the adjudicating authority does not have any power to close the case  but still closes the cases illegally and arbitrarily such as  the cases closed by;

  1. The State Human Rights Commission or NHRC
  3. Lokpal or Lokayukta
  4. State or Central Information Commission

Even if the law provides the adjudicating authority has the power to do so the same power cannot be used Whimsically or Mechanically. 

Case Laws;

  1.   The Associated Cement Co. Ltd. Vs Keshvanand – 1997-SC
  2. Bijoy Vs State of Kerala , 2016, Kerala HC.
  3. K. K. Construction v. Shri Bhagwan Singh Poswal, Chairman Shri Vinayak Mission Medical and Education Society Jaipur & Ors : Punjab & Haryana High Court.-2024

09. Printing on A4 paper and on double side.

The Supreme Court has issued circular stating that filings in the judicial side should be in A4 size paper with both-sides printing from April 1 2020 onwards.This has been done with the view to “bring uniformity about use of paper and printing thereon and to minimize the consumption of paper and consequently to save the environment”.

10. High Court is duty bound to Quase cases of False Allegation

Section 482 can be used to quash even non-compoundable offences. It is the duty of the High Court evaluate whether quashing a criminal proceeding serves the interests of justice. The inherent power of the High Court must be exercised: To secure the ends of justice.

High court have a duty to Quash Vexatious Criminal Prosecution.

Case Law ;

Vishnu Kumar Shukla  Vs State of UP, Crl. Appeal no.3618 of 2023