Principle of Natural Justice mandatory in every case of disc

4.1 The provisions of the Evidence Act and the Criminal Procedure Code are not applicable to departmental inquiries. (State of Orissa vs. Murlidhar Jana, AIR 1963 SC 404) Whatever the Inquiry Officer does should be ‘lawful’ but not ‘legalistic’.

4.2 The Inquiry Officer should afford reasonable opportunity to both sides to present their respective cases including full opportunity for cross-examining witnesses. The principles of natural justice should be followed.

4.3 A departmental proceedings is not a criminal trial and the standard of proof required in a departmental inquiry is that of preponderance of probability and not proof beyond reasonable doubt. (Union of India vs. Sardar Bahadur, 1972 SLR SC 355: State of Andhra Pradesh vs. Sree Ramarao, AIR 1963 SC 1723: Nand Kishore Prasad vs. State of Bihar and ors, 1978(2) SLR SC 46)

well i must add few words to Vishal's reply. the legal aspect is NO ONE SHALL BE CONDEMNED UNHEARD, so compliance of principles of natural justice is must....a reasonable opportunity to present his/ her part shall be given to the accused/ respondent.

may be any kind or proceedings, civil or criminal or departmental an opportunity of being heard is must other wise it will be clear cut violation of constitutional provisions as well.

Thank you Vishal and Kiran.

No sir . The Court, despite opining that principle of natural justice was required to be followed, may, however, decline grant of a relief, inter alia, on the premise that the same would lead to a useless formality or that the person concerned, in fact, did not suffer any prejudice. The expressions "natural justice" and "legal justice" do not present a water-tight classification. It is the substance of justice which is to be secured by both, and whenever legal justice fails to achieve this solemn purpose, natural justice is called in aid of legal justice. Natural justice relieves legal justice from unnecessary technicality, grammatical pedantry or logical prevarication. It supplies the omissions of a formulated law (kindly see, Crl Appeal no 471/2009, Uma Nath Pandey and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Anr. decided on 16/3/9 )

He, who alleges violation of natural justice, must establish that prejudice has been caused to him .--State of U.P. v. Prem shanker sharma(2007)1LBEC572  (Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. now elevated to Supreme Court)

Dear Dr.Tripathi, I appreciate the deep understanding of the matter and also thank you for the citation. Please also check your mail.