2014 (2) TMI 1422 - SC - Indian Laws

Principles of Natural Justice - Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution of India - Whether any reasonable restriction or limitation or exception to this principle (of natural justice) is permissible in the interest of national security - HELD THAT - It is now settled law that there are some special exceptions to the principles of natural justice though according to Sir William Wade Administrative Law, 10th Edition, H.W.R. Wade C.F. Forsyth, Pages-468-470 , any restriction, limitation or exception on principles of natural justice is only an arbitrary boundary . It is difficult to define in exact terms as to what is national security. However, the same would generally include socio-political stability, territorial integrity, economic solidarity and strength, ecological balance, cultural cohesiveness, external peace, etc. - What is in the interest of national security is not a question of law. It is a matter of policy. It is not for the court to decide whether something is in the interest of State or not. It should be left to the Executive. Thus, in a situation of national security, a party cannot insist for the strict observance of the principles of natural justice. In such cases it is the duty of the Court to read into and provide for statutory exclusion, if not expressly provided in the rules governing the field. Depending on the facts of the particular case, it will however be open to the court to satisfy itself whether there were justifiable facts, and in that regard, the court is entitled to call for the files and see whether it is a case where the interest of national security is involved. Once the State is of the stand that the issue involves national security, the court shall not disclose the reasons to the affected party. It has become unnecessary for this Court to go into more factual details and consideration of the appeal on merits - Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
1. Whether any reasonable restriction or limitation to the principle of natural justice is permissible in the interest of national security.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the principle of natural justice and its application in cases concerning national security. The appellant, a ground handling service provider, had its security clearance withdrawn by the Central Government in national interest. The appellant challenged this decision, arguing that they were not given a fair hearing before the withdrawal of security clearance. The High Court initially ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the importance of natural justice in administrative actions with civil consequences. However, the Division Bench overturned this decision, stating that certain information was withheld in national interest, justifying the withdrawal of security clearance. The Division Bench highlighted the importance of national security and the authority's discretion in such matters. The Supreme Court, after considering the differing views of the High Court, reiterated that in cases involving national security, the principle of natural justice may be subject to reasonable restrictions. The Court cited legal precedents emphasizing that national security concerns may override the duty of fairness, and decisions based on national security must be respected. The Court concluded that since the appellant's security clearance had expired, further examination of the case on merits was unnecessary, and the appeal was disposed of accordingly.

The judgment underscores the delicate balance between natural justice and national security concerns. It clarifies that in cases where national security is at stake, the principle of natural justice may be subject to limitations. The Court highlighted the need for courts to defer to the executive on matters of national security and emphasized that evidence of national security risks must be presented to justify decisions that may infringe on natural justice principles. The judgment provides a nuanced understanding of how national security considerations can impact administrative decisions and underscores the importance of upholding national security in such cases.