A.K. Kraipak v Union of India (1970)
A.K. Kraipak v Union of India (1970) 2 SCC 262
Court:
Supreme Court of India
Facts of the Case:
A.K. Kraipak was an applicant for a position under the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
During the selection process, some members of the UPSC were found to have pecuniary interest in the outcome of the selection.
Specifically, some UPSC members were related to other candidates or had personal stakes, raising concerns of bias.
Kraipak challenged the selection, alleging that the members of the UPSC had violated the principles of natural justice by participating in the decision despite the conflict of interest.
He argued that this affected the fairness and impartiality of the selection process.
Legal Issues:
Whether the participation of members with a conflict of interest violates the principles of natural justice.
What is the scope of bias and disqualification in administrative tribunals or decision-making bodies?
The extent to which procedural fairness applies to public bodies like the UPSC.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that the participation of members with pecuniary or personal interest in a decision violates the rule against bias (nemo judex in causa sua).
The Court ruled that natural justice principles apply fully to administrative bodies like the UPSC.
Members with a direct or indirect interest in the outcome must recuse themselves to ensure impartiality.
The Court emphasized that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done.
The selection process was declared void, and the matter was remitted for fresh consideration without bias.
Legal Principles Established:
1. Rule Against Bias (Nemo Judex in Causa Sua):
No person can be a judge in their own cause.
Even a reasonable apprehension of bias is enough to invalidate a decision.
2. Natural Justice in Administrative Actions:
Principles of natural justice apply to public bodies and administrative tribunals, not just courts.
These include:
Right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem), and
Rule against bias.
3. Pecuniary and Personal Interest:
Any pecuniary interest or personal stake disqualifies a member from participating in decisions.
This applies whether the interest is direct or indirect.
Supporting Case Law:
1. Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40
A foundational case on natural justice emphasizing the need for a fair hearing.
2. Dimes v Grand Junction Canal (1852) 3 HL Cas 759
Classic English case establishing the rule against bias due to pecuniary interest.
3. Harbans Singh v Union of India AIR 1964 SC 305
Indian case affirming natural justice principles in administrative actions.
Summary:
A.K. Kraipak v Union of India is a milestone case affirming that natural justice and procedural fairness are essential in administrative decision-making.
The Supreme Court reinforced the rule against bias, holding that members with personal or financial interest cannot participate in decisions.
The case widened the application of natural justice principles beyond courts to bodies like the UPSC and other administrative tribunals.
It has become a cornerstone in Indian administrative law, shaping fairness and integrity in public administration.
RELATED Blog
0 comments