A.K. Kraipak v Union of India

Facts

The Acting Chief Conservator of Forests, Naqishbund, was a member of a special selection board recommending officers for the Indian Forest Service while also being a candidate for selection to the same cadre. Though he abstained when his own name was considered, he participated in the deliberations when the names of his rivals were considered and while preparing the final preference list. The unsuccessful candidates challenged the selection on the ground of bias.

Issues

• Whether the rules of natural justice apply to a purely administrative function such as selection to a government service.
• Whether the mere presence and participation of a candidate on the selection board vitiates the selection on the ground of bias even without proof of actual bias.

Arguments

The petitioners argued that the presence of a rival candidate on the board created a real likelihood of bias and the selection function was effectively judicial. The Union argued that the function was administrative and the member had withdrawn when his own case was considered, so no bias was made out.

Held

The Court held there was a real likelihood of bias because the mere presence of a candidate on the selection board could adversely influence the judgment of the other members. It held that the old distinction between administrative and quasi-judicial functions was thinning and being obliterated, and that the rules of natural justice apply even to administrative inquiries because their purpose is to prevent miscarriage of justice. Actual proof of bias is unnecessary; reasonable likelihood of bias suffices to invalidate the selection. The selections in which the interested member participated were quashed.

Ratio decidendi

Natural justice, including the rule against bias, governs administrative as well as quasi-judicial action; where there is a real likelihood of bias actual proof is not required to vitiate the decision.

Significance

Landmark that demolished the rigid administrative/quasi-judicial dichotomy as the gateway to natural justice in India, vastly expanding the reach of fair-procedure norms over administrative action; consistently followed (e.g. D.K. Yadav v JMA Industries) and forming the foundation for Maneka Gandhi.

Related