Revisiting ECIL V. B. Karunakar: A Flawed Legacy In Natural Justice Jurisprudence
- IJLLR Journal
- 1 hour ago
- 1 min read
Kawanpreet Kaur, Jindal Global Law School
ABSTRACT
The case of Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad etc. v. B. Karunakar and Ors. is a landmark judgement in the Principles of Natural Justice jurisprudence. It upheld the right of the alleged delinquent employees in an institution to receive the report of the enquiry committee and to respond to that report. While the judgment ostensibly strengthened the principles of natural justice under Article 311(2) of the Constitution, it simultaneously gave rise to certain doctrinal and procedural issues. Such issues include concerns regarding the prejudicial test laid down by the Court, failing to engage with the issue of biases within the quasi-judicial authority, leaving the issue of delayed reports unaddressed and applying the law prospectively, leaving employees who were dismissed before the given date with no legal remedy. Despite the existence of such issues, the decision continues to be cited in the contemporary decisions without the concerns being addressed. This commentary argues that while the case is foundational, its flaws must be acknowledged. It also suggests certain changes which can be made to the law laid down by the Court in this decision to affirm the rights of the employees under the Constitution.
Keywords: Principles of Natural Justice, Quasi-judiciary, Article 311(2) of the Constitution.
