Audi alteram partem
Latin: Hear the other side.
Also called: Rule of fair hearing, Right to be heard
A rule of natural justice that no one should be condemned unheard: a person affected by a decision must have notice of the case and a fair chance to answer it.
Explained
Audi alteram partem means hear the other side. With nemo judex in causa sua, the rule against bias, it is one of the two principles of natural justice. It requires that a person against whom an adverse decision may be taken be told the case against him and be given a fair opportunity to answer it before the decision is made.
The rule has two broad facets: notice of the proposed action and the grounds for it, and a reasonable opportunity to present one's case. Its content is flexible. An oral hearing, cross examination or legal representation is not always required, and in urgent situations minimal notice may suffice. Where a prior hearing is impracticable, a full post decisional hearing may satisfy the rule, but urgency ordinarily modifies the rule rather than excludes it.
In India the rule is read into statutes that are silent, whenever the decision has civil consequences, unless the statute excludes it expressly or by necessary implication. Since Maneka Gandhi, a procedure depriving a person of liberty must be fair, just and reasonable under Article 21, and a hearing was read into Section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act, though a hearing soon after the impounding was held sufficient. Where the rule applies, a decision made in breach of it is vitiated; in S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan (1980) the Court held that proof of prejudice was unnecessary, though later decisions have declined relief where a hearing would have been a useless formality.
The rule can be excluded by the Constitution or a statute. Article 311(2) gives a civil servant a reasonable opportunity of being heard before dismissal, removal or reduction in rank, but its second proviso removes that right in the cases it lists, and Article 14 cannot be used to reintroduce it. Examiners test the meaning of the maxim, its two facets, the pre and post decisional hearing distinction, and the leading cases.
What the law says
(1) No person who is a member of a civil service of the Union or an all-India service or a civil service of a State or holds a civil post under the Union or a State shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to that by which he was appointed.
[(2) No such person as aforesaid shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges ***:
[Provided that where it is proposed after such inquiry, to impose upon him any such penalty, such penalty may be imposed on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry and it shall not be necessary to give such person any opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed:
Clause (2): reasonable opportunity of being heard, and its exclusions
Example
For example, if a licensing authority cancels a trader's licence on a complaint without telling him of the complaint or hearing his reply, the cancellation is open to challenge for breach of audi alteram partem.
For the exam
- Meaning: hear the other side; no one should be condemned unheard.
- Two facets: notice of the case, and a fair opportunity to answer it.
- Implied wherever a decision has civil consequences, unless excluded.
- A post decisional hearing may suffice where a prior hearing is impracticable.
- Breach vitiates the decision; S.L. Kapoor (1980) held proof of prejudice unnecessary.
27 questions in the Law Maker question bank use this maxim. Practise Administrative Law questions
Judgments
- Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. Union of India (1981)Section 18AA of the IDR Act does not universally exclude a pre-decisional hearing before a takeover; since none was given though one was practicable, the Court, on the Government's undertaking, directed a full post-decisional hearing instead of quashing the order.
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)Procedure under Article 21 must be right, just and fair, not arbitrary; Articles 14, 19 and 21 are not mutually exclusive; a hearing is implied in Section 10(3)(c) of the Passports Act, which was held valid.
- S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan (1980)The supersession of the New Delhi Municipal Committee under Section 238(1) of the Punjab Municipal Act, 1911 without notice or opportunity to answer the allegations was vitiated by breach of audi alteram partem; proof of prejudice was unnecessary.
- Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985)The majority held that when a clause of the second proviso to Article 311(2) applies, no inquiry or opportunity of hearing need be given, that Article 14 cannot reintroduce it, and overruled Challappan on hearing before penalty.
Related terms
- Nemo judex in causa suaNo one should be a judge in his own cause. It is the rule against bias, one of the two main principles of natural justice.
- Ex parteDone in the absence of the other party, or on the application of one party only. In civil procedure, a hearing or decree against a defendant who does not appear after due service.
- CertiorariA writ by which a superior court calls up the record of an inferior court, tribunal or authority and quashes a decision made without jurisdiction, against natural justice, or with an error of law apparent on the record.
- Ultra viresBeyond the powers. An act, rule or law made in excess of the authority conferred by the Constitution, the parent statute or a company's memorandum is ultra vires and void.
- Bona fideIn good faith; genuine and honest, without fraud or deceit. Its opposite is mala fide. Statutes give good faith their own definitions.
Further reading
Checked 6 November 2026. Statutory text is quoted from the Bare Acts library, taken from India Code. See the full glossary.