Doctrine of Post Decisional Hearing

Authors

  • Preksha Preya

Keywords:

Apex court, doctrine, administrative, right to hearing

Abstract

In an effort to find the correct balance between administrative effectiveness and individual fairness, the concept of a post-decisional hearing has developed over time. Pre-decisional hearings are those held by the authorities prior to the making of a decision or judgement, and post-decisional hearings are those held by the authorities following the making of the decision (Provisional). The idea of a postdecisional hearing provides individuals. The authorities can only make a preliminary decision not a
final one without consulting the party in issue, which is one of the most crucial things to keep in mind at a post-decisional hearing. In order to undermine the goal of delivering a fair hearing and make it less effective than a Pre-Decision Hearing, the objective is to make it harder for the authorities to change their minds after the Final Decision (similar proposition was held by the Apex Court).

References

Kishan Chand Arora v. Commissioner of Police, Calcutta (1961) 3 SCR 135

A.K. Kraipak & Ors v. Union of India (1969)

Ridge v. Baldwin (1964) AC 40

Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [1978] AIR 597

Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. Union of India [1981] AIR 818

Liberty Oil Mills v. Union of India [1984] AIR 1271

Published

2022-12-18

How to Cite

Preya, P. (2022). Doctrine of Post Decisional Hearing. Journal of Constitutional Law and Jurisprudence, 5(2), 20–23. Retrieved from https://lawjournals.celnet.in/index.php/Jolj/article/view/1104

Issue

Section

The Constitutional Jurisprudence: Concept, influence

Categories