This maxim has been applied to ensure fair play and justice for the person concerned. It is particularly applicable in the field of administrative action. The procedure adopted must be fair and equitable. The person should have the opportunity to defend himself or herself in court. The person who decides something without hearing the other side, even if he says what is right, but he would not have done what is right. The principle of consultation is essentially a set of procedural rules and therefore covers all stages of an administrative court, namely from publication to final decision. The Latin maxim Audi alteram partem is based on the common law rule regarding judicial function, which states that both parties must hear each case. It applies not only to the plaintiff, plaintiff or applicant, but this rule also applies to the defendant that he has the right to present his testimony and evidence in order to take an adequate defense on his side. This rule protects the right of another party if it is affected by the action of the applicant, petitioner or law enforcement.

A fair hearing may take any form, such as written or oral, depending on the nature of the case or the discretion of the authority. But the authority must have given an opportunity before taking action in the case. This rule ensures that the party concerned must be heard and that the authority has given an appropriate opportunity to be heard. This maxim means “hear the other side” or no one should remain inaudible, both parties have the opportunity to be heard. Justice will be done to both parties. Audi alteram partem comes from a Latin expression “audiatur et altera pars”. Its meaning is also the same as that of the other side to hear. This is a very strong rule that means that no one will be tried without a fair hearing. The reason for this maxim is to give another party the opportunity to respond to the evidence against it. There is no chance of fair justice without hearing the other party. The main basis of Audi alteram partem is to hear the other side.

In this way, both parties have the opportunity to present their point of view so that justice can be done to both. In this article, we will discuss in detail the meaning, essential elements, exceptions, etc. […] […] The rule of Audi alteram partem is that no one can be punished without hearing from his side. She should be informed before taking action against her, and she should be heard so that she can adequately defend herself with her witness and the evidence on her side. (1) Natural justice is a flexible instrument in the hands of the judiciary to remedy injustice in appropriate cases. Violation of the rule of daily procedure alone cannot easily lead to the conclusion that it causes damage. The rule of natural justice has evolved through human progress. It did not evolve from the Indian Constitution, but from humanity itself. Each person has the privilege of speaking and being heard when charges are laid against the person in question. The Latin maxim “Audi Alteram Partem” is the standard of characteristic justice, in which every individual has the opportunity to be heard. The meaning of a proverb itself is that no individual is denounced without being heard. Therefore, a judgment on a case is not rendered in the absence of another party.

There are many situations in which this rule of natural justice is excluded and the Party does not have the opportunity to be heard. Natural justice implies that justice be granted to both parties in a simple, reasonable and reasonable manner. Under the watchful eye of the Court, both parties are equal and have an equal opportunity to express themselves and prove themselves. In that case, it was decided that the denial of legal representation constituted a violation of natural justice, because the party was not in a position to effectively understand the legal norms and should have the opportunity to be heard again. The Audi alteram partem is used in the administrative field of the legal system. This maxim is intended to render natural and fair justice to the person who is the party concerned before the court. Each interested party has the right to have knowledge of the case against him before it is noted at the beginning of the hearing. If a particular date, time and place of the hearing are mentioned, it is also worth mentioning the legal jurisdiction where the case or action is the case, and what charges or allegations are made against that person. In short, we can say that each case began with a notification. Before taking any action against the data subject, the notification must be sent to him.

The notice shall inform the party of the case against it that is necessary before it can act against it. If, without notice, an order that constitutes the power of the principle of natural justice is issued, and such an order becomes null and void. .