EX. ARMYMEN'S PROTECTION SERVICES P. LTD. versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2014] 3 S.C.R. 359 · Decided: 26-02-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA · Disposal: Disposed off
Cited by 4 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

[2014] 3 S.C.R. 359 
EX. ARMYMEN'S PROTECTION SERVICES P. LTD. 
v. 
UNION OF !NOIA AND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 2876 of 2014) 
FEBRUARY 26, 2014 
[SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA AND 
KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.] 
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: 
Security policy - Natural justice -- Airport - Ground 
handling agency - Security clearance withdrawn in the interest 
of national security - f-leld: What is in the interest of national 
security is not a question of law - It is a matter of policy - It is 
B 
c 
not for the court to decide whether something is in the interest D 
of State or not - It should be left to the Executive - In a 
situation of national security, a party cannot insist for the strict 
observance of the principles of natural justice - In such cases 
it is the duty of the Court to read into and provide for statutory 
exclusion, if not expressly provided in the rules governing the 
E 
field - The security clearance granted to the appellant for a 
period of five years has already expired - It has become 
unnecessary for this Court to go into more factual details and 
consideration on merits. 
' 
The ·instant appeal arose out of the order of the 
F 
respondents withdrawing in the interest of national 
security, the security clearance of the appellant company 
for the ground handling services to Jet Airways in 
~arious aerodromes including Patna. The question for 
consideration before the Court was: On whether any G 
reasonable restriction or limitation or exception to the 
principle of the natural justice would be permissible in the 
interest of national security. 
359 
H 
360 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
Disposing of the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 There are some exceptions to principles of 
natural justice. National security would generally include 
socio-political stability, territorial integrity, economic 
8 solidarity and strength, ecological balance, cultural 
cohesiveness, external peace, etc. What is in the interest 
of national security is not a question of law. It is a matter 
of policy. It is not for the court to decide whether 
something is in the interest of State or not. It should be left 
C to the Executive. [para 11, 15 and 16] [365-B; 367-C & D] 
D 
Secretary of State for the Home Department v. Rehman 
(2003) 1 AC 153; Council of Civil Service Union and others 
v. Minister for the Civil Service (1985) AC 374; The Zamora 
(1916) II AC 77 - referred to. 
Administrative Law, 10th Edition, H.W.R. Wade & C.F. 
Forsyth, Pages-468-470 - referred to. 
1.3 In a situation of national security, a party cannot 
insist for the strict observance of the principles of natural 
E justice. In such cases it is the duty of the court to read 
into and provide for statutory exclusion, if not expressly 
provided in the rules governing the field. Depending on 
the facts of the particular case, it will, however, be open 
to the court to satisfy itself whether there were justifiable 
F facts, and in that regard, the court is entitled to call for 
the files and see whether it is a case where the interest 
of national security is involved. Once the State is of the 
stand that the issue involves national security, the court 
shall not disclose the reasons to the affected party. [para 
G 17] [367-F-H] 
1.4 The security clearance granted to the appellant 
by order dated 17 .04.2007 for a period of five years has 
already expired. In that view of the matter, it has become 
H unnecessary for this Court to go into more factual details 
EX. ARMYMEN'S PROTECTION SERVICES P. LTD. 361 
v. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS 
and consideration of the appeal on merits. [para 18 and 
A 
19] [368-A & CJ 
Case Law Reference: 
(1985) AC 374 
(1916) II AC 77 
(2003) 1 AC 153 
referred to 
referred to 
referred to 
para 12 
para 13 
para 16 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
B 
2876 of 2014. 
c 
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.04.2010 of the 
High Court of Patna at LPA No. 60 of 2010. 
Samir Ali Khan for the Appellant. 
Atul Nanda, Rameeza Hakeem, Amol N. Suryawashi, 
Parinay T. Vasandani, Law Associates, Sushma Suri for the 
Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KURIAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 
D 
E 
2. Natural justice is a principle of universal application. It 
requires that persons whose interests are to be affected by 
decisions, adjudicative and administrative, receive a fair and 
F 
unbiased hearing before the decisions are made. The principle 
is traceable to the Fundamental Rights under Part Ill of the 
Cons
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.