Maradana Mosque v. Badiuddin Mahmud and Another
[1967] 1 A.C. 13 — Natural justice, jurisdiction & error of law
The case is about a government takeover of Zahira College. The Minister relied on a ground that the managers were not told about and did not give them a fair chance to answer it. The court said: when a Minister uses such powers, he acts in a judicial or quasi-judicial way. He must follow natural justice, ask the right legal questions, and be satisfied on the correct statutory condition at the time of the order. Because he failed to do this, the order had no jurisdiction and was quashed.
- Was the Minister acting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity with a duty to follow natural justice?
- Did he exceed jurisdiction by asking the wrong questions or skipping the statutory satisfaction needed for an order under section 11?
- Was there an error of law on the face of the record?
- Hear the other side (audi alteram partem): no order without fair notice and an opportunity to answer.
- Natural justice applies whenever powers affect rights in a judicial/quasi-judicial way.
- Jurisdictional satisfaction: the decision-maker must be satisfied on the present statutory condition, not just past breaches.
- No fair hearing on the “funds” ground—natural justice violated.
- Minister did not satisfy the present statutory condition—no jurisdiction.
- Error of law: relied on unnotified ground; mixed past with present.
- Takeover followed statutory power after consultation.
- One serious breach was enough to act.
- Function was administrative; certiorari should not lie.
Held: The order was without jurisdiction and could not stand. The Minister’s function was judicial or quasi-judicial. He had to observe natural justice and be satisfied on the right questions at the right time. He used a ground not put to the managers, so the hearing was unfair. The appeal succeeded and the takeover order was quashed.
- When rights are affected, the decision-maker must follow natural justice.
- Jurisdiction depends on present satisfaction of the statutory condition, not only past contraventions.
- Using an unnotified ground is an error of law and denies a fair hearing.
It is a classic on fair hearing in administrative action. It teaches two checks for exams and practice: Was the right statutory question answered now? and Was the person heard on the actual grounds?
- Notice & Reply: Put every relied-on ground to the party.
- Present Satisfaction: Decide on the condition as at the date of the order.
- Certiorari: Lies for judicial/quasi-judicial acts with legal error.
Mnemonic: “HEAR-NOW-GROUNDS”
- HEAR: Give fair notice and chance to answer.
- NOW: Be satisfied on the present statutory condition.
- GROUNDS: Rely only on grounds put to the party.
| Issue | Rule | Application | Conclusion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the Minister lawfully take over the school? | Natural justice; jurisdictional satisfaction on present facts; fair notice of grounds. | Grounds expanded after the hearing; no chance to answer “funds” ground; focus on past breach. | Order ultra vires; appeal allowed; takeover quashed. |
- Natural Justice
- Basic fairness rules—notice and a chance to be heard.
- Jurisdictional Fact
- A condition that must exist now before power can be used.
- Error of Law
- A legal mistake on the face of the record that voids the decision.
Natural Justice
Cases reinforcing fair notice and hearing before adverse action.
Audi Alteram Partem Due ProcessJurisdictional Facts
Orders must rest on the correct statutory satisfaction at the date of decision.
Ultra Vires CertiorariStructured Fields
Share
Related Post
Tags
Archive
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now