खालीलपैकी कोणत्या बाबतीत नैसर्गिक न्यायतत्त्वांची पायमल्ली करण्यात आली ?
(a) एका अधिकाऱ्यापुढे केस चालली परंतु दुसऱ्याच अधिकाऱ्याने निकाल दिला.
(b) विनंती करणाऱ्या अर्जदाराला त्याची बाजू ऐकून घेण्यास बोलावले पण तो आलाच नाही.
(c) गुंतागुंतीचे किंवा न्यायिक प्रश्न उद्भवत नाही म्हणून वकीली मदत दिली गेली नाही.
(d) परीक्षेत नक्कल करताना विद्यार्थ्याला पकडले आणि त्याचे म्हणणे ऐकून न घेता त्याला पुढील परीक्षेला बसण्यास अटकाव केला.
पर्यायी उत्तरे :

The correct answer is Option B ((a) and (d)).

Key Points:
• Violations of the Principles of Natural Justice:
• He who hears must decide: In *Gullapalli Nageswara Rao v. APSRTC (1959)*, the Supreme Court ruled that if one officer hears the matter and another officer passes the final order, the rule of fair hearing is breached -> (a) is a clear violation.
• Fair Hearing Before Penalty: In disciplinary inquiries (including student debarment), punishing/debarring a person without affording an opportunity to explain or defend violates *audi alteram partem* (*Board of High School v. Ghanshyam*, 1962) -> (d) is a clear violation.
• In scenario (b), opportunity was granted but waived by the party (no violation). In scenario (c), legal representation is not an absolute right in domestic inquiries unless mandated by rules or complex legal points.
• Natural justice is violated in (a) and (d), matching Option (2).
• Key Takeaway: Natural justice is violated when one officer hears but another decides, or when a student is penalized without a hearing.