Article 226: Simplified and Demystified

Article 226 of the constitution grants the High Court the authority to issue directives, orders, or writs to any individual or entity, including the government, in the form of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, or certiorari.

We will explore the grounds on which individuals can file a writ petition. These grounds encompass a wide range of violations, including infringement of fundamental rights, illegal detention, and administrative injustice. We will examine case studies and real-life examples to illustrate how individuals have successfully utilised Article 226 to seek justice and redressal.

Thereafter, we will also discuss Article 227, which empowers the high courts to supervise all courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction.

Various Writs Under Article 226

• Habeas corpus

Habeas corpus is a legal writ that requires someone who has been arrested to be brought before a judge or into court, typically to secure their release unless there is a lawful reason for their detention.

• Mandamus

Mandamus writ is issued as a command to an inferior court or ordering someone to perform a public or statutory duty. It is pretty similar to a bossy older sibling telling their younger sibling to clean their room because it's their duty as a member of the family. Except in this case, the bossy older sibling is a court, and the younger sibling is an inferior court or person who needs to perform a specific task.

• Prohibition

Prohibition is issued to prevent an inferior court or tribunal from exceeding its jurisdiction in cases pending before it or acting contrary to the rules of natural justice.

• Quo warranto

Quo warranto is a writ that is used to inquire into the legality of someone's claim to a public office. Like most legal terms, its origin lies in Latin, where it means ‘by what authority.’ It is used to stop the unauthorized occupation of a public office and is only applicable to public offices, not private offices. It's the legal equivalent of a parent intervening when an older sibling is bossing around their younger sibling.

• Certiorari

The Supreme Court or a High Court can issue a Certiorari writ to quash an order passed by an inferior court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial authority. The High Court has the power to issue this writ to enforce fundamental rights under the Constitution of India or for any other legal rights.

Mandamus vs. Prohibition

Certiorari vs. Prohibition

Article 226 vs. Article 227

The scope of Article 226 is broader than that of Article 32, as it allows the High Court to issue orders and writs not only for the enforcement of fundamental rights but also for the enforcement of legal rights granted by statute.

One of the main differences between Articles 226 and 227 is that actions taken under Article 226 are carried out by the High Court using its original jurisdiction. In contrast, actions taken under Article 227 are purely supervisory in the role.

Moreover, the jurisdiction under Article 226 can only be exercised on behalf of an aggrieved party, while the supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 can be exercised suo moto (on its own initiative).

The High Court does not have the authority to act as an appellate court when exercising its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 according to Indian laws. Still, it does have the power to correct errors or injustices that may have occurred in the decisions of lower courts or tribunals.

In the Chandigarh Administration v. Manpreet Singh case, the High Court's role was determined to be purely supervisory rather than serving as an appellate authority over the orders and actions of subordinate authorities when operating under Article 226. The Supreme Court also discussed the circumstances under which each of these articles should be used, such as correcting errors of jurisdiction or keeping subordinate courts within their jurisdiction. In the case of Radhey Shyam & Anr vs. Chhabi Nath & Ors, the Supreme Court further clarified that the power under Article 227 should only be exercised in cases of grave injustice or failure of justice and should not be used as an alternate remedy to appeal.

Who can file the writ petition?

A writ petition can be filed by any individual or organisation whose fundamental rights, as mentioned under Part – III of the Indian Constitution, or other legal rights are violated. It serves as protection against the infringement of these rights.

Where and When should the Writ Petition be filed?

For the violation of fundamental rights, the writ petition can be filed in either various High Courts or the Supreme Court. Under Article 32, an individual can file a writ petition in the Supreme Court if their fundamental rights have been violated.

Under Article 226, a person can approach the High Courts to file a writ petition when there is a violation of their fundamental rights. It is important to note that the authority against whom the writ petition is filed must be present within the territory of India for the petition to hold value.

It is not necessary to first approach the High Court and then the Supreme Court. When a person's fundamental rights are infringed, they can move to either court.

✅ Amto Tip:

If you can approach either the high court or the supreme court to file a writ petition, you should choose the high court first to keep your options open for later.

In the case of Vijai Raje Scindia vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, it was established that there is no specific time limit to file a writ petition in India. However, the petition is expected to be filed without any undue delay. If there is a delay, the court may require a valid justification for it. A reasonable delay can

Sample Template for Writ Petition in High Courts for Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo Warranto or Certiorari

Conclusion

Articles 226 and 227 of the Indian Constitution give the power of judicial review to the High Courts and the Supreme Court, respectively. This means that they have the authority to examine the decisions of lower courts and government agencies to ensure that they are in accordance with the law. The jurisdiction of these articles is wide-ranging, but it should be exercised sparingly and only to correct errors of jurisdiction. It is not meant to re-examine pure findings of fact, which is the role of an appellate court. The power of revision, on the other hand, enables a court to assess the correctness, legality, or propriety of any decision or order made by an inferior court and to ensure that the proceedings of that court were conducted regularly. The jurisdiction of Article 226 cannot be used as a revision or appeal court when an alternative remedy, such as an appeal, is available to the person seeking to challenge a decision.