PIL: Part of Writ Jurisdiction

The Writ jurisdiction of the superior courts play an important role in the PIL. PIL usually filed praying the court to issue suitable writs.

Writ jurisdiction of SC under article 32:

 Provides for enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution.

 32(1) – guarantees right to move the SC by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
 32(2) – including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, whichever may be
appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental rights.
 In case of any infringement in FR, right to move to SC is itself a Fundamental Rights and the SC has the Duty to enforce the FR
guaranteed by the Constitution. SC – Protector / Guarantor of the FR.
 An application under article 32 cannot lie where no FR has been infringed. No question other than the question relating to FR can be
determined in a proceeding under article 32.
 Article 32 does not give SC an appellate jurisdiction, it provides original jurisdiction. It gives quick remedy.
 Infringement of FR is the Condition to present a petition to move to the SC under article 32 but there is no need to prove the actual
infringement of the FR and the petition will lie if there is imminent danger of the infringement of the FR.
 “in the nature of” indicates that powers are wide not confined only to issuance of writs. The curt can issue any order or direction
appropriate for the enforcement of any FR.

HABEOUS CORPUS – To bring the body / produce the body.

  Order to a person who has detained another person to produce the detainee before the court to examine the legality of his
detention. Court finds that there was no legal justification for the detention of such person than such detention is considered as
illegal and it will order immediate release of detainee.
 Object of this writ is to secure the release of the person detained illegally whether in prison or in private custody.

WHO MAY FILE?

 Ordinarily the person whose fundamental rights has been violated is entitled to apply for relief under article 32 and whose
fundamental rights and other legal rights has been infringed then under article 226. But in the case of Habeous Corpus and Quo
warranto a person other than the said person may apply for the relief.
 Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra AIR 1964 SC 686 - Application for the Habeous Corpus may be made by the Detainee himself or
if he is not in the position to file, then by other person on behalf of him.
 See Kamaladevi v. State of Punjab, 1985 – Application by stranger or a social worker.
 Raj Bahadur v. Legal Remembrancer AIR 1952 – If child is detained illegally and has no guardian or the guardian not capable to apply
for or does not apply then it may be made by his relative or his friend.
 Vidya Verma v. Shiv Narain AIR 1956 SC 108 – If the application is made by other person on behalf of detainee, then the person
applying should give the reason that why the detainee could not make the affidavit himself.

Where the person or authority against whom habeas corpus is sought is not within the territorial jurisdiction of the court;

Where imprisonment or detention of a person is in accordance with a decision rendered by a court of law or by an authority in accordance
with law;
 MANDAMUS:

Command issued by the superior court to the Government, inferior court, tribunal, public authority, corporation or any other person
having public duty to perform, asking to perform the public duty or to refrain from doing illegal act.

The writ is generally not issued against a private person for his act or omission because the aggrieved party has an alternative
remedy to file a civil suit against such person in a civil court.

Object is to compel the performance of public duties prescribed by the statute and to keep the sub ordinate tribunals and officers
exercising public functions within the limit of their jurisdiction.

It is issued to any authority exercising public functioning’s. so, it can be issued to any authority whether it exercises administrative,
legislative, judicial, or quasi-judicial functioning.

Who may apply?

Any person who is affected by the violation of statutory duty or the abuse of the statutory power may apply. The petitioner should have
legal right to compel the performance of the public duty on the opponent.

CONDITIONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF MANDAMUS:

The person or authority against whom the writ is sought to be issued must have some public duty to perform, which he has failed to
do so. But the court must make sure that the petitioner had made a demand for alleged breach of duty to be performed and the same has
been refused by the public authority before issuing the writ.

Such public duty must be imperative or mandatory in nature and not discretionary and there has to be a failure in its performance.
 The petitioner should have the right backed by law to compel the authority or person against whom he seeks to issue the writ of
Mandamus.

It may also be issued directing the public authority to restrain from doing an act which is unconstitutional or contrary to law.

WHEN IT MAY BE REFUSED? Or does not lie.

1. No writ of Mandamus can be granted against the President and governors of states.

2. Where the duty cast upon the government or public authority is discretionary in nature. (Rule to grant DA)

3. It won’t be granted against private individuals and companies that have no public duty to perform.

4. It cannot be issued against a legislature, commanding or preventing it to enact a legislation.

5. It will not lie for the enforcement of an obligation arising out of contract between the two parties.
6. It also holds the writ petition where it finds that certain relevant facts have been suppressed and not brought to the notice of the
court or the details furnished are false.

WRIT OF CERTIORARI:

Basically, it means “to be certified”. It can be issued by the Supreme Court or the High Court to quash an order already passed by a lower
court. It could also be used by the Supreme Court to transfer a particular matter to it or some other superior judicial authority for
consideration.
It is issued by the Supreme Court or the High Court to quash an order (order illegal) passed by the inferior court, tribunal, or body exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions, whenever the authority has acted in excess of its power, or without requisite jurisdiction, or has violated
the principles of natural justice. It is corrective in nature and is aimed at preventing overstepping by the judicial authorities.

The court or tribunal of which order is sought to be quashed by certiorari must be within the jurisdiction of the court before which the
application for certiorari has been presented.

No court can issue certiorari to quash its own order or the order of a superior court or the order of the co-ordinate court.

CONDITIONS:

 Judicial or Quasi-Judicial body must have legal authority to decide on the cases affecting the rights of people.
 Such authority must have acted-
o In excess of judicial power, or

o without requisite jurisdiction, or (excess, overlapping or crossing)

o in violation of the principles of natural justice.

OBJECT:

To keep inferior court and quasi-judicial authorities within the limits of their jurisdiction. The important function of the writ is to determine
the lower court or an inferior tribunal had acted without jurisdiction or in excess of power vested in it.
WHO MAY APPLY? - Generally, the person whose legal right has been affected (affected person) may apply for certiorari. Any member of
the public may draw the attention of a superior court to an order passed by the inferior court or tribunal being illegal or ultra vires.

WHEN CERTIORARI WOULD NOT LIE:

It cannot be issued to quash an act or ordinance on the ground that it is unconstitutional or void. It lies only against inferior court or
tribunal.

WRIT OF PROHIBITION:

Prohibition is a legal term that implies ‘to prohibit, restrain, prevent, or forbid.’ A higher court issues a writ of prohibition against the lower
court to prevent it from exceeding its authority or going beyond its required jurisdiction. It cannot be enforced against administrative
agencies, statutory authorities, or private persons or enterprises. It is exclusively applicable to judicial and quasi-judicial bodies.

OBJECT:

The object of prohibition is to restrain the inferior courts or tribunals or bodies exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions from exceeding
their jurisdiction and, thus to keep them within the limit of their jurisdiction.

East India Commercial Co. v. Collector of customs, AIR 1962 SC 1895 – It is an order directed to an inferior court which forbids the court to
continue the proceedings therein excess of jurisdiction or in contravention of the law of the land.