WRIT PETITION

Writ Petition:
The expression ‘Writ’ is not defined in our ‘Constitution. In a dictionary meaning writ is ‘a formal order in writing to be issued under the seal, in the name of a Sovereign, Government, Court or other authority, commanding an officer or other person to whom it is issued, to do or refrain from doing some act specified therein’. The writ petition does not confer any inherent right to the petitioner, rather it is a power vested upon the High Court (Article-226) and Supreme Court (Article-32) to exercise when there is a presence of an error regarding laws on fundamental rights and irreparable damages. For an example relating to tax issue High Court will not interfere under Article-226 of the Constitution of India, rather can question the tax related disputed matters and can reverse or quash the order of the tax authority. The National Tax Tribunal that has been established under Article-323B of the Constitution does not take away the supervisory powers of the High Court and the Supreme Court under Article 226/32. Recently, the Supreme Court in the case of L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, (228 ITR 725) had an occasion to test the Constitutional validity of such exclusion of power vested under Article-226/227 and Article-32 of the Constitution in favor of such Tribunals and held that to the extent these exclude the jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court under Articles 226/227 and 32 of the Constitution, are unconstitutional on the ground that it affects the basic structure of the Constitution.
In an another case where the Madras High Court held in Aditanar Educational Institution v. Assistant Director of Income-tax (297 I.T.R. 376) that the relief under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can be granted in spite of the availability of alternate remedy under the statute, only based on undisputed facts. When the High Court finds that factual disputes are involved, it would not be desirable to deal with them in a writ petition.
Under Article-226 the High Court can not consider evidence as Court of appeal, but can make a conclusion arrived on irrelevant grounds can be set aside. On the other hand under Article-32 of the Constitution Supreme Court have the power and original jurisdiction to issue writ for the enforcement of fundamental rights guaranteed in Part-III of the Constitution.
Court is also empowered to refuse the writ petition if there is any efficient alternative to get the remedy by way of Appeal or Review. The objective of the writ is to prevent miscarriage of justice, equity and good conscience.

There are five writ petitions in the Constitution of India and those are Writ of Mandamus, Writ of Habeas Corpus, Writ of Prohibition, Writ of Certiorari, Writ of Quo Warranto.
1) The Writ of Mandamus (means ‘we command’) is generally filed by the petitioner where the Court gives direction to any government, sub-ordinate Court, corporation or others public authority to do something or refrain to do something. It demands some activity on the part of the body or person to whom it is addressed. It commands the person to whom it is addressed to perform some legal duty of public nature, which he has refused to perform, when such performance cannot be enforced by any other adequate legal remedy. Mandamus is available against judicial/quasi-judicial as well as administrative authorities. Prohibition and Certiorari are available only against judicial and quasi-judicial authorities. According to Article-361 of the Constitution a Wirt of Mandamus can not lie against the President or Governor of a state for the exercise of their duties and power.
Example: In Commissioner of Customs (Seaport Import) v. Unistar World Trade, 2009, the Madras High Court held that a Writ of mandamus can be granted in a circumstance where the petitioner has made a request and the denial of the request is performed by the Court.
2) The Writ of Habeas Corpus (means ‘has his body’) is in a nature of an order calling upon the person who has detained another to produce the latter before the Court for ensuring the legal justification for such confinement. Any interested person can file this writ on behalf of the detainee. The purpose of this writ petition is to ensure the release of a person from detention, but this does not conclude the acquittal of a person from his guilt.
Example: In Nilabati Behera v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1993 SC 1960) case, where the Orissa police arrested son of the writ petitioner for the purpose of police interrogation and during the pendency of the petition the son of the petitioner found dead on railway track, wherein Court allowed the writ petition and the petitioner was awarded Rs. 1,50,000 as a compensation.
3) The Writ of Prohibition (means ‘to forbid’) is issued by the Court to an inferior judicial and quasi-judicial authority that forbid the latter to continue some proceedings therein in excess of its jurisdiction or usurp a jurisdiction with which it is not legally vested or act mala fide having personal interest in the cause. This writ is generally available before trial or during the course of trial where authorities are acting without jurisdiction. Prohibition is generally issued by the Court where the dispute is relates to issues having lack of jurisdiction. This writ is issued by the superior Court against the inferior Court from continuing with the proceedings.
Example: In Thirumala Tirupati v. Thallappaka (AIR 2003 SC 3290), the Supreme Court of India has categorically defined that when a Writ of Prohibition can be issued-
1. Proceeds to act without jurisdiction or in excess of jurisdiction.
2. Proceeds to act in violation of the rules of natural justice.
3. Proceeds to act under a law which is ultra vires or unconstitutional.
4. Proceeds to act in contravention of the fundamental rights.
4) The Writ of Certiorari (means ‘be certified’) is filed under Article-226 of the Constitution and it is issued for correcting gross error on jurisdictional matter, that is when a subordinate Court is found to have acted without jurisdiction/overstepping the limits of jurisdiction or acting in flagrant disregard of law or the rules of procedure or acting in violation of principles of natural justice where there is no procedure specified, and thereby occasioning failure of justice. Certiorari is available at later stage for cancellation of authority assumed without jurisdiction. This writ is issued to quash judicial/quasi-judicial order, judgment or decision of an inferior court delivered after the conclusion of proceedings and to pronounce Perverse and subjective orders.
Example: In the case of M/S Himalaya E-Com Marketing & Finance Ltd. & Ors. v. GNCT of Delhi & Ors (16th May 2008), where the petitioners were been prayed for a Writ of Certiorari quashing of two FIRs that has been filed against them. Petitioner argued on the basis of the violation of fundamental rights. The Delhi High Court held that “a Wirt Court is required to see is whether the assertions made in the complaint/FIR constitute an offence if the same are presumed to be correct”. Applying this test Court held that “we have no manner of doubt that the allegations made against the petitioners justified the registration of the FIRs against them for initiating investigation into the same”. In the result, this Writ petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
5) The Writ of Quo warranto (means ‘by what warrant or authority’) is a prerogative writ where Court directs a person to show on what authority he or she is for exercising some of the powers or rights or holding a public office . This can be issued to correct a wrongful assumption of a public office. This is issued when the office is a public office and substantive in nature/created by statute or by Constitution/the respondent has asserted his claim to that office. The objective of this writ is to see that a person holding a public office shall not usurp the public office.
Example: If a person who is an IPS officer who has to be leave his office within 30 years from the date of joining, but if he hold the office even after the expiry of 30 years and using power vested upon him then any interested person can file a Writ of Quo Warranto against him arguing that the IPS fellow is using his power without any authority.