Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the jurisdiction of a High Court to issue appropriate writs particularly a writ of Mandamus is highly discretionary. The relief cannot be claimed as of right. […]
Writ Law Digest
Law of Writs
Central Bureau of Investigation & ANR. Vs. Mohd. Parvez Abdul Kayuum Etc-05/07/19
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION-the provisions of Article 32 do not specifically indicate who can move the court. In the absence of such a provision in that respect, it is plain that the petitioner may be anyone in whom the law has conferred power to maintain an action of such nature. It is open to anybody who is interested in the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution for relief.
Writs of certiorari
It is well-settled that the powers of this Court to issue writs of certiorari under Art. 32(2) as well as the powers of the High Courts to issue similar writs under Art. […]
When in contractual matters involving the state or its instrumentality writ interference can be resorted
DDA is acting unfairly, unjustly and unreasonably, even in contractual matters, appropriate relief can be granted. Judicial pronouncements on the issues as to when in contractual matters involving the state or its instrumentality writ interference can be resorted : Delhi High Court
MANSUKHLAL VITHALDAS CHAUHAN Vs STATE OF GUJARAT
Mandamus which is a discretionary remedy under Article 226 of the Constitution is requested to be issued, inter alia, to compel performance of public duties which may be administrative, ministerial or statutory in nature.
Writ Petition challenging the orders passed by Civil Courts refusing to grant interim injunction could be maintainable
Writ Petition under Article 227 challenging the orders passed by Civil Courts refusing to grant interim injunction under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC could very well be maintainable. […]
Condition for entertaininga Public Interest Litigation
At the first instance the petitioner has to satisfy this Court that he is entitled to maintain this writ petition as a public interest litigation. Such public interest litigations are entertained as […]
Whether a writ proceeding is civil or criminal depends on the nature of relief claimed and grounds for such relief
Whether a writ proceeding is civil or criminal, depends on the nature of relief claimed and grounds for such relief. “Civil Proceedings” or “Criminal Proceedings” are not defined anywhere. The Constitution of […]
Writ of certiorari- an Indian historical perspective
A writ of certiorari like the writ of prohibition is a judicial writ of antiquity and it is the ordinary process by which the Court of King’s Bench Division exercises control over […]
SC refused to interfere with the arrest of five activists by Maharashtra Police in Koregaon-Bhima violence case.
Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with liberty to the concerned accused to take recourse to appropriate remedy as may be permissible in law. The interim order passed by this Court on 29th August, 2018 shall continue for a period of four weeks to enable the accused to move the concerned court. The said proceedings shall be decided on its own merits uninfluenced by any observation made in this judgment, which is limited to the reliefs claimed in the writ petition to transfer the investigation to an independent Investigating Agency and/or Court-monitored investigation. The Investigating Officer is free to proceed against the concerned accused as per law. All the accompanying applications are also disposed of in terms of this judgment”. [Read the Judgment]
Maj. Amod Kumar Vs. Union of India & ANR. [ALL SC 2018 SEPTEMBER]
September 6, 2018-Writ Petitions under Article 32-Army Service Corps-The Officers belonging to the ASC, Army Ordinance Corps, and Electronic and Mechanical Engineers, i.e. the services stream, do not constitute a common cadre with those serving in the Arms, and Arms Support for the purposes of promotion.4 As a result, they were not entitled to be considered for promotion to the rank of Colonel against the vacancies created in pursuance of the implementation of the AVS Committee Report.
The Petitioners have contended that the Posting Orders passed by the Respondents posting them to operational areas/units is violative of their Fundamental Rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The Petitioners have, however, failed to substantiate how their Fundamental Rights have been violated. Postings and transfers are a necessary incident of service. Hence, the grievance, if any, cannot be entertained under Article 32.
M. K. Gopalan and another Versus The State of MADHYA PRADESH [ALL SC 1953 APRIL]
KEYWORDS:-SANCTION FOR PROSECUTION AIR 1954 SC 362 : (1955) 1 SCR 168 : (1954) CriLJ SC 1012 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) M. K. Gopalan and another Appellant Versus The State of MADHYA […]
The High Court cannot in guise of exercising its jurisdiction under Article 227 convert itself into a Court of appeal
In Bathutmal Raichand Oswal vs. Laxmibai R. Tarta and another, (1975) 1 SCC 858, this Court held : “The High Court cannot in guise of exercising its jurisdiction under Article 227 convert […]
Habeas corpus writ
Latin, meaning “you have the body.” A writ of habeas corpus generally is a judicial order forcing law enforcement authorities to produce a prisoner they are holding, and to justify the prisoner’s […]
