Food For Thought (Writ Petition under Constitution of India)

1. The two well recognized exceptions to the requirement of exhaustion of the statutory remedies before the extraordinary jurisdiction of the HC is invoked, are (1) where the order impugned is passed without jurisdiction, and (2) where the order is passed in violation of natural justice.

2. The vast majority of petitions under Article 226 are filed solely for the purpose of obtaining interim orders and thereafter prolong the proceedings by one device or the other so as to paralyze the collection of revenue.

3. Every citizen whose fundamental right is infringed by the State has a fundamental right to approach the Court for enforcing his right.

4. Where a party had a statutory remedy available under the relevant statute, he cannot bypass the said remedy and file a Writ Petition under Article 226. If such a procedure is allowed, it may enable the litigant to defeat the provisions of the statute.
   A Writ petition should not be entertained when statutory remedy is available under the concerned legislation unless exceptional cases are made out.

5. Certiorari does not lie to quash the Judgments of inferior courts of civil jurisdiction.

6. Both certiorari and prohibition are employed for the control of inferior courts, tribunals and public authorities.

7. Certiorari was meant to supervise “judicial acts” which included quasi judicial functions of administrative bodies.

8. It is plain that certiorari will not be issued as the cloak of an appeal in disguise.

9. A judicial order of a competent court could not violate a fundamental right.

10. Final order of the Apex Court cannot be challenged under Article 32 as violative of fundamental right.