Join our Law Notes WhatsApp Group and stay updated with Legal and Judicial Updates
According to the Indian Legal System, the Supreme Court and High Courts (at state level) have jurisdiction over writs. Article 32 of Constitution of India guarantees fundamental rights. Article 32(1) provides the means to go to Supreme Court for the enforcement of the fundamental rights. The Supreme Court is made the protector and guarantor of the fundamental rights.
The Writ Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is limited to the enforcement of Fundamental rights while the High Court has the jurisdiction of enforcement of Fundamental rights and for other purposes also.
Parts of a Writ
- Name of the Court
- Number and year of petition
- Name of the parties
- Reference of relevant Article
- Body of the petition
- Affidavit and verifications
Types of Writs
Recent cases / Related cases / Case Law
- An Award by a Lok Adalat can be challenged only by filing a Writ Petition and not by way of separate suit - Supreme Court
- Kochunni vs State of Madras, AIR 1959 SC 725: The right to move to Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental rights is itself a fundamental right
- Darya vs State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1961 SC 1457: It is the duty of the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
- Gopal Das vs Union of India, AIR 1955 SC 1: An application under Article 32 cannot lie where no fundamental rights are infringed.
- Coffee Board vs CTO, AIR 1971 SC 870; Star Mills vs State of UP, AIR 1984 SC 373: No question other than relating to fundamental rights can be determined in a proceeding under Article 32.
- State of Uttar Pradesh vs Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86: Existence of an alternative remedy is a rule of discretion and not rule of law and therefore the existence of alternative remedy is not an absolute bar.
- City Industrial Development Corporation vs Dosi Aardeshir Bhiwandi Wala, AIR 2009 SC 571: Courts exercising public law jurisdiction do not encourage agitation of stale claims and exhuming matters where the rights of third parties may have accured in the interregnum
- Kumkum Khanna v Principal, Jesus and Mary College, AIR 1976 Del 35
- G Misra v Orissa Association of Sanskrit Learning and Culture, AIR 1971 Ori 212
- Radha Kumari v MM Mahila Mahavidyalaya, AIR 1976 Pat 378
- Vaish Degree College v Lakshmi Narain, (1976) 2 SCC 58: AIR 1976 SC 888: Writ against private affiliated college
- Dr Het Ram Kalia v Himachal Pradesh University, AIR 1977 Him Pra (NOC) 246 is a case about irregular appointment, Quo Warranto, Writ under Article 226 of Constitution of India, application of Res judicta and treatment of writs when delay and laches exits particularly when a continuing wrong exits.
- Swetamber Sthanakwasi Jain Samiti v Alleged Committee of Management, Sri R J I College, (1996) 3 SCC 11: High Courts refuse to accept writs when there is a predetermined course available for seeking justice.
From the Constitution