Writ of Certiorari
Writ of Certiorari: Detailed Explanation
Introduction
The Writ of Certiorari is a judicial remedy issued by a higher court to a lower court, tribunal, or administrative authority directing it to send the records of a case for review. The purpose is to examine the legality, jurisdiction, or procedural correctness of the lower body's decision.
Certiorari is mainly used to quash or annul decisions or orders that are:
Without jurisdiction
Made in excess of jurisdiction
In violation of the principles of natural justice
Arbitrary, illegal, or mala fide
It is a tool of judicial review to check abuse or excess of power by inferior courts or administrative authorities.
Nature and Scope
Discretionary Writ: Courts may refuse certiorari even if illegality exists if it is not necessary for justice.
Corrective, not Appellate: Certiorari does not decide the merits but corrects jurisdictional errors or procedural irregularities.
Applies to Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Authorities: Usually issued against tribunals, boards, or administrative agencies acting in a judicial/quasi-judicial capacity.
Grounds for Issuance
Lack of Jurisdiction or Excess of Jurisdiction
Violation of Natural Justice
Error of Law Apparent on the Face of Record
Arbitrariness or Mala Fide Action
Failure to Exercise Jurisdiction
Limitations
Cannot be issued to correct errors of fact or mere irregularities.
Not issued against purely legislative or executive acts (except when they involve violation of natural justice or jurisdiction).
Must be filed within a reasonable time.
Important Case Law Explaining Writ of Certiorari
1. Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, AIR 1967 SC 1857
Facts:
The Rajasthan State Electricity Board passed an order exceeding its jurisdiction.
Holding:
The Supreme Court issued certiorari to quash the order on the ground of excess of jurisdiction.
Significance:
Reaffirmed certiorari’s role in controlling excess of jurisdiction.
Emphasized the power of courts to keep administrative bodies within legal limits.
2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597
Facts:
The government issued a passport cancellation order without providing a hearing.
Holding:
The Supreme Court held that certiorari is available to quash administrative orders violating principles of natural justice.
Significance:
Expanded the scope of certiorari to protect fundamental rights.
Reinforced procedural fairness as a mandatory requirement.
3. Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram Sardar Singh Raghuvanshi, AIR 1975 SC 1331
Facts:
The administrative authority acted arbitrarily in granting benefits.
Holding:
Certiorari was issued to quash the arbitrary and mala fide administrative order.
Significance:
Emphasizes that certiorari is a remedy against arbitrariness and mala fide actions.
Upholds fairness and reasonableness in administrative decisions.
4. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India, AIR 1970 SC 150
Facts:
The selection committee acted without following the principles of natural justice.
Holding:
Certiorari was issued to quash the decision for failure to provide a fair hearing.
Significance:
Underlines that quasi-judicial bodies must follow natural justice or face certiorari.
Strengthens judicial control over administrative discretion.
5. State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, AIR 1992 SC 604
Facts:
The police registered a criminal case without jurisdiction or proper investigation.
Holding:
The Supreme Court issued certiorari to quash the order registering the FIR.
Significance:
Illustrates use of certiorari to check jurisdictional errors by executive agencies.
Prevents misuse of power under the guise of legal authority.
Summary Table of Writ of Certiorari Cases
| Case | Year | Grounds for Certiorari | Key Legal Principle |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal | 1967 | Excess of jurisdiction | Limits jurisdiction of administrative authorities |
| Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India | 1978 | Violation of natural justice | Protects procedural fairness and fundamental rights |
| Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagatram | 1975 | Arbitrariness and mala fide actions | Remedy against arbitrary administrative acts |
| A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India | 1970 | Failure to observe natural justice | Ensures fair hearing in quasi-judicial decisions |
| State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal | 1992 | Lack of jurisdiction by executive agency | Prevents abuse of executive power |
Conclusion
The Writ of Certiorari is a crucial judicial tool to ensure that administrative and quasi-judicial authorities act within their legal boundaries, uphold fairness, and do not abuse power. It safeguards individual rights against arbitrary, illegal, or jurisdictionally defective decisions and reinforces the rule of law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments