Of course.
Here is a detailed note on Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
structured for clarity and understanding.
---
Note on Article 226 of the Constitution of India
1. Introduction
Article 226 is one of the most powerful and fundamental provisions in the
Indian Constitution. It empowers the High Courts of India to issue various
writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose. It
is a cornerstone of judicial review and administrative law in India, acting as a
bulwark for protecting citizens' rights and ensuring government
accountability.
2. Text of Article 226 (In Essence)
Article 226(1) states that notwithstanding anything in Article 32, every High
Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it
exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in
appropriate cases, any government, within those territories directions,
orders, or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus,
prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari for:
· a) The enforcement of any of the fundamental rights conferred by Part III of
the Constitution.
· b) The enforcement of any other legal right or for any other purpose.
This "any other purpose" clause is what gives Article 226 its expansive
scope, making it broader than Article 32 (which is only for fundamental
rights).
3. Key Features and Scope
· Wider than Article 32: While the Supreme Court can issue writs only for the
enforcement of fundamental rights (under Article 32), High Courts can issue
them for both fundamental rights and for the enforcement of ordinary legal
rights. This means a petitioner can approach a High Court for a breach of
contract, service matters, or any statutory right, even if no fundamental right
is involved.
· Territorial Jurisdiction: A High Court can exercise its power only if the cause
of action (wholly or in part) arises within its territorial jurisdiction, or if the
respondent (authority or person) resides or is located within its territory.
· Discretionary Power: The power under Article 226 is discretionary. The High
Court has the discretion to refuse to grant a writ if it finds that the petitioner
has not come with clean hands, there is an alternative remedy available, or
there has been a delay (laches).
· Against "Any Person or Authority": The writs can be issued not only against
state and governmental authorities but also against private bodies
performing public functions (e.g., a private university, a cooperative society,
or a telecom company). This is based on the doctrine of State under Article
12.
· Flexibility: High Courts are not limited to issuing the five traditional writs.
They can also pass any order or give any direction they deem appropriate to
do justice in a case. This makes it a flexible and potent tool.
4. Types of Writs (Briefly)
1. Habeas Corpus ("To have the body"): Orders the production of a person
who has been detained illegally and sets them free if the detention is found
unlawful.
2. Mandamus ("We command"): Commands a public authority to perform a
public or statutory duty it has failed or refused to perform.
3. Prohibition ("To forbid"): Issued by a higher court to a lower court or
tribunal to prevent it from exceeding its jurisdiction where no other remedy is
available.
4. Certiorari ("To be certified"): Issued to a lower court or tribunal to quash an
order or decision that has been passed without jurisdiction or in violation of
principles of natural justice.
5. Quo Warranto ("By what authority?"): Challenges the legality of a person's
claim to a public office. It restrains a person from holding an office they are
not entitled to.
5. Significance and Importance
· Guardian of Fundamental Rights: It provides a quick and effective remedy
for the protection of fundamental rights at the state level, making justice
accessible.
· Check on Administrative Action: It is the primary tool for judicial review of
administrative actions, ensuring they are legal, rational, and procedurally
fair.
· Upholds Rule of Law: It ensures that every authority, including the
government, acts within the limits of the law.
· Accessible Justice: With High Courts in every state, it provides easier
geographical access to justice for the common citizen compared to the
Supreme Court.
6. Limitations and Doctrines
· Alternative Remedy: A court may refuse to entertain a writ petition if an
equally efficacious alternative remedy exists (e.g., an appeal to a tribunal).
However, this is a rule of discretion, not a bar. Courts can intervene if the
alternative remedy is ineffective, the order is ultra vires, or principles of
natural justice are violated.
· Laches (Delay): The petitioner must approach the court without undue
delay. A court may deny relief if there is an unexplained and prolonged delay
in filing the petition, as it can prejudice the rights of others.
· Res Judicata: The principle that a matter already adjudicated by a
competent court cannot be re-agitated.
· Mootness: The court will not decide academic or hypothetical questions.
7. Article 226 vs. Article 32
Feature Article 226 (High Courts) Article 32 (Supreme Court)
Purpose Enforcement of Fundamental Rights + Other Legal Rights
Enforcement of Fundamental Rights only
Jurisdiction Territorial (over a state or group of states) Entire territory of India
Power Discretionary A fundamental right in itself
Scope Wider Narrower (but more powerful for FRs)
8. Conclusion
Article 226 is rightly described as the "conscience keeper" of the Indian
judiciary at the state level. Its expansive scope and discretionary power
make it an indispensable instrument for ensuring justice, upholding the rule
of law, and maintaining a system of checks and balances on the executive
and legislative organs of the state. It is a vital link between the citizen and
the justice system, making constitutional remedies a living reality.
