Certiorari – quashing unlawful decisions
Certiorari – Quashing Unlawful Decisions
Introduction
Certiorari is one of the writs issued by courts under Article 32 (Supreme Court) and Article 226 (High Courts) of the Constitution of India. It is a judicial remedy aimed at quashing or invalidating unlawful, illegal, or ultra vires orders or decisions passed by inferior courts, tribunals, or administrative authorities.
Purpose of Certiorari
To correct errors of jurisdiction or law committed by inferior courts or administrative bodies.
To quash decisions that are illegal, irrational, or violate principles of natural justice.
To ensure that administrative authorities act within their lawful powers.
To maintain the rule of law and protect fundamental rights.
Scope of Certiorari
It is not an appellate remedy; courts do not substitute their own decisions but only examine legality.
Grounds for issuing certiorari include:
Lack of jurisdiction or acting beyond jurisdiction.
Error of law apparent on the face of the record.
Violation of natural justice (audi alteram partem, bias).
Unconstitutional or illegal exercise of power.
Malafide or arbitrary actions.
Nature of Decisions Subject to Certiorari
Orders of inferior courts, tribunals, quasi-judicial and administrative authorities.
Not applicable to legislative or purely executive actions.
Administrative decisions that affect legal rights.
Key Case Laws on Certiorari
1. A.K. Kraipak v. Union of India (1969)
Facts: The case involved appointment to a service where the selection committee acted with bias.
Held: Certiorari was issued to quash the selection because of violation of natural justice and bias.
Significance: Established that administrative decisions tainted by bias are liable to be quashed.
2. State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (1977)
Issue: Whether certiorari can be issued against administrative orders.
Judgment: Affirmed that certiorari is available to quash administrative decisions that are illegal or beyond jurisdiction.
Impact: Strengthened the scope of certiorari in administrative law.
3. Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal (1967)
Facts: The electricity board passed an order without jurisdiction.
Outcome: Certiorari was issued to quash the order for acting beyond jurisdiction.
Principle: Reinforced that lack of jurisdiction is a valid ground for certiorari.
4. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978)
Context: Detention order and passport impoundment without hearing.
Court’s Role: Exercised writ jurisdiction and quashed the order for violating principles of natural justice.
Importance: Highlighted certiorari’s role in safeguarding fundamental rights.
5. Sukhdev Singh v. Bhagat Ram (1975)
Issue: Arbitrary termination of service.
Decision: The Court quashed the order as it violated the principles of fairness and was arbitrary.
Administrative Law Significance: Arbitrary and unfair decisions attract certiorari.
6. R.D. Shetty v. International Airport Authority of India (1979)
Facts: Arbitrary tender cancellation.
Judgment: Quashed the tender decision on grounds of non-application of mind and arbitrariness.
Lesson: Certiorari checks administrative arbitrariness.
Procedure
An aggrieved party files a writ petition under Article 226 or 32 seeking certiorari.
The court examines the legality of the impugned decision or order.
If unlawful, the court quashes or annuls the order.
Limitations of Certiorari
Cannot be used as an appeal to substitute the decision.
Not applicable where alternative statutory remedies exist.
Courts may refuse certiorari if delay or laches are evident.
Summary
Certiorari is a potent judicial tool for controlling administrative and quasi-judicial actions.
It ensures authorities act within jurisdiction, legally, and fairly.
Courts rely on certiorari to quash unlawful, arbitrary, or biased decisions.
Landmark cases have expanded and clarified its scope, making it a cornerstone of Indian administrative law.
RELATED Blog
0 comments