“No question other than relating to Fundamental Rights will be determined in a proceeding under Article 32. The difference between Article 32 and 226 is that while an application under Article 32 lies only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, the High Court under Article 226 has a wider power to exercise its jurisdiction not only for the […]
Read more "Battle of the Articles I: 32/226"“It may not always be safe for a Writ Court to decide issues and facts having great impact on general public or a large part of it only on basis of Oath against Oath.” – Hon’ble Justice Dipak Misra, Riju Prasad Sharma v. State of Assam, [Civil Appeal Nos. 3276-3278 of 2013]. ‘Oath against Oath’ […]
Read more "Oath Against Oath"My Lord, Is a Writ Application maintainable against an Order of West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal, refusing to initiate Contempt Proceedings against an Authority arrayed as a Respondent before the Tribunal? Yes. “Such a pristine question of law does not require any reference to the facts… We are unable to agree with the […]
Read more "Writ Against Order of Tribunals II"Only recently in Jacky v. Antony, (2014) 6 SCC 508 it was decided, “in no case, power under Article 226 can be exercised to question a plaint.” In Radhey Shyam v. Chabbi Nath, [Civil Appeal No. 2548 of 2009] it has been further held, “Judicial Orders of a Civil Court are not amenable to Writ […]
Read more "Bull in a China Shop"
The Last Word 