filmov
tv
V110- Writ Petition is Maintainable even where Alternate Remedy is available. Article 226.
Показать описание
00:00 - Introduction
01:49 - Can a Writ Petition be maintainable even after an alternate and efficacious remedy being available?
02:05 - Statutory Remedy for Dispute Resolution
02:39 - Approaching the High Court for Dispute Resolution
03:00 - 5 (Five) Circumstances for approaching the High Court even after Statutory/ Alternative Remedy being available.
03:34 - 1) When there is violation of Fundamental Rights
03:41 - 2) When there is violation of Principles of Natural Justice
04:07 - 3) When an Order was passed wholly without Jurisdiction
04:30 - 4) When Vires of a Statute is Challenged.
05:03 - 5) When there is a pure Question of Law involved devoid of any undisputed facts.
06:51 - Conclusion
________
PRESENTED BY: Prashant Kanha, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. He is based out of Delhi and practices law mainly in the Supreme Court of India and High Court of Delhi, conducts arbitration as an arbitrator as well as a lawyer besides practicing before many other courts and Tribunals across India in various fields with the help of his team of lawyers.
IN CASE OF ANY OBJECTION, DISCREPANCY, MISINFORMATION, OR CLARIFICATION IN/ ABOUT THE INFORMATION IN THE VIDEO CONTACT AT +91 9599732224 or +91 9910843777 over WhatsApp or call on +91 8920718595.
******DISCLAIMER******
THE ABOVE VIDEO IS NEITHER AN ADVERTISEMENT NOR A LEGAL ADVICE, IT IS ONLY FOR INFORMATION & AWARENESS PURPOSES.
All due care has been taken by the presenter to stay accurate however, the interpretation of the law is based on specific facts and circumstances as such given information may not be fit for all as such always seek independent legal advice.
###-----ABSTRACT-----####
A "Writ" is a direction issued by a higher court, usually to a lower court (or any person or government authority), instructing them to act or abstain from acting in a certain manner. It is a legal mandate commanding you to carry out a particular action. Writ petitions are a type of public law litigation used to uphold constitutional rights, basic human rights, and other government obligations.
The High Courts’ writ jurisdiction is governed by Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. As per Article 226, High Courts can issue writs for "any other" purpose, in addition to protecting fundamental rights. Therefore, it is not necessary that the breach is of a fundamental or constitutional right to invoke a writ petition under Article 226. For issuance of a writ, any harm caused by the State or a State institution in violation of ordinary law would be sufficient.
ALTERNATE AND EFFICACIOUS REMEDY
In an event where there is an alternate and efficacious remedy available, the common rule is that the remedy must be availed before approaching the High Court under Article 226.
Although, availability of an alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court of its powers under Article 226; in an appropriate case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be entertained when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law.
In the case of Whirlpool Corporation v Registrar of Trademarks (1998) 8 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that a mere existence of an alternate remedy would not bar the High Court of its writ jurisdiction. However, litigators are advised to avail the remedy before approaching the High Court.
In this case, the Supreme Court famously observed that an alternative remedy would not operate as a bar in filing a writ in the following cases:
1) The Petition has been filed for enforcement of a Fundamental Right
2) The Petition involves violation of the Principles of Natural Justice
3) Order (impugned) from where the Petition is originating is wholly without Jurisdiction.
4) The Petition challenges the vires of a Legislation.
WRIT PETITION MAINTAINABLE EVEN AFTER ALTERNATE REMEDY AVAILABLE
In a recent judgement delivered by the Supreme Court in the case of Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. V Excise and Taxation Officer (2023) SCC OnLine SC 95, the court agreeing with the four settled circumstances, included the fifth circumstance.
The court stated that an alternate remedy would not operate as a bar in filing a writ petition even when 'there is pure Question of Law devoid of undisputed facts."
01:49 - Can a Writ Petition be maintainable even after an alternate and efficacious remedy being available?
02:05 - Statutory Remedy for Dispute Resolution
02:39 - Approaching the High Court for Dispute Resolution
03:00 - 5 (Five) Circumstances for approaching the High Court even after Statutory/ Alternative Remedy being available.
03:34 - 1) When there is violation of Fundamental Rights
03:41 - 2) When there is violation of Principles of Natural Justice
04:07 - 3) When an Order was passed wholly without Jurisdiction
04:30 - 4) When Vires of a Statute is Challenged.
05:03 - 5) When there is a pure Question of Law involved devoid of any undisputed facts.
06:51 - Conclusion
________
PRESENTED BY: Prashant Kanha, Advocate on Record, Supreme Court of India, New Delhi. He is based out of Delhi and practices law mainly in the Supreme Court of India and High Court of Delhi, conducts arbitration as an arbitrator as well as a lawyer besides practicing before many other courts and Tribunals across India in various fields with the help of his team of lawyers.
IN CASE OF ANY OBJECTION, DISCREPANCY, MISINFORMATION, OR CLARIFICATION IN/ ABOUT THE INFORMATION IN THE VIDEO CONTACT AT +91 9599732224 or +91 9910843777 over WhatsApp or call on +91 8920718595.
******DISCLAIMER******
THE ABOVE VIDEO IS NEITHER AN ADVERTISEMENT NOR A LEGAL ADVICE, IT IS ONLY FOR INFORMATION & AWARENESS PURPOSES.
All due care has been taken by the presenter to stay accurate however, the interpretation of the law is based on specific facts and circumstances as such given information may not be fit for all as such always seek independent legal advice.
###-----ABSTRACT-----####
A "Writ" is a direction issued by a higher court, usually to a lower court (or any person or government authority), instructing them to act or abstain from acting in a certain manner. It is a legal mandate commanding you to carry out a particular action. Writ petitions are a type of public law litigation used to uphold constitutional rights, basic human rights, and other government obligations.
The High Courts’ writ jurisdiction is governed by Article 226 of the Indian Constitution. As per Article 226, High Courts can issue writs for "any other" purpose, in addition to protecting fundamental rights. Therefore, it is not necessary that the breach is of a fundamental or constitutional right to invoke a writ petition under Article 226. For issuance of a writ, any harm caused by the State or a State institution in violation of ordinary law would be sufficient.
ALTERNATE AND EFFICACIOUS REMEDY
In an event where there is an alternate and efficacious remedy available, the common rule is that the remedy must be availed before approaching the High Court under Article 226.
Although, availability of an alternate remedy by itself does not divest the High Court of its powers under Article 226; in an appropriate case though ordinarily, a writ petition should not be entertained when an efficacious alternate remedy is provided by law.
In the case of Whirlpool Corporation v Registrar of Trademarks (1998) 8 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that a mere existence of an alternate remedy would not bar the High Court of its writ jurisdiction. However, litigators are advised to avail the remedy before approaching the High Court.
In this case, the Supreme Court famously observed that an alternative remedy would not operate as a bar in filing a writ in the following cases:
1) The Petition has been filed for enforcement of a Fundamental Right
2) The Petition involves violation of the Principles of Natural Justice
3) Order (impugned) from where the Petition is originating is wholly without Jurisdiction.
4) The Petition challenges the vires of a Legislation.
WRIT PETITION MAINTAINABLE EVEN AFTER ALTERNATE REMEDY AVAILABLE
In a recent judgement delivered by the Supreme Court in the case of Godrej Sara Lee Ltd. V Excise and Taxation Officer (2023) SCC OnLine SC 95, the court agreeing with the four settled circumstances, included the fifth circumstance.
The court stated that an alternate remedy would not operate as a bar in filing a writ petition even when 'there is pure Question of Law devoid of undisputed facts."
Комментарии