Types of Writs in the Indian Constitution

Introduction – Writ Jurisdiction

Prior to the coming into force of the Constitution of India on 26 January 1950, the High Courts of Madras, Bombay and Calcutta had the power to issue certain prerogative writs within their original civil jurisdiction.
However, after the commencement of the Constitution of India, remedies in the nature of prerogative writs were incorporated under Articles 32 and 226 for redressal of Fundamental Rights and for “any other purpose”.

Under Article 32 any aggrieved person can move the Supreme Court through its original jurisdiction for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution.
Article 32 can be summarised as:
The Constitution guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights.
The Supreme Court has the power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari whichever may be appropriate for the enforcement of fundamental right.
The powers can be exercised by any court empowered by Parliament to do so.

Article 226 provides 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 any 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 or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.

Habeas corpus literally means “to produce the body” or” to have the body”
It is considered as the most important safeguard of personal liberty, the aim of which is the speedy release of a person who is illegally detained.
It is an order issued by the court to a person who has detained another person, to produce the body of the latter before it. The court then examines the cause and legality of detention. It would set the detained person free, if the detention is found to be illegal. Thus, this writ is a bulwark of individual liberty against arbitrary detention.
The writ of habeas corpus can be issued against both public authorities as well as private individuals.
The writ, on the other hand, is not issued where the
- detention is lawful,
- the proceeding is for contempt of a legislature or a court,
- detention is by a competent court, and
- detention is outside the jurisdiction of the court.

It literally means ‘we command’.
It is a command issued by the court to a public official asking him to perform his official duties that he has failed or refused to perform.
It can also be issued against any public body, a corporation, an inferior court, a tribunal or government for the same purpose.
The writ of mandamus cannot be issued
- against a private individual or body;
- to enforce departmental instruction that does not possess statutory force;
- when the duty is discretionary and not mandatory;
- to enforce a contractual obligation;
- against the President of India or the State Governors; and
- against the Chief Justice of A High Court acting in judicial capacity.

Literally, it means ‘to forbid’.
It is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to prevent the latter from exceeding its jurisdiction or usurping a jurisdiction that it does not possess. Thus, unlike mandamus that directs activity, the prohibition directs inactivity.
The jurisdiction for the grant of a writ of prohibition is primarily supervisory, and the object of the writ is to restrain courts or inferior tribunals from exercising jurisdiction which they do not possess at all or to prevent them from exceeding the limits of their jurisdiction.
The circumstances under which the writ of prohibition can be issued is when the quasi-judicial bodies/tribunals are:
- acting without jurisdiction;
- acting beyond its jurisdiction;
- acting in violation of the rules of natural justice;
- proceeding under a law, which is ultra vires; and
- acting in contravention of a fundamental right.
The writ of prohibition can be issued only against judicial and quasi-judicial authorities.
It is not available against administrative authorities, legislative bodies, and private individuals or bodies.

Certiorari literally means, “to be fully informed of” ‘to be certified’.
It is issued by a Higher Court to a Lower Court or tribunal either to transfer a case pending with the latter to itself or to squash the order of the latter in a case.
It is issued on the grounds of excess of jurisdiction or lack of jurisdiction or error of law. Thus, unlike prohibition, which is only preventive, certiorari is both preventive as well as curative.
Previously, the writ of certiorari could be issued only against judicial and quasi-judicial authorities and not against administrative authorities. However, in 1991, the Supreme Court ruled that the certiorari can be issued even against administrative authorities affecting rights of individuals. Like prohibition, certiorari is also not available against legislative bodies and private individuals or bodies.

In the literal sense, it means ‘by what authority or warrant’.
It is issued by the court to enquire into the legality of claim of a person to a public office. Hence, it prevents illegal usurpation of public office by a person.
The object of this writ is to prevent a person who has wrongfully usurped a public office from continuing in that office.
The writ calls upon the holder of the office to show the court under what authority he holds the office. If the court decides that a person is occupying the office in question illegally, it passes the order of ouster.
The writ can be issued only in case of a substantive public office of a permanent character created by a statute or by the Constitution. It cannot be issued in cases of ministerial office or private office. Unlike the other four writs, this can be sought by any interested person and not necessarily by the aggrieved person.