Writs — Set 2

Correct Answer: C. While the proceedings are pending

• **Prohibition — issued while proceedings are pending** = Prohibition is issued by a higher court while proceedings are still pending in a lower court or tribunal that is acting beyond its jurisdiction. • **After final order: Certiorari** — once a final order has been passed by the lower court, Prohibition can no longer be issued; at that stage, Certiorari is the appropriate writ to quash the already-made order. • 💡 Option A (Before filing) is wrong — Prohibition is not available before proceedings begin; Option B (After final judgement) is when Certiorari, not Prohibition, is used; Option D (After execution) is too late for either Prohibition or Certiorari.

Correct Answer: A. Habeas Corpus

• **Habeas Corpus — Res Judicata does not apply** = 'Res Judicata' (a matter already decided cannot be litigated again) generally does NOT apply to Habeas Corpus — a fresh petition can be filed if new grounds of illegal detention arise. • **Liberty over procedural finality** — this exception exists because personal liberty is paramount; if a person's detention becomes illegal later due to changed circumstances, they should be able to re-approach the court. • 💡 Option B (Certiorari) is generally subject to Res Judicata — once an order is quashed, the same issue cannot be reopened; Option C (Mandamus) is subject to finality principles; Option D (Quo-Warranto) similarly has res judicata applicability.

Correct Answer: C. Habeas Corpus

• **Habeas Corpus — 'bulwark of individual liberty'** = Habeas Corpus is considered the most powerful safeguard for personal liberty because it provides an immediate remedy against any unlawful detention by state or private persons. • **Requires production before court** — the detaining authority must produce the detained person before the court and justify the legal basis of detention; if not justified, the person is immediately released. • 💡 Option A (Mandamus) commands performance of a duty — it is about omission by officials, not personal liberty; Option B (Certiorari) quashes lower court orders; Option D (Quo-Warranto) challenges the right to hold public office — none directly protect personal liberty.

Correct Answer: B. Mandamus

• **Mandamus = 'We Command'** = the Latin word 'Mandamus' literally means 'We Command' — it is a court's command to a public official, authority, corporation, or inferior court to perform a mandatory public duty. • **Corrects acts of omission** — Mandamus is used when a public authority has failed (omitted) to perform a mandatory duty; it cannot be used to enforce discretionary duties or private contracts. • 💡 Option A (Habeas Corpus) means 'to have the body of'; Option C (Certiorari) means 'to be certified/informed'; Option D (Prohibition) means 'to forbid' — none translate to 'We Command'.

Correct Answer: B. To be certified/informed

• **Certiorari = 'to be certified/informed'** = the Latin word 'Certiorari' means 'to be certified' or 'to be informed' — historically, a king demanded to be informed of the proceedings of lower courts for review. • **Higher court calls for records** — Certiorari involves a higher court summoning the records of a lower court or tribunal to. • 💡 Option A (By what warrant) is the meaning of Quo-Warranto; Option C (To forbid) is the meaning of Prohibition; Option D (To have the body) is the meaning of Habeas Corpus — none mean 'to be certified'.

Correct Answer: C. By what authority

• **Quo-Warranto = 'by what authority or warrant'** = 'Quo-Warranto' means 'by what authority or warrant' — the court asks the officeholder to show the legal authority under which they are holding the office. • **Removal if no authority proved** — if the person cannot prove their lawful authority, they are ousted from the public office; the writ is a safeguard against illegal usurpation of substantive public offices. • 💡 Option A (To forbid) is the meaning of Prohibition; Option B (We command) is the meaning of Mandamus; Option D (To be certified) is the meaning of Certiorari — none mean 'by what authority'.

Correct Answer: A. Article 226

• **Article 226 — HC writ for 'any other purpose'** = Article 226 uniquely grants High Courts the power to issue writs for 'any other purpose' beyond Fundamental Rights — for any legal right, statutory right, or common law right. • **SC limited to Fundamental Rights** — the Supreme Court under Article 32 can only issue writs for Fundamental Rights violations; therefore, the HC's writ jurisdiction is substantively wider. • 💡 Option B (Article 142) gives SC power of 'complete justice' in pending cases; Option C (Article 32) gives SC writ power but only for Fundamental Rights; Option D (Article 136) grants Special Leave to Appeal — none give the HC's broader 'any other purpose' writ power.

Correct Answer: B. Prohibition and Certiorari

• **Prohibition + Certiorari — jurisdiction control writs** = Prohibition and Certiorari are the two writs specifically designed to control inferior courts and tribunals that act beyond their jurisdiction. • **Stage distinction** — Prohibition: issued while proceedings are pending (preventive); Certiorari: issued after an order has been passed (curative/corrective); both target jurisdictional excess. • 💡 Option A (Quo-Warranto and Certiorari) is wrong — Quo-Warranto controls public office holders, not lower court jurisdiction; Option C (Habeas Corpus and Mandamus) targets detention and duties; Option D (Mandamus and Prohibition) mixes duty-command with jurisdiction-control writs.

Correct Answer: B. Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras High Courts

• **Pre-1950: only Calcutta, Bombay, Madras HCs had writ power** = before the Constitution came into force, only the High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras (established under Royal Charter/Letters Patent) had the power to issue writs. • **1950 Constitution extended to all HCs** — Article 226 of the 1950 Constitution extended writ-issuing power to all High Courts in India, creating uniform access to this remedy. • 💡 Option A (All High Courts) is the current position after 1950, not the pre-1950 position asked here; Option C (Only Delhi HC) is incorrect — Delhi HC was not among the original three; Option D (No High Court) is incorrect — three HCs did have writ powers.

Correct Answer: B. The Parliament

• **Parliament — can authorize other courts to issue writs** = Article 32(3) empowers Parliament to authorize any court lower than the SC to issue writs — without prejudice to the SC's existing writ powers under Article 32. • **No such law made yet** — as of now, Parliament has not passed any law granting writ powers to district courts or other subordinate courts; only the SC and HCs have this power. • 💡 Option A (The High Courts) cannot authorize other courts to issue writs under Article 226; Option C (The Supreme Court) can only issue writs itself, not empower others; Option D (The President) has no role in authorizing writ jurisdiction for courts.