Imagine a situation when a person has been unlawfully detained and the public official refuses to perform their statutory duty, or the Trial Court oversteps its legal boundaries. In such a moment of administrative or judicial overreach, where does a person turn for redressal?
The answer lies in Article 226 of the Constitution of India. A provision that serves as one of the most powerful and significant judicial safeguards in the Indian legal framework. Often described as the “Sentinels on the Qui Vive,” (Guardian), High Courts use this article to act as the primary protectors of both fundamental and legal rights within their respective states.
While Article 32 is famously called the “Heart and Soul” of the Constitution for protecting Fundamental Rights, Article 226 is arguably even broader in its reach. It empowers High Courts to issue writs not just for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights found in Part III of the Constitution, but also “for any other purpose”—a phrase that expands its jurisdiction to include any violation of legal or statutory rights.
Historical Evolution of Article 226
The powers of High Courts to issue Writs emerged from the Indian High Courts Act of 1861, which established the “Chartered High Courts” in Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. These Courts have inherited Prerogative Writ power from their predecessor Supreme Court, a privilege which other courts do not have.
During the Constituent Assembly Debates, many framers sought for decentralizing these remedies. Article 226 was adopted for ensuring that every High Court in India possessed the power to issue Writs, making justice more accessible at regional level.
Scope of High Court Powers under Article 226
The Supreme Court expressed that the scope of Article 226 is wider than Article 32. High Courts can issue writs not only for enforcement of fundamental rights but also for other legal rights provided by statutes.
2. Veerappa Pillai v. Raman and Raman Ltd. (1952)
The Supreme Court clarified that High Courts can issue writs when subordinate authorities act without jurisdiction, exceed jurisdiction, violate principles of natural justice, or commit an error apparent on record. However, the High Court cannot act as an appellate court to re-examine facts.
In the words of Apex Court – “Such writs as are referred to in Article 226 are obviously intended to enable the High Court to issue them in grave cases where the subordinate tribunals or bodies or officers act wholly without jurisdiction, or in excess of it, or in violation of the principles of natural justice, or refuse to exercise a jurisdiction vested in them, or there is an error apparent on the face of the record, and such act, omission, error, or excess has resulted in manifest injustice. However extensive the jurisdiction may be, it seems to us that it is not so wide or large as to enable the High Court to convert itself into a Court of appeal and examine for itself the correctness of the decision impugned and decide what is the proper view to be taken or the order to be made.”
3. Chandigarh Administration v. Manpreet Singh (1991)
While exercising powers under Article 226, the High Court performs a supervisory role over subordinate authorities and does not act as an appellate authority.
4. Common Cause v. Union of India (1999)
The Supreme Court discussed the wider scope of powers of the High Court as per Article 226. The Court expressed that “Under Article 226 of the Constitution, the High Court has been given the power and jurisdiction to issue appropriate Writs in the nature of Mandamus, Certiorari, Prohibition, Quo-warranto and Habeas Corpus for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights or for any other purpose. Thus, the High Court has jurisdiction not only to grant relief for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights but also for “any other purpose” which would include the enforcement of public duties by public bodies. ”
Article 226 vs. Article 32
While both the writs empower the court to issue the same writs, they differ in scope and nature.
| Feature | Article 226 | Article 32 |
| Scope | Fundamental Rights + “Any other purpose” (Legal Rights) | Only Fundamental Rights |
| Nature | Discretionary Constitutional Remedy | A Fundamental Right in itself |
| Jurisdiction | State Level | Nationwide |
| Emergency | Cannot be suspended | Can be Suspended by the President |
The Phrase “any other purpose” means High Court can intervene for any legal wrong such as violation of a statutory Right like Right to property under Article 300A, which is not a Fundamental right.
Alternate Remedy Rule
High Courts does not entertain a Writ if there are alternate remedies available. This is a rule of policy and convenience, rather than a strict rule. However, the High Court can intervene if there is a violation of fundamental, ignorance of principle of natural justice, or the authorities have exceeded or acted without jurisdiction.
Contemporary Significance
In the modern era, Article 226 is the backbone of Public Interest Litigation (PIL). High Courts have used it to address the environmental issues, human rights violations, and data protection. While backlogs remain a challenge, technological shifts like e-courts are making these remedies more accessible to marginalized communities.
