Article 226 of Indian Constitution- Detailed Analysis

Article 226 Of Indian Constitution

Power of High Courts to issue certain writs

(1) 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 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.

(2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders, or writs to any Government, authority, or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.

(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1), without—

(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order; and

(b) giving such party an opportunity of being heard,

the High Court shall, before making such interim order, record the reasons as to why an order of such nature is being made and shall, immediately after the making of such interim order, furnish to such party a copy of such petition and documents along with a copy of such interim order, and give such party an opportunity to be heard in the matter within a reasonable period, not exceeding two weeks from the date on which such interim order is made; and if the High Court does not dispose of the petition within a period of two weeks, such interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or on the date on which the party against whom such order has been made appears before the court, whichever is earlier, stand vacated.

(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme Court by clause (2) of Article 32.

Note: "The information provided above has been sourced from the official website, i.e., Indian Code. While the content has been presented here for reference, no modifications have been made to the original laws and orders" 

Simplified Interpretation of Article 226 of Indian Constitution 

Article 226 grants High Courts the authority to issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights and for other purposes. This simply means that individuals can approach High Courts not only for violations of fundamental rights but also for other legal rights recognized by law. 

Article 32 and Article 226 of Indian Constitution both empower courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and other legal rights. However, Article 32 grants the right to constitutional remedies exclusively through the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, making it a fundamental right itself. In contrast, Article 226 allows High Courts to issue writs not only for fundamental rights but also for other legal rights. Thus, while Article 32 is more restrictive but fundamental, Article 226 provides a broader scope of judicial review at the state level. Explore in-depth analysis of other Constitutional Articles. The writs that can be issued under this article include:

• Habeas Corpus: A writ requiring a person under arrest to be brought before a judge or into court, ensuring that the individual's detention is not illegal.
• Mandamus: A writ directing a public official or authority to perform a duty they are obligated to perform but have failed or refused to do so.
• Prohibition: A writ directing a subordinate court or tribunal to stop doing something that exceeds its jurisdiction.
• Quo Warranto: A writ questioning the legal right of a person to hold a public office.
• Certiorari: A writ by which a higher court reviews a case tried in a lower court.
   

Under clause (2) of Article 226, a High Court can exercise its power even if the authority or person against whom the writ is sought is located outside its territorial jurisdiction, provided the cause of action arises within its jurisdiction. This shows that justice is accessible and not hindered by territorial limitations.

Several landmark judgments have elucidated the scope and significance of Article 226:

• T.C. Basappa vs. T. Nagappa (1954): The Supreme Court held that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is not confined to issuing prerogative writs as understood in England but is much wider, enabling High Courts to reach injustice wherever it is found.
• L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India (1997): The Court reaffirmed that the power of judicial review vested in High Courts under Article 226 is a basic feature of the Constitution and cannot be curtailed or excluded even by constitutional amendment.
   
• A.V. Venkateswaran vs. Ramchand Sobhraj Wadhwani (1961): The Supreme Court emphasized that the existence of an alternative remedy does not bar the exercise of the writ jurisdiction under Article 226, especially when fundamental rights are at stake.

Significance of Article 226 of Indian Constitution 

Article 226 serves as a cornerstone of the Indian judicial system for several reasons:

• Judicial Review: It empowers High Courts to review the actions of the legislature and executive so that they act within their constitutional limits.
• Protection of Rights: Beyond fundamental rights, Article 226 permits individuals to seek remedies for violations of other legal rights by giving a broader scope for justice.

Federal Balance: By granting High Courts the power to issue writs, it maintains a balance of power between the central and state judiciaries, reinforcing the federal structure.

Over the years, the interpretation and application of Article 226 have evolved:

• Territorial Jurisdiction: The 15th Amendment Act of 1963 introduced clause (1A) (now clause 2) to Article 226, allowing High Courts to issue writs even if the person or authority is outside its territorial jurisdiction, provided the cause of action arises within its jurisdiction.
• Alternative Remedies: While traditionally, the existence of an alternative remedy was considered a bar to invoking Article 226, courts have held in various judgments that this is not an absolute rule. If fundamental rights are at stake or if the alternative remedy is ineffective or inadequate, the High Court can still exercise its jurisdiction.
• Expansion of Scope: Over time, the courts have expanded the interpretation of Article 226 to include the review of administrative decisions, contractual matters involving the state, and even actions of private bodies that perform public functions.
• Judicial Activism: The increasing role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) under Article 226 has permitted High Courts to interfere in matters affecting public welfare like environmental issues, human rights violations and governance failures.

Conclusion

Article 226 of Indian Constitution is a crucial article for upholding justice and constitutional values. It ensures that High Courts can step in to safeguard individuals from administrative arbitrariness, legislative overreach and executive excesses. The power to issue writs is a fundamental aspect of judicial review focusing on the principle of checks and balances within the governance structure. As India's legal landscape evolves, Article 226 continues to play a pivotal role in safeguarding the rights and liberties of citizens, making it one of the most significant provisions in the Indian Constitution.