Constitutional & Writ Litigation
Writ petitions before the High Court and the Supreme Court against the State, public authorities and statutory bodies.
Overview
Writ jurisdiction is the remedy where a public authority has acted without power, unfairly, or in breach of a fundamental right. It is a discretionary jurisdiction and a demanding one: the petition must show not merely that a decision was wrong, but that it was one the authority was not entitled to make in that manner.
Matters ordinarily handled
- Writ petitions under Article 226 before the High Court
- Petitions under Article 32 before the Supreme Court
- Challenges to administrative and regulatory action
- Service and employment matters against public employers
- Licensing, permissions and statutory approvals
- Special Leave Petitions before the Supreme Court
How a matter usually proceeds
- Examination of the impugned order and the authority acting
- Assessment of alternative remedies, delay and maintainability
- Representation to the authority where that route remains open
- Drafting and filing of the petition with supporting affidavit
- Admission, interim relief and affidavits in reply
- Final hearing, and appeal where the outcome requires it
This is the ordinary course. Any particular matter may take a different one.
Questions clients ask
When is a writ petition the right remedy?
Broadly, where a public authority has acted beyond its powers, unfairly, or in breach of a fundamental right, and where no adequate alternative remedy is available.
Does delay matter?
Considerably. Writ jurisdiction is discretionary and unexplained delay is a common reason for a petition being declined.
Can a private dispute be brought by writ petition?
Ordinarily not. The jurisdiction runs against the State and public authorities, though bodies performing public functions may fall within it.