Articles 226 & 227 have distinctive differences
The distinctions between Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India have been clearly spelt out in the three-member Bench judgement of the Supreme Court (SC) in Radhey Shyam v Chhabi Nath. The SC, based on some survey, found that the distinction between the two jurisdictions stands almost obliterated in practice.
The decision of the SC in this case
The main legal issue considered by the SC in this case was whether an order of civil court was amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the judgement the SC declared that the judicial orders of civil courts are not amenable to a writ of certiorari under Article 226 and that a writ of mandamus does not lie against a private person not discharging any public duty. Scope of Article 227 is different from Article 226.
The distinctions between Article 226 & 227 are as follows:
Under Article 226 the High Courts have power to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights or other legal rights. These writs include habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari.
On the other hand, the Article 227 confers upon High Courts the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals within their jurisdiction. This power is more administrative in nature, ensuring proper functioning of the subordinate judiciary.
The Article 226 allows High Courts to intervene in individual cases where fundamental rights are at stake or for other legal issues that warrant the issuance of writs.
The Article 227 provides High Courts with the authority to oversee the entire judicial machinery within their territorial jurisdiction, ensuring uniformity and proper administration of justice.
The Article 226 primarily serves as a tool to protect fundamental rights and ensure justice by providing a mechanism for individuals to directly approach the High Court with Writ Petitions.
The Article 227 intends to maintain judicial discipline and ensure the proper functioning of all courts and tribunals under the High Court’s jurisdiction, without necessarily being concerned solely with fundamental rights.
The Article 226 empowers individuals to directly approach the High Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights or other legal issues by filing writ petitions.
The Article 227 does not provide individuals with a direct mechanism for enforcement but allows the High Court to intervene in matters relating to lower courts and tribunals either on its own motion or upon application.
The Article 226 empowers High Courts to exercise jurisdiction over specific cases and matters within their territorial jurisdiction, without necessarily extending to the entire judicial system.
The Article 227 extends the High Court’s authority over all courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction, ensuring uniformity and proper functioning of the entire judicial system under its purview.
Further reading
