About Writ Petition:

In legal terms, a writ refers to a formal written order issued by a court or other judicial or administrative authority. Writs are typically used to direct a person or an entity to take a certain action or refrain from doing something. They are enforceable legal documents that carry the authority of the issuing court. Writs play an essential role in ensuring the proper functioning of the justice system by safeguarding individual rights, regulating the exercise of power by public authorities, and providing remedies for legal grievances. Writs are often associated with constitutional law and are used to protect fundamental rights. In India, a Writ Petition can be filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India in the Supreme Court or under Article 226 in the respective High Courts. The timing for filing a Writ Petition in India can vary depending on the circumstances, but generally, it is filed in the following situations:

• Violation of Fundamental Rights: When an individual believes that their fundamental rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution have been violated, they can file a Writ Petition seeking the court’s intervention to protect their rights. This can include cases related to personal liberty, equality, freedom of speech, etc.
• Administrative or Executive Action: If there is an issue with an administrative or executive action by a government authority, such as arbitrary or unfair decision-making, abuse of power, or non-compliance with legal obligations, a Writ Petition can be filed to challenge or seek redressal and enforcement of legal rights.
• Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Writ Petitions can also be filed in the public interest to address larger societal issues or matters of public concern. These petitions are filed by individuals or organizations on behalf of the public at large, highlighting issues of public importance and seeking the court’s intervention.

Types of Writ Petition in India

1. Writ of Habeas Corpus: This writ is filed to challenge the unlawful detention or imprisonment of a person. It seeks the production of the detained person before the court to ensure their physical liberty is protected.
2. Writ of Mandamus: This writ is filed to compel a public official, government agency, or any person holding a public office to perform their legal duty. It is used when there has been a failure or refusal to fulfill an obligation.
3. Writ of Certiorari: This writ is filed to seek the review of a decision made by a lower court, tribunal, or administrative authority. It is used to challenge errors of jurisdiction, law, or procedural irregularities.
4. Writ of Prohibition: This writ is filed to prevent a lower court, tribunal, or administrative authority from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting beyond its lawful authority.
5. Writ of Quo Warranto: This writ is filed to question the authority or legitimacy of a person holding a public office. It seeks to determine whether the person has the legal right or qualifications to hold that office.

Landmark cases on Writ Petition in India

• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): This case is significant for expanding the scope of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court held that the procedure established by law must be fair, just, and reasonable, and that personal liberty cannot be deprived except by the procedure prescribed by law.
• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This landmark case established the doctrine of basic structure, which limits the amending power of the Parliament. The Supreme Court held that certain essential features of the Constitution, including fundamental rights, cannot be amended or abrogated.
• ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976): This case is also known as the “Habeas Corpus case” during the Emergency period. The Supreme Court held that during a state of Emergency, the right to personal liberty under Article 21 can be suspended, and the courts cannot entertain habeas corpus petitions challenging detentions.
• Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985): In this case, the Supreme Court recognized the right to livelihood as a part of the right to life under Article 21. The court held that slum dwellers cannot be evicted without providing alternative arrangements or rehabilitation.
• Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This case dealt with the issue of sexual harassment of women in the workplace. The Supreme Court laid down guidelines for preventing and addressing sexual harassment, recognizing that it violated the fundamental rights of women.
• R. Bommai v. Union of India (1994): This case clarified the law relating to the imposition of President’s Rule in states. The Supreme Court held that the power to impose President’s Rule should be exercised sparingly and subject to judicial review.
• PUCL v. Union of India (2003): In this case, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of custodial deaths and human rights abuses by the police. The court issued guidelines to prevent torture, custodial violence, and custodial deaths.