-Applicability of Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India to the orders passed by courts.

- This matter was placed before a bench of 3 Judges to consider the law laid down in Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai and others that the order of the civil court was amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The Supreme Court of India laid down in this Judgement that petitions which challenge the orders of the Court in any State would come under Art.227 of the Constitution of India. Petitions which challenge orders of other state instrumentalities under Art.12 would come under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.

Further, a Writ would not lie against private individuals who are not performing a public function.

The Supreme Court thus overruled Surya Dev Rai vs. Ram Chander Rai (2003) 6  SCC 675.

The question before the Supreme Court in this case was of territorial jurisdiction. The question was whether the seat of Parliament or the State legislature would be a relevant factor for determining the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court to entertain a Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court held that the situs of the office of Parliament, the legislature of a State or Authorities empowered to make subordinate legislation is not relevant for this purpose. The place where the original order or appellate order, or revisional order is passed may give rise to part of the cause of action to any of the High Courts as per Article 226 (2) of the Constitution of India.

In this case Bombay High Court discussed how a writ petition should not be entertained when an alternative remedy in civil courts is available. The Court held that a writ petition is not a remedy to decide the intra-party disputes and that it is the civil court which is the proper remedy. The court further observed that the tendency to invoke extraordinary jurisdiction is growing for various reasons. The court held that this aspect of not entertaining writs when an alternative remedy is available would be adequately considered by all courts having writ jurisdiction.