Article 226 of the Indian Constitution

enshrined under Part V of the Constitution of India, Article 226 provides the
High Courts with the power to issue writs, including writs in the form of
habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, certiorari, or
any of them, to any person or authority, including the government. Article
226 of the Indian Constitution gives High Courts the power and ability to
enforce any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the
Constitution of India, 1949, or for any other reason.

According to Article 226(1), each High Court within India’s territorial

jurisdiction has the ability and power to issue orders, instructions, and writs,
to any individual or authority..

Article 226(2) empowers the High Courts with the authority to issue orders,
instructions, and writs to any government authority or any individual, outside
their own local jurisdiction in circumstances when the cause of action is
completely or partially within their local jurisdiction.

According to Article 226(3), when an interim order is issued against the

respondent under Article 226 in the form of an injunction or a stay without: 

1. providing the respondent with a copy of the petition and any

relevant evidence; and
2. providing the respondent with an opportunity to be heard.
The High Court shall decide on the application within two weeks of receiving
the application or within two weeks of the date on which the other party
received the application, whichever is later. If the application is not so
disposed of, the interim order shall be vacated on the expiry of that period,
or, if the High Court is closed on the last day of that period, before the expiry
of the next day on which the High Court is open, the interim order shall be
vacated.  

According to Article 226(4), the jurisdiction granted to the High Courts under
Article 226 does not preclude the Supreme Court from using its powers under
Article 32(2).

Difference between Article 32 and Article

226
  Article 32 is a fundamental right, but Article 226 is a constitutional
right.
 Article 32 can be suspended if the President declares an emergency,
however, Article 226 cannot be suspended even during an
emergency.
 Article 32 has a limited reach since it only applies when a
fundamental right has been violated. Article 226 on the other hand,
has a greater reach since it applies not only to violations of
fundamental rights but also to violations of legal rights.
 Under Article 32, the Supreme Court has the authority to issue writs
across India. As a result, the Supreme Court’s territorial jurisdiction
is broader and expanded. Article 226, on the other hand, allows the
High Court to issue a writ exclusively in its own local jurisdiction. As
a result, the territorial authority of High Courts is narrower and
limited.
 Since Article 32 is a basic right, the Supreme Court cannot dismiss
it. However, Article 226 gives the High Court discretionary power,
which means it is up to the High Court to decide whether to issue a
writ.

Darya and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh, it was held that

Article 32 is not merely a fundamental right of a citizen but also
the duty of the supreme court to protect those fundamental
rights. As Article 32 is a fundamental right which is substantive in
nature and not merely procedural, it’s not needed to file an
application before the High Court before approaching the
Supreme Court under Article 32.

What are the similarities between Article 32 and Article

226?
1. Both Article 32 and 226 is invoked for the enforcement of
Fundamental Rights
2. Both the Supreme court and High court has the power to
issue writs under Article 32 and Article 226 respectively.

Enforcement of the Article 32 and 226 is done with

the help of five prerogative Writs
Habeas Certiorari Quo Mandamus Prohibition
Corpus warranto
prohibition,
to have a body means ‘to be It means “what ‘We command.’ which means “to
or to produce a certified.’ The is your It is a type of forbid,” while
body.” This is Supreme Court command that certiorari is
the most and the High
authority”. can be used to linked to
powerful and Court can use Issued to execute public treatment or
most often this writ to order restrain a duties by cure. If a
used writ. For other subordinate person from constitutional, judgement is
example, if a courts to submit statutory, non- given and it is
holding a public
person is their records for statutory, invalid, it is
wrongfully held review. The office. universities, quashed and a
by the purpose of these courts, and writ of certiorari
government, reviews is to see • Conditions: other bodies. is granted.
that person, if the lower This writ is used However, if the
can file a writ court’s decisions 1. Public office to compel a judgement is
to have that are legal or not. created by a public official to still to be
person Their decisions carry out the published and to
released. When may be illegal if
statue 2. Person duties that have prevent the
this writ is they are made in to be appointed been assigned mistake from
used, the excess of by a statue or to them.  occurring, a writ
Supreme Court jurisdiction, in statutory of prohibition is
or the High the absence of CASE LAW issued. This writ
instrument. •
Court jurisdiction, in can only be used
interrogates unconstitutional Illustrations: Hemendra v until the
the State about jurisdiction, or in Gauhati judgement has
the reasons for violation of a)Subramanian not been
University :
the individual’s natural justice Swamy petition Mandamus was delivered.
detention. If principles. against issued to direct a
the ground is CASE LAW
judged to be CASE LAW:
Jayalalitha in University to
2001. Two PIL’s announce that the
irrational, the
against her petitioner has passed
person is Hari Vishnu where, University
promptly freed appointment. b)
Kamath Vs. Manohar Reddy vs had refused so to
from custody. declare though the
Ahmad Ishaque Union of India: two
advocates filed a petitioner had
obtained the pass
1. It is issued to petition quashing
the appointment of marks required by
CASE LAW: correct the errors of
a Judge of a HC of the statutory rules of
Jurisdiction. the University.
AP and a writ is in
Kanu Sanyal v. the nature of
2. When court or
District Mandamus • Barada Kanta
tribunal acts illegal
Magistrate in its jurisdiction.
commanding the Bar v State of West
Council of AP to
Bengal
the court may cancel the
3. Order against enrollment as an
examine the legality Writ of Mandamus
principles of natural advocate N V
of the detention cannot be issued
without requiring justice. Ramana.
against an individual
the person detained person or any private
to be produced 4. Court acts in
organization because
before it exercise of its they are not
supervisory and not entrusted with a
• Sheela Barse appellate public duty.
v. State of Jurisdiction.
Maharashtra
5. An error in the
if the detained decision or
person is unable to determination itself
pray for the writ of may also be
habeas corpus, amenable to a writ
someone else may of Certiorari.
pray for such writ
on his behalf. • Nagendra Nath Bora
& Anr. Vs.
Nilabati Behera Commissioner of
v. State of Orissa Hills Division and
Appeals, Assam &
the petitioner was Ors.,
awarded
compensation of Rs. 1. Check whether
1, 50, 000 inferior court has
exceeded its
jurisdiction. 2. Mere
formal and technical
errors does not attract
this.