Bombay High Court Clarifies Jurisdiction for Writ Petitions Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960 mandates that such petitions be heard by a Division Bench.

High Court: Bombay High Court
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Bombay High Court, in this judgment, addressed the procedural confusion regarding whether writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India should be heard by a Single Judge or a Division Bench. The matter arose from a writ petition filed by the Principal of Micky School, English Medium, against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petition was initially listed before a Single Judge, who on 24.2.2005 held that the petition was tenable only before a Division Bench, relying on Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960. The court noted that the question of the appropriate bench for such petitions had been debatable, causing difficulty for the office in listing cases. The court examined the relevant rules, particularly Rule 1 of Chapter I, which states that civil and criminal jurisdiction on the Appellate Side shall be exercised by a Division Court, and Rule 2, which specifies matters that can be disposed of by a Single Judge. The court concluded that writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 fall within the ambit of Rule 18, requiring a Division Bench. The judgment clarifies the applicable law to resolve the confusion and ensure proper listing of such petitions.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960 - The court considered the appropriate bench for hearing writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 - Held that such petitions are to be heard by a Division Bench as per Rule 18, unless otherwise provided (Paras 1-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether a writ petition filed under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India should be heard by a Single Judge or a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court clarified that writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are to be heard by a Division Bench as per Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960, unless otherwise provided.

Law Points

  • Writ petitions under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are to be heard by a Division Bench as per Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules
  • 1960
  • unless otherwise provided
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2005 LawText (BOM) (09) 84

Writ Petition No. 5862 of 2004

2005-09-16

V.G. Palshikar, D.B. Bhosale

Mr. R.G. Ketkar for the petitioner, Mr. Mihir Desai for respondent No.3

Principal, Micky School, English Medium

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India

Remedy Sought

Clarification of the appropriate bench for hearing the writ petition

Filing Reason

Confusion regarding whether the petition should be heard by a Single Judge or Division Bench

Previous Decisions

Single Judge on 24.2.2005 held that the petition is tenable only before a Division Bench

Issues

Whether a writ petition under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution should be heard by a Single Judge or a Division Bench

Submissions/Arguments

The Single Judge relied on Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960 to hold that the petition is tenable only before a Division Bench

Ratio Decidendi

Writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India are to be heard by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court as per Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960, unless otherwise provided by the rules.

Judgment Excerpts

The question of hearing a writ petition filed under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution or a petition filed under Article 226 & 227 of the Constitution has been a debatable question on several occasions. In our opinion, therefore it is necessary that the entire aspect is clarified and stated as law applicable.

Procedural History

The writ petition was initially listed before a Single Judge who on 24.2.2005 passed an order holding that the petition is tenable only before a Division Bench, relying on Rule 18 of Chapter XVII of the Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960. The matter was then placed before the Division Bench for clarification.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226, Article 227
  • Bombay High Court (Appellate Side) Rules, 1960: Rule 18 of Chapter XVII, Rule 1 of Chapter I, Rule 2 of Chapter I
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Gujarat High Court Dismisses State's Condonation of Delay Application in Land Acquisition Appeal Due to Lack of Sufficient Cause. Delay of 774 days not condoned as state failed to explain each day's delay with cogent evidence.
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Tender Notification for Jog Falls Concession Due to Lack of Authority and Non-Compliance with Tender Rules. The court held that the State Government lacked authority to issue the tender notification under the Karnataka...