deals with the right to move to the supreme court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights including the Writs of (i) Habeas corpus, (ii) Mandamus, (iii) Prohibition, (iv) Certiorari and (iv) Quo warranto..
1. Habeas Corpus:
A writ of habeas corpus is in the nature of an order calling upon the person who has detained another, to produce the latter before the Court in order to let the Court know on what ground she/ he has been confined and to set him/her free if there is no legal justification for the imprisonment.
2. Mandamus:
Mandamus literally means ‘we command.’ It commands the person, to whom it is addressed to perform some public or quasi-public legal duty which she/he has refused to perform and the performance of which cannot be enforced by any other adequate legal remedy.
3. Prohibition:
The writ of prohibition is a writ issued by the Supreme Court or a High Court to an inferior court forbidding the latter to continue proceedings therein in excess of its jurisdiction or to usurp a jurisdiction with which, it is legally not vested.
4. Certiorari:
The literal meaning of the word ‘certiorari’ is “to be more fully informed of”. Though prohibition and certiorari are both issued against Courts or tribunals exercising judicial or quasi-judicial powers, certiorari is issued to quash the order or decision of the tribunal while prohibition is issued to prohibit the tribunal from an ultra vires order or decision.
5. Quo Warranto:
Quo warranto is a proceeding whereby the court enquires into the legality of the claim which a party asserts to a public office, and to oust him/her from its enjoyment if the claim is found to be fake or invalid.
The conditions necessary for the issue of a writ of quo warranto are as follows:
(i) The office must be public and it must be created by statute or by the Constitution itself;
(ii) The office must be a substantive one and not merely the function or employment of a servant at the will and during the pleasure of another.
(iii) There has been a contravention of the Constitution or a statute or statutory instrument, in appointing such a person to that office.
The fundamental basis of the proceeding of quo warranto is that the public has an interest to see that an unlawful claimant does not usurp a public office. It is, however, a discretionary remedy that the court may grant or refuse according to the facts, and circumstances in each case. Quo warranto is thus a very powerful instrument for safeguarding against the usurpation of public offices.
