MANU/SC/0200/2015

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 2548 of 2009 and SLP (C) No. 25828 of 2013

Decided On: 26.02.2015

Appellants: Radhey Shyam and Ors. Vs. Respondent: Chhabi Nath and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
H.L. Dattu, C.J.I., A.K. Sikri and Adarsh Kumar Goel

JUDGMENT

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.

1. This matter has been placed before the Bench of three Judges in pursuance of an order dated April 15, 2009 passed by the bench of two Hon'ble Judges to consider the correctness of the law laid down by this Court in Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai and Ors. MANU/SC/0559/2003 : 2003 (6) SCC 675 that an order of civil court was amenable to writ jurisdiction Under Article 226 of the Constitution. The reference order, inter alia, reads:

30...Therefore, this Court unfortunately is in disagreement with the view which has been expressed in Surya Dev Rai insofar as correction of or any interference with judicial orders of civil court by a writ of certiorari is concerned.

31. Under Article 227 of the Constitution, the High Court does not issue a writ of certiorari. Article 227 of the Constitution vests the High Courts with a power of superintendence which is to be very sparingly exercised to keep tribunals and courts within the bounds of their authority. Under Article 227, orders of both civil and criminal courts can be examined only in very exceptional cases when manifest miscarriage of justice has been occasioned. Such power, however, is not to be exercised to correct a mistake of fact and of law.

32. The essential distinctions in the exercise of power between Articles 226 and 227 are well known and pointed out in Surya Dev Rai and with that we have no disagreement. But we are unable to agree with the legal proposition laid down in Surya Dev Rai that judicial orders passed by a civil court can be examined and then corrected/reversed by the writ court Under Article 226 in exercise of its power under a writ of certiorari. We are of the view that the aforesaid proposition laid down in Surya Dev Rai, is contrary to the ratio in Mirajkar and the ratio in Mirajkar has not been overruled in Rupa Ashok Hurra [MANU/SC/0910/2002 : 2002 (4) SCC 388].

33. In view of our difference of opinion with the views expressed in Surya Dev Rai, matter may be placed before His Lordship the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of India for constituting a larger Bench, to consider the correctness or otherwise of the law laid down in Surya D........