Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

15. It was contended by Mr. Kunzru very strenuously that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is not barred because of the mere existence of an alternative remedy. While considering the scope of the various writs it was held by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of U. P. State v. Mohd. Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 as follows:

"In the next place it must be borne in mind that there is no rule, with regard to certiorari as there is with mandamus, that it will lie only where there is no other equally effective remedy. It is well established that, provided the requisite grounds exist, ccrtiorari will lie although a right of appeal has been conferred by statute."

53) that in making a reference under Section 10(1) the appropriate government is doing an administrative act and the fact that it has to form an opinion as to the factual existence of an industrial dispute as a preliminary step to the discharge of its function does not make it any-the-less administrative in character. That being so, we think it would be more appropriate to issue a writ of mandamus ag ainst the appellant in respect of the impugned noti fication."

It is clear therefore that the only tenable prayer of the petitioner could be for the issue of a writ of mandamus. I have already quoted above the observations of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Mohammad Nooh, AIR 1958 SC 86 wherein it has been clearly stated that an alternative remedy is a bar to the issue of a writ of mandamus. That being so the contention of Mr. Kunzru cannot be accepted.

16. Mr. Kunzru has next contended that in England or America the existence of an alternative remedy has not been considered to be a bar to the issue of a writ of mandamus, It is really not necessary for me to investigate into the practice prevailing in England or America in view of the clear pronouncement of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Mohammad Nooh's case AIR 1958 SC 86. I may however add that the statement of law as contained in the well known book "Extraordinary Legal Remedies" by Ferris and in Halsbury's Laws of England, Vol. 11 (Simond's Edition) does show that the existence of an alternative remedy has been considered a bar to the issue of a writ of mandamus. I am reproducing below a passage from Ferris, 1926 Ed. p. 245, Article 212: