Shivanna vs Narayana Gowda on 23 January, 1995
What are the exceptional cases in which the Court exercises jurisdiction irrespective of the fact that there is alternative remedy as well has been laid down in the case of STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH v. MOHAMMED NOOH AIR 1958 SC 86 and following that Decision, Division Bench of this Court in the case of H.S. VASANTASENAIAH v. DIVISIONAL CONTROLLER, KSRTC , has laid it down that doctrine of alternative remedy does not by itself create a bar for Courts exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, in case the order is per se without jurisdiction or the order impugned has been passed under an Act which is by itself ultra vires or that the order in question has been passed in violation of the principles of Natural Justice and fair play or the order in question has been passed in clear cut breach of the provision of law and the like. It may also be mentioned that if the order is of such a nature that it touches the conscience of the Court, then it can also be interfered with. So as regards the Doctrine of Alternative Remedy, if the order can be shown to be suffering from jurisdictional error and appears to be per se void, alternative remedy may not come into the way.