‘Avail alternate remedy first before filing writ petitions’

Nagpur: Solution available under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, which is usually invoked when the fundamental rights are violated, is an alternate remedy. Therefore, the lawyers should first exhaust other options and approach the constitutional courts only when there is no relief, said senior lawyer Uday Dastane on Wednesday.
He was speaking at a group discussion and interactive session with junior lawyers and law students on ‘Maintainability of writ petitions and alternate remedies’, organized by the Study Circle of High Court Bar Association (HCBA).
Gauri Venkatraman, president of HCBA, Prafulla Khubalkar, secretary, PB Patil vice-president, and lawyers Ranjit Bhuibhar and Firdos Mirza were present.
Alternate remedies include approaching statutory courts and tribunals or maybe even settlement for redressal of grievances.
Dastane said, “Although there are statutory remedies, the law does not debar one from invoking Article 226 if the grievance is of such a nature. The power to issue writs is the plenary power of the high court and the Supreme Court. Choosing the writ over alternate remedy and satisfying discretion in our favour is a skill.”
“Discretion and efficacy are the two major parameters while invoking writ jurisdiction in the presence of an alternate remedy. When the alternate remedy is available before a tribunal, efficacy is a better option before it,” he said.
Lawyer Apurva Kolhe said in the Mohd Nooh judgment, where there is patent illegality in terms of observing the principles of natural justice, then in that case, even in the presence of an alternate remedy, a person can rightfully invoke Article 226.
Lawyer Yash Venkatraman said, “Writs are written orders of judicial authorities and they can be issued under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution. These articles entitle a person to the right to constitutional remedies.”