Article 226 Constitution of India Archives

[Medical Negligence] ‘High Court cannot act as an expert body with reference to medical terminology’; Madras High Court dismisses petition seeking compensation

“It is for the Doctors to take a decision and continue the treatment by following the medical protocol. Contrarily, High Court cannot interfere with the opinions of the medical expert by acting as an expert body which is not desirable, and it will lead to excess exercise of powers of judicial review conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution”

Case Briefs High Courts

MP HC | Period of suspension for disciplinary proceedings to be treated as “no work no pay”; appeal against order sustained

Madhya Pradesh High Court: G.S. Ahluwalia, J. contemplated a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, where the petition

Case Briefs High Courts

Kar HC | Jurisdiction of Court under Art. 226 is equitable and discretionary; writ appeal dismissed for delay of nearly four decades

Karnataka High Court: The Division Bench of Abhay S. Oka, CJ and H.T. Narendra Prasad, J. dismissed the appeals on the ground

Case Briefs High Courts

All HC | Order dismissing first writ petition operates as res judicata; second petition on same facts not allowed

Allahabad High Court: This writ petition was filed before a Divison Bench of Pankaj Kumar Jaiswal and Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, JJ.,

Case Briefs High Courts

Guj HC | Court reserves upon a contentious issue, exercises extraordinary jurisdiction instead

Gujarat High Court: A Bench of Sonia Gokani, J., allowed a petition directing the concerned authorities to release the seized-vehicle. In the

Case Briefs High Courts

MP HC| Court has no jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if alternate remedies available

Madhya Pradesh High Court: Petitioner had filed this petition before a Bench of Subodh Abhyankar, J., under Article 226 of the Constitution

Case Briefs High Courts

Sikk HC | Impleadment of party allowed where necessary to hear him before issuing writ of prohibition

Sikkim High Court: The Bench of Bhaskar Raj Pradhan, J. allowed an impleadment through the present petition. The petitioner in the present

Case Briefs High Courts

Pat HC | When order is violative of principles of natural justice, plea of alternative remedy would not bar exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226

Patna High Court: The Bench of Madhuresh Prasad, J., allowed the writ petition which was filed against the act of arbitrary stoppage

Case Briefs High Courts

Promissory estoppel not applicable where documents failed to show government’s assurance to construct toilets

Sikkim High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Meenakshi Madan Rai, J. addressed an application under Article 226 of the Constitution of

Case Briefs High Courts

Property disputes between private parties: Not a fit case for High Courts to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution

Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Dhiraj Singh Thakur, J., dismissed a writ petition filed against the actions

Case Briefs High Courts

SCC Times

Article 226 Constitution of India

[Medical Negligence] ‘High Court cannot act as an expert body with reference to medical terminology’; Madras High Court dismisses petition seeking compensation

MP HC | Period of suspension for disciplinary proceedings to be treated as “no work no pay”; appeal against order sustained

Kar HC | Jurisdiction of Court under Art. 226 is equitable and discretionary; writ appeal dismissed for delay of nearly four decades

All HC | Order dismissing first writ petition operates as res judicata; second petition on same facts not allowed

Guj HC | Court reserves upon a contentious issue, exercises extraordinary jurisdiction instead

MP HC| Court has no jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India if alternate remedies available

Sikk HC | Impleadment of party allowed where necessary to hear him before issuing writ of prohibition

Pat HC | When order is violative of principles of natural justice, plea of alternative remedy would not bar exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226

Promissory estoppel not applicable where documents failed to show government’s assurance to construct toilets

Property disputes between private parties: Not a fit case for High Courts to interfere under Article 226 of the Constitution

Relief under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution not available if efficacious alternative remedy present

High Court refused to quantify compensation on mere allegation of ‘Medical Negligence’

Clause ousting jurisdiction of courts held valid, Gauhati HC directs petitioner to pursue remedy before Delhi courts