A

Project on
“WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO”

Submitted in the partial fulfillment of

B.Com.LL.B (8th semester)

Session: 2020-2021

DRAFTING PLEADING AND CONVEYANCING

SUBMITTED TO: SUBMITTED BY:

Mr. ABHISHEK MISHRA sir NeelamRathore

B.Com.LL.B 8thsem
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my earnest and deepest gratitude to Mr. ABHISHEK sir a faculty
for DPC, to give me opportunity to do a project on such a valuable topic of ‘WRIT OF
QUOWARRANTO UNDER DPC’. I am grateful for the assistance, guidance and
support that were extended during the course of excellent research. I am also thankful to
the college administration for providing him resources necessary for the research work. I
thank my parents and my friends for their moral support and love throughout my research
work and projects operation. Above all I thank the God almighty for the blessing me with
the health vitality to complete this projects.

NeelamRathore

B.Com.LL.B VII SEM

 CERTIFICATE

I am to glad to submit this project report on “WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO” as a part

of my academic assignment. This project is based on research methodology. It further
studies making sources and method of research methodology and further discusses the
interview method. I hope this would be significant for a cadmic for academic purpose as
well as prove information to all readers.

Here through I declare that this paper is an original piece of research and all the borrowed
text and ideas have been duly acknowledged.

SUBMITTED BY

NeelamRathore

DECLARATION
NeelamRathore, ROLL. NO.21 B.Com.LL.B VIII Semester, OF GURU GHASI DAS
UNIVERSITY does hereby declare that, this project is my original work and I have not
copied this project or any pert there from any sources without any acknowledgement. I
am highly indebted to the author of the book that I have preferred in my book as well as
all the writers of the articles and the owner of the information taken from website to it. It
is only because of their contribution and proper guidance of my faculty adviser
Mr.ABHISHEK MISHRA Sir, that I was able to gather light on the subject.

NeelamRathore

B.Com.LL.B IV SEM.

Synopsis
 Topic= writ of quo warranto

 INTRODUCTION
 ORIGIN AND CONCEPT OF WRIT
 WRIT OF QUO WARRANTO
 WRIT OD QUO WARRANTO IN INDIAN COURT
 MODEL FORMAT FOR FILLING OD WRIT WARRANTO
 CONCLUSION
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
MR. ABHISHEK MISHRA SIR NEELAM RATHORE
B.COM LLB VIII SEM.

Introduction
In English common law, a writ is a formal written order issued by a body with administrative
orjudicial jurisdiction; in modern usage, this body is generally a court. Warrants,prerogativewrits
and subpoenas are common types of writ but innumerable forms exist, as listedin Palgrave's
Parliamentary Writs (1827, 1834). In its earliest form a writ was simply a writtenorder made by
the English monarch to a specified person to undertake a specified action; forexample, in the
feudal era a military summons by the king to one of his tenants-in-chief to appeardressed for
battle with retinue at a certain place and time. An early usage survives in the UnitedKingdom
and Canada in a writ of election, which is a written order issued on behalf of themonarch (in
Canada, the Governor General) to local officials (High Sheriffs of every county inthe historical
UK) to hold a general election. Writs were used by the medieval English kings tosummon
persons to Parliament (then consisting of the House of Lords alone) whose advice wasconsidered
valuable or who were particularly influential, who were thereby deemed to have beencreated
"barons by writ"

Under the Indian legal system, jurisdiction to issue 'prerogative writs' is given to the
SupremeCourt, and to the High Courts of Judicature of all Indian states. Parts of the law relating
to writsare set forth in the Constitution of India. The Supreme Court, the highest in the country,
mayissue writs under Article 32 of the Constitution for enforcement of Fundamental Rights
andunder Articles 139 for enforcement of rights other than Fundamental Rights, while High
Courts,the superior courts of the States, may issue writs under Articles 226. The Constitution
broadlyprovides for five kinds of "prerogative" writs: habeas corpus, certiorari, mandamus,
quowarranto and prohibition.

Types of writ petition under Indian constitution

 Prohibition

The writ of prohibition is issued by a higher court to a lower court prohibiting it fromtaking up a
case because it falls outside the jurisdiction of the lower court. Thus, the highercourt transfers the
case to itself.

 Habeas Corpus

The writ of habeas corpus is issued to a detaining authority, ordering the detainer toproduce the
detained person in the issuing court, along with the cause of his or her detention.If the detention
is found to be illegal, the court issues an order to set the person free.

 Certiorari

The writ of certiorari is issued to a lower court directing that the record of a case be sentup for
review, together with all supporting files, evidence and documents, usually with theintention of
overruling the judgement of the lower court. It is one of the mechanisms by which the
fundamental rights of the citizens are upheld.
  Mandamus

The writ of mandamus is issued to a subordinate court, an officer of government, or acorporation

or other institution commanding the performance of certain acts or duties.

 Quo Warranto

The writ of quo warranto is issued against a person who claims or usurps a public
office.Through this writ the court inquires 'by what authority' the person supports his or her
claim.

Origin of the Concept of Writs

The development of writs as a means of commencing a court action was a form of "off-the-
shelf"justice designed to enable the English law courts to rapidly process lawsuits by allocating
eachform of complaint into a standard category which could be dealt with by standard
procedures.The complainant simply applied to the court for the writ most relevant to his
complaint to be sentto the wrongdoer, which ordered him under royal authority to attend a royal
court to answer forhis actions. The development was part of the establishment of a Court of
Common Pleas, fordealing with commonly made complaints by subjects of the crown, for
example: "someone hasdamaged my property". The previous system of justice at the royal court
of Chancery was tailormadeto suit each case and was thus highly time-consuming. Thus
eventually the obtaining of awrit became necessary, in most cases, to have a case heard in one of
the Royal Courts, such asthe King's Bench or Common Pleas. Some franchise courts, especially
in the Counties Palatine,had their own system of writs which often reflected or anticipated the
common law writs. Thewrit was "served" on (delivered in person to) the wrongdoer and acted as
a command that heshould appear at a specified time and date before the court specified in the
writ, or it mightcommand some other act on the part of the recipient.

Where a plaintiff wished to have a case heard by a local court, or by an Eyre if one happened
tobe visiting the County, there would be no need to obtain a writ. Actions in local courts
couldusually be started by an informal complaint. However, if a plaintiff wished to avail himself
ofRoyal — and by implication superior — justice in one of the King's courts, then he would need
a
 Writ of Quo Warranto
Quo warranto(Medieval Latin for "by what warrant?") is a prerogative writ requiring the
personto whom it is directed to show what authority they have for exercising some right or
power (or"franchise") they claim to hold.

writ of quo warranto may be issued against a person holding a public office or
governmentalprivilege. The issue of summon is followed by legal proceedings, during which an
individual’sright to hold an office or governmental privilege is challenged. The writ requires the
concernedperson to explain to the Court by what authority he holds the office. If a person has
usurped apublic office, the Court may direct him not to carry out any activities in the office or
mayannounce the office to be vacant. It is issued to restrain the authority or candidate
fromdischarging the functions of public office. In University of Mysore v. GovindaRao, the
SupremeCourt observed that the procedure of quo Warranto confers the jurisdiction and
authority on thejudiciary to control executive action in making the appointments to public offices
against therelevant statutory provisions; it also protects a citizen being deprived of public office
to which hemay have a right.

Model Format for Filing of Writ of Quo Warranto

In the High Court of…………………… at……………………

Civil Original (Extra-ordinary) Jurisdiction Civil Writ Petition No…………………… of 200…

In the matter of:

JKL S/o……………… R/o…………………… former employee (Inspector Grade-I) in the

RespondentCompany. …Petitioner

1. XYZ Company Ltd., a company wholly owned by the Govt. of India and having its registered
office at…………………… through its Chairman.

2. Managing Director of the above Company

…Respondent

Civil Writ Petition against the order dated…………………… passed by the Managing Director,
respondent No. 2 herein, by which the services of the petitioner as an employee of the
respondent-company have been terminated.

May it please the Hon'ble Chief Justice of the High Court of…………………… and His
Lordship's companion Judges.
The Petitioner

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the petitioner is a citizen of India and is therefore entitled to enjoy all the rights
guaranteed by the Constitution of India.

2. That respondent No. 1 is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 having its
registered office at…………………… The respondent-company is wholly owned by the
Government of India and is, thus, an instrumentality of state is given in Annexure 12 of the
Constitution.

3. That the petitioner was an employee of the respondent-company, having been appointed as a
Sub-Inspector Grade-I on…………………… 1991 and he continued to work, earning one
promotion also.

4. That on…………………… 20…..respondent No. 2 herein abruptly issued the impugned order
dated……………… terminating the services of the petitioner and thepetitioner came to be
relieved of his duties the same day. A copy of the impugnedorder is annexed hereto and marked
as ANNEXURE-1.

5. That on a bare reading of the impugned order it becomes clear that the order hasbeen issued on
the basis of some alleged misconduct on the part of petitioner, butno inquiry under the relevant
rules has been held before the passing of the order.

6. That the petitioner has not committed any act that could be termed to be an act constituting
misconduct.

7. The impugned order is being assailed on the following, amongst other,

GROUNDS

7.1 That the petitioner being a permanent employee of the respondent-company hisservices could
not be terminating without holding an enquiry under the rulesapplicable to the employees of the
company.

7.2 That the principles of natural justice have been contravened by the respondentsin not giving
to the petitioner any opportunity of being heard.

7.3 That the impugned order is otherwise also erroneous and unsustainable, as itdoes not contain
any reason and is a non-speaking order.

7.4 That the impugned order is arbitrary and contravenes Article 14 of theConstitution.

7.5 …………………………………………
7.6 …………………………………………

8. That the petitioner has not filed any petitioner other proceedings relating to thematter at this
petition in any other court.

PRAYER

In the facts and circumstances stated above the petitioner prays that a direction inthe form of a
writ of quo warranto or any other appropriate writ be issued quashingthe impugned order and
reinstating the petitioner in service with all consequentialbenefits including back wages.

It is further prayed that the respondent be burdened with costs.

PETITIONER

THROUGH

DATED…………………… COUNSEL MR.……………………

Conclusion
Broadly stated, the quo warranto proceeding affords a judicial remedy by which any person,who
holds an independent substantive public office or franchise or liberty, is called upon to show by
what right he holds the said office, franchise or liberty, so that his title to it may be duly
determined, and in case the finding is that the holder of the office has not title, he would be
ousted from that office by judicial order. In other words, the procedure of quo warranto gives the
Judiciary a weapon to control the Executive from making appointment to public office against
law and to protect a citizen from being deprived of public office to which he has a right. These
proceedings also tend to protect the public from usurpers of public office, who might be allowed
to continue either with the connivance of the Executive or by reason of its apathy. It will, thus,
be seen that before a person can effectively claim a writ of quo warranto, he has to satisfy the
Court that the office in question is a public office and is held by a usurper without legal
authority, and that inevitably would lead to the enquiry as to whether the appointment of the
alleged usurper has been made in accordance with law or not." It is also beneficial to refer to the
decision of this Court in GhulamQadir vs. Special Tribunal and Others, (2002) 1 SCC 33 para
38 which reads thus:-

“At any event implicit in the finding of the Division Bench that the appointing authority has no
right to appeal in Quo warranto proceedings is that the Court cannot probe the mind of the
appointing authority in a motion for Quo Warranto. The High Court erred in probing the mind of
the government and acted contrary to its own finding on the role of appointing authority in Quo
Warranto proceedings. The reasons felt out by the learned Judges of the Division Bench are not
sustainable in law and the impugned judgment is liable to be interfered with in these appeals.
The learned Judges are not right in quashing the appointment of the appellant as Managing
Director on the misconception that he has been re- appointed to the said office, whereas it was a
fresh appointment under the provisions of the Act and in accordance with the prescribed
qualification and eligibility under the Act. Further the appointee holds the office during the
pleasure of the Government as provided under Section 6(1) of the Act. The learned Judges are
not correct in holding that the Government is not affected by allowing the writ of QuoWarranto
against the appointee and observed that the Government ought not have filed the appeal. It is
unfortunate that the learned Judges have observed that the Government has filed the appeal at the
instance of the appointee. The learned Judges, in our opinion, failed to appreciate that it is the
duty of the Government to justify the appointment as such there is no wrong in filing the writ
appeal.”

BIBLIOGRAPHY
https://www.latestlaws.com/articles/analysis-of-types-of-writs-
under-constitution-of-india-landmark-cases-by-tanu-kapoor/

https://www.scribd.com/document/241377501/Writ-of-QUO-
WARRANTO-UnderIndian-Constitution
WWW.SLIDESHARE.COM