Resp 1kla Moot

RESP 226 The high court exercising their jurisdiction under article 226 have the power to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or to pass orders and give necessary directions where the government or a public authority has failed to exercise or has wrongly exercised the discretion conferred upon it by a statute or a rule or a policy decision of the government .1 if a judicial order is passed by the court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction and its sole purpose is to help the administration of justice , then any incidental consequence which may flow from the order will not introduce any constitutional infirmity in it. 2 it is the duty of the executive to fill the vaccum by orders because its field is contraminous with that of the legislature , and where there is inaction even by the by he executive, for whatever reason , the judiciary must step in

3

in exercise of its

constitutional obligations. under the aforesaid provision to provide solution till such time as the legislature acts to perform its role by enacting proper legislation to cover the field.4 The highcourt would advance public morality or public interest advance through the process of courts, for the reason that moral considerations cannot be kept at bay and the judges are not excepted to sit as mute structures of aclay , in the hal known as the court room , but have to be sensitive “ in the that they must keep their fingers firmly upon the pulse of the accepted morality of the day.5

RESP 14

1

Te controller & auditor general of india, jayan prakash new delhi and another v. KS jaggannathan & another AIR 1997 SC 537 2 Naresh v. state of maharashtra AIR 1967 SC 1 3 Vineet narain & others v. union of India & another AIR 1998 SC 889 (916) 4 ibid 5 MR x v. hospital z AIR 1999 SC 495

Article 14 prohibits the state from denying persons or class of persons equal treatment; provided they are equals and are similarly situated.6 It however does nor forbid classification.7 In other words what article 14 forbids is discrimination and not classification if otherwise such classification is legal, valid & reasonable .8 The differentiation made by the prohibition law between Indians and foreigners staying in India for a short time is also valid.9

6

State of bihar & ors v. bihar atate +2 lectures association & ors AIR 2007 SC 1948 ibid 8 ibid 9 Stste of Bombay v. Balsara AIR 1951 SC 318 7