The Constitution of India
Article 226
Power of High Courts to issue certain writs
(1) Notwithstanding anything in article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.
(2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.
(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1), without —
(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order; and
(b) giving such party an opportunity of being heard,
makes an application to the High Court for the vacation of such order and furnishes a copy of such application to the party in whose favour such order has been made or the counsel of such party, the High Court shall dispose of the application within a period of two weeks from the date on which it is received or from the date on which the copy of such application is so furnished, whichever is later, or where the High Court is closed on the last day of that period, before the expiry of the next day afterwards on which the High Court is open; and if the application is not so disposed of, the interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or, as the case may be, the expiry of the said next day, stand vacated.
(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme Court by clause (2) of article 32.
Why this exists
The framers wanted more than one layer of protection for citizens' rights and for general legal accountability of the state. Article 32 gave the Supreme Court writ powers only for fundamental rights, but Article 226 gave High Courts a wider, more accessible remedy — covering fundamental rights and 'any other purpose' — so people wouldn't have to travel to Delhi for every legal wrong. Clause (3) was added later, during the 44th Amendment (1978), after the Emergency era exposed misuse of ex-parte interim orders that could stay government action indefinitely without hearing the other side.
How courts read it
In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review under Articles 226 and 32 is part of the Constitution's 'basic structure' and cannot be taken away even by a constitutional amendment. Courts have also read the 'cause of action' test in clause (2) — as in Kusum Ingots & Alloys v. Union of India (2004) — to determine which High Court has jurisdiction when a central government order affects people across states. Courts treat the 'any other purpose' phrase broadly, extending writ jurisdiction beyond fundamental rights to general illegality or arbitrariness by public authorities.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Only the Supreme Court can issue writs like habeas corpus or mandamus.
Fact: High Courts under Article 226 can issue the same writs, and their power is actually broader since it covers 'any other purpose,' not just fundamental rights. - Myth: A High Court can only act if the government office is physically located in its state.
Fact: Under clause (2), a High Court can act if any part of the cause of action arose within its territory, even if the government or person is based elsewhere. - Myth: Once a High Court grants a stay order, it stays in force indefinitely.
Fact: Under clause (3), if such an order was passed without hearing the other side, it can be challenged, and the court must decide within two weeks or the order automatically lapses.