Source: Allahabad High Court

Why in News?

Recently, the Allahabad High Court in the matter of M/S Genius Ortho Industries v. Union of India and Ors., has held that the writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI) can only be exercised for a petitioner who has approached the Court in good faith and with clean hands.

What was the Background of M/S Genius Ortho Industries v. Union of India and Ors. Case?

• In this case, a writ petition has been filed before the High Court of Allahabad, wherein the petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated February 27, 2023, passed by the Joint Commissioner, C.G.S.T., Meerut cancelling its GST registration.
• The ground for cancelling the GST registration of the petitioner was that upon physical verification, it was found by the authorities that no business activity was being carried out at the said premises.
• Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that there has been suppression of material fact, as the petitioner has not revealed before this Court that a new registration was obtained by the petitioner subsequent to cancellation of the earlier registration.
• The High Court dismissed the writ petition on the ground of suppression of material facts.

What were the Court’s Observations?

• Justice Shekhar B. Saraf observed that Article 226 of the COI is a discretionary jurisdiction which is to be exercised for petitioners who are acting in a good faith.
• It was held that the principle of uberrima fides requires a party that comes to a Court to act in utmost good faith. This principle is the genesis of the expectation of the Court to pass orders at the behest of the petitioner who has approached the Court with clean hands.
  • The moment this trust is broken, and it is discovered that there is suppression of material facts, the Court is bound to dismiss the said petition without granting any relief whatsoever to the petitioner.

What are the Relevant Legal Provisions Involved in it?

Principle of Uberrima Fides

• The principle of uberrima fides is a Latin phrase that translates to utmost good faith.
• It requires the advocate to act in the best interests of the client.

Article 226 of the COI

About:

• Article 226 is enshrined under Part V of the COI which puts power in the hand of the High Court to issue the writs.
• Article 226(1) of the COI states that every High Court shall have powers to issue orders or writs including habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari, to any person or any government for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for other purpose.
• Article 226(2) states that the High Court has the power to issue writs or orders to any person, or government, or authority -
  • Located within its jurisdiction or
  • Outside its local jurisdiction if the circumstances of the cause of action arises either wholly or partly within its territorial jurisdiction.
• Article 226(3) states that when an interim order is passed by a High Court by way of injunction, stay, or by other means against a party then that party may apply to the court for the vacation of such an order and such an application should be disposed of by the court within the period of two weeks.
• Article 226(4) says that the power granted by this article to a high court should not diminish the authority granted to the Supreme Court by Clause (2) of Article 32.
• This Article can be issued against any person or authority, including the government.
  • This is merely a constitutional right and not a fundamental right. It cannot be suspended, even during an emergency.
• Article 226 is of mandatory nature in case of fundamental rights and discretionary nature when it is issued for “any other purpose”.
  • It enforces not only fundamental rights, but also other legal rights.
• The following writs are available under this Article:
  • Writ of Habeas Corpus
  • Writ of Mandamus
  • Writ of Certiorari
  • Writ of prohibition
  • Writ of Quo warranto

Case Laws:

• In Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. the Union of India (1984), the Supreme Court held that Article 226 has a much broader scope than Article 32 as Article 226 can be issued to safeguard legal rights as well.
• In Common Cause v. Union of India (2018), the Supreme Court held that the writ under Article 226 can also be issued for the enforcement of public responsibilities by public authorities.