The jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226 to issue a writ of certiorari is supervisory in nature and does not extend to acting as an appellate authority over findings of fact reached by an inferior tribunal after appreciation of evidence. (!) [1000118980005][1000118980006]

A writ of certiorari may issue to correct jurisdictional errors, such as orders passed without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, or failure to exercise jurisdiction, or where the tribunal acts illegally or violates natural justice principles. [1000118980006]

Findings of fact by a tribunal cannot be challenged in certiorari proceedings merely on grounds of insufficiency or inadequacy of evidence; such matters fall within the tribunal's exclusive domain. [1000118980006]

A writ may correct an error of law apparent on the face of the record, such as obvious misinterpretation of a statutory provision, ignorance or disregard of it, or conclusions plainly inconsistent with the law, but not errors requiring argument to discover or mere errors of fact. [1000118980006][1000118980007]

Where a tribunal's finding of fact is based on no evidence, erroneously excludes material evidence, or admits inadmissible evidence influencing the finding, it may amount to an error of law correctable by certiorari. [1000118980006]

In evaluating workshop facilities for permit grants under motor vehicles legislation, a tribunal's preference for an applicant with facilities at a route terminus over one with facilities midway does not constitute an irrelevant consideration. [1000118980008][1000118980013]

Failure by a tribunal to expressly reference or reason every piece of evidence does not, by itself, justify certiorari if the finding is supported by other record evidence, such as official reports contradicting a claimant's assertion. [1000118980008][1000118980009][1000118980010][1000118980011][1000118980012]

Official transport reports indicating workshop locations, when contradicting a claimant's self-assertion, provide evidentiary basis for a tribunal's factual finding, precluding High Court interference under Article 226. [1000118980010][1000118980011][1000118980024]

Article 136 jurisdiction is discretionary and may be declined where interests of justice so dictate, but not where a High Court order lacks jurisdiction, as substituting appellate review for tribunal fact-finding undermines the supervisory role. [1000118980005][1000118980015]

Tribunals and authorities are necessary parties to writ or appeal proceedings challenging their orders but need not be represented by counsel absent specific allegations requiring reply, as they hold a neutral position akin to courts. [1000118980018]

Writ orders should be precisely drafted to avoid technically setting aside unchallenged portions of tribunal decisions, such as permits granted to unrelated parties. [1000118980016]