A High Court cannot issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order of a Tribunal situated outside its territorial jurisdiction.

P. CHANDRA REDDY, Offg., C.J. : -

The question for consideration in this matter is whether a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India to quash the order of the General Manager, Central Railway, Bombay, could be entertained in this Court, which has no territorial jurisdiction over the Tribunal.

2. The petitioner, who was a servant of the Central Railway, received a communication from the General Manager that his services were terminated with effect from a particular date. This order was communicated to the petitioner through the Divisional Superintendent, Central Railway, Hyderabad. It is thus clear that the relief sought for in this petition is the removal of the order of the General Manager, Central Railway, whose office is located at Bombay and not within the jurisdiction of this Court. That being the case, we think that this Court cannot exercise any jurisdiction over the Tribunal and, consequently, cannot issue a Writ of Certiorari to quash its order.

3. Article 226 of the Constitution is in these words :

"1. Notwithstanding anything in Art. 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territtories 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 on a High Court by Cl. (1) shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme Court by Cl. (2) of Art. 32."

4.It is manifest that the condition precedent to the issuance of a writ is that the Tribunal should be situated within the territories in relation to which the High Court is called upon to exercise its jurisdiction. If a tribunal or an individual is not amenable to the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226, a Writ cannot go against that tribunal or the individual. This view of ours is in consonance not only with the language of Art. 226 of the Constitution but also the judgments of the Supreme Court.

In Election Commission, India v. Venkata Rao, 1953 SCJ 293 : (AIR 1953 SC 210) (A), the Supreme Court ruled that the High Court of Madras could not issue a Writ under Art. 226 to the Election Commission having its office permanently located at New Delhi. To a similar effect is the judgment of the same Court in K. S. Rashid and Son v. Income-tax Investigation Commission, 1954 SCJ 264 : (AIR 1954 SC 207) (B). The position is summed up thus by Mukherjee, J., as he then was :

"There are only two limitations placed upon the exercise of these powers by a High Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution; one is that the power is to be exercised throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, that is to say, the writs issued by the Court cannot run beyond the territories subject to its jurisdiction. The other limitation is that the person or authority to whom the High Court is empowered to issue writs must be within those territories and this implies that they must be amenable to its jurisdiction either by residence or location within those territories."

5. Reliance is placed by Sri Bhujanga Rao, in support of his contention that since some records that might throw some light on this enquiry might be in the office of the Divisional Superintendent, Hyderabad, this Court has jurisdiction to grant the relief prayed for in the petition, on a decision of the Supreme Court in Hari Vishnu Kamath v. Ahmed Ishaque, 1955 SCJ 267 : ((S) AIR 1955 SC 233) (C). We do not think that this ruling is apt in the context of the present enquiry.

The question for consideration there was whether a writ could issue against a body which had become functus officio. The Supreme Court answered that question in the affirmative in the view that since the records that had to be ca