Chagla, J.

[1] This is an application by the Pandyan Insurance. Company for a writ under article 227 to correct a decision given by the Chief Presidency Magistrate who is investigating into the loss of S. S. Janaki which took place on 13-3-1954. The order complained of is refusing the petitioners and 34 other insurance companies to be made parties to these proceedings. The facts briefly are that on 13-3-1954, S. S. Janaki sailed outward from Bombay 'laden with cargo, and the ship had hardly left the harbour when she took successive/lists first to starboard and then to port and suddenly capsized a few miles of Kanheri Island, becoming a total loss. The casualty consisted of seven lives including that of the master and the mate and one passenger and with the loss of all the cargo which was on board. The cargo was insured with the petitioner Insurance Company and also the other insurance companies, a list of which is annexed to the petition. The cargo was insured for a sum exceeding Rs. 12,38,000. Claims were submitted by the shippers and the consignees of this cargo and these claims have been paid by the insurance companies. Now, the Government has ordered under the provisions of the relevant statute, to which we shall presently refer, an investigation into the loss of this ship. The petitioners say that they offer to the trading community the benefits of marine insurance on the basic presumption that due diligence is employed by ship owners to make their ships seaworthy and safe for the reception and carriage of cargo before sending them to sea, and their contention is that the fullest investigation should be held to decide what were the causes which led to the total loss of this ship and they claim this full investigation in order that the confidence of insurers and of the public in Indian shipping should not be shaken. The petitioners say that the insurance companies have made detailed investigation and inquiry into the cause and circumstance attending the loss of the ship, that they have gathered vital information and evidence to establish that the ship was overloaded at the time of her departure from Bombay, and further that the cargo on the ship was so faultily stowed as to deprive the ship of stability and that she was in an unseaworthy condition within the meaning of the Indian Merchant shipping Act, The learned Chief Presidency Magistrate, along with three assessors who are respondents Nos. 2, 3 and 4, commenced holding the formal investigation on the loss of the S. S. Janaki on 28-9-1954. An application was made by the petitioners (to be made a party to these proceedings so that they would be in a position to lead evidence and also to cross-examine the witnesses. On 28-9-1954, the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate made the order complained of by which he rejected the application of the insurance companies, and it is against this order that this petition is' presented.

[2] Now/ Mr. Vimadalal who appears for the Malabar Steamship Company, to which company this snip belonged, takes a preliminary objection to our entertaining this petition, and the preliminary objection is that the investigation that is being held by the learned Chief Presidency Magistrate is not a judicial investigation, that the tribunal set up under the Act is a purely administrative tribunal, and that under article 227 our jurisdiction does not extend to correct decisions given by administrative tribunals. Turning first to the provisions of the Constitution, Article 227 confers very wide powers upon the High Court of supervision and superintendence, and Clause (1) of that article provides: "every High Court shall have superintendence over all Courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises, jurisdiction". It will be immediately noticed that the powers of superintendence of the High court are not confined to Courts, they also extend to tribunals, and apart from any authority it seems to us clear that the reaso