( 1 ) THIS petition stated to have been filed in public interest mainly contains the following prayer:

"1. That the Hon ble court may be pleased to issue writ of mandamus and or any other appropriate writ/ order/ direction thereby directing the respondents to take immediate steps and bring an enactment or get promulgated an ordinance by the President of India under Article 123 of the Constitution of India to the effect of prescribing higher qualifications for the legislatures (both parliamentarian and state legislatures) within a reasonable period of time. 2. This Hon ble Court may further pleased to direct the respondents to give effect to the prescribed qualifications in the next coming general election. "

( 2 ) CASE of the petitioner, an advocate, who appeared in person to present the case, is that definite and minimum positive qualifications for becoming Member of Parliament or Member of Legislative Assembly should be prescribed in addition to the existing qualification and disqualification as prescribed in the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the Constitution) and Representation of People Act, 1951 (in short the Representation Act.) It is his case that legislators are primarily reasonsible to legislate enactments and are supposed to have total understanding of the enactments made by the legislative bodies, and if they are oblivious to what is being enacted, it would be against the very concept of democratic set up and legislative governance. Petitioner makes a grievance that most of the Members of the legislative bodies are not educationally equipped to understand various implications of the enactments being made and therefore necessary changes should be made in Articles 88 and 173 of the Constitution. It is his case that it is a well known fact that most of the legislators even do not understand what are being enacted, leave aside comprehend them. It is stated that they are more mute and dumb spectators to the process which is engineered by few. Grievance is made that by not looking into these aspects legislative bodies have abdicated and neglected their functions. They should be directed to enact such legislations which would make legislative bodies more meaningful, so far as the enactment of different statues are concerned. It is submitted that non-legislation by Parliament about higher additional qualifications in Articles 84 (c) (2) and 173 (C) for more than half-a-century is nothing but sheer abdication and neglect of its functions in the Parliament, thereby warranting judicial interference.

( 3 ) WE pointed out to the petitioner, that it is impermissible for a Court to issue writ of mandamus to legislature in a particular manner or even to legislate a particular Act or provision. petitioner s submission was, however, that judiciary being guardian of the rights of people it should mould law according to the reliefs and necessities of time. Training of the legislators in the lines indicated is imminent which will promote public good and would be in general interest of the people. Reliance is placed on S. R. Bommai. v. Union of India, (1994) 3 SCC 1. to contend that by exercising power of judicial review, mandamus can be issued.

( 4 ) THE writ of mandamus is a high prerogative writ of most extensive remedial nature, and is, in form, a command issued from the High Court of justice, directed to any person, corporation or inferior court, requiring him or them to do some particular thing therein specified which appertains to his or their office and is in the nature of a public duty. [see. Halsbury s laws of England (Hailsham Edn) Vol. 9 p. 744. ]

( 5 ) BEFORE mandamus can issue, petitioner must show that he has a legal right to the performance of a legal duty by the party against whom the mandamus is sought, The purpose of mandamus is to supply defects of justice. It does in case where there is a specific right and no specific legal remedy to enforce that right. A writ of mandamus may be granted only in a