I.A. Ansari, J.

1. What is a writ of certiorari?. When can a High Court issue a writ of certiorari or an order or direction in the nature of a writ of certiorari? What is the difference, if any, between the High Court's power to issue a writ of certiorari or an order or direction in the nature of a Writ of certiorari under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, on the one hand, and its power to issue a writ of certiorari or a direction or order in the nature of a Writ of certiorari under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, on the other?. Whether a writ of certiorari can be issued against a decree, which has been passed by a Court, which had no civil jurisdiction?. Whether a writ of certiorari can be issued, in such a case, by a High Court in exercise of its powers under Article 226 and, if so, when? Whether a decree passed by court, 'X', which is subordinate to a High Court, 'Y', can be challenged in a High Court, 'Z', on the ground that the decree, which has been passed by the court, 'X', is without jurisdiction, inasmuch as the court, which had been passed the decree, had no civil jurisdiction and that the decree is likely to be executed within the territorial limits of the jurisdiction of the High Court, 'Z'? Can, in such circumstances, the High Court, 'Z', quash the decree by issuing a writ of certiorari in exercise of its extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226? What is a Fast Track Court? Whether a Fast Track Court, in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, can exercise civil jurisdiction? These are some of the important questions, which this set of writ petitions have raised.

2. All these writ petitions, which involve identical facts and raise same questions of law, have been heard, at the request of learned Counsel for the parties, analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.

Background Facts:

3. Keeping in view extreme poverty of the tribal populace in the hill states of the North-East Region, Govt. of India, on the recommendation of the Agricultural Price Commission, adopted, way back in the year 1971-72, a policy, whereunder it was decided that the food grains, covered by the Public Distribution System (PDS), which are required to be released from the stocks of the Union Government, should be delivered at the Principal Distribution Centres (PDCs) in the hill States. The reason for adopting the policy was that in hill States, the food grains were required to be moved by road to the interior places, which are not connected with rail-heads or had limited rail-heads. It was, therefore, decided that the Food Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation'), which is established under the Food Corporation Act, 1964, should open go-downs at the PDCs, wherever possible in the hill States, and since food grains could not have been carried to these PDCs by rail heads, the same would be carried by road and the cost of transportation to these centres, which the State Government may incur, shall be reimbursed by the Corporation. As the transportation of carriage of food grains were required to be done by the State Governments with the help of private contractors, it was also decided, at some point of time, that the allotment of carriage contract would be by the State Governments. The policy, adopted in this regard, also envisaged off loading of the stocks of the food grains at the fair price shops en route PDCs. The reimbursement was subject to the condition that the reimbursement charges shall not exceed the transportation charges, which would have been payable, had the stocks been moved from the base depots to the approved PDCs. The reimbursement of the transportation charges of the food grains, as conceived under the relevant policy, stood divided, broadly speaking, into two parts, namely,

(i) Road Reimbursement Charges:

These charges were to be paid to the State Government for lifting of food grains from rail heads carrying the same to the base depots;

(ii) Hill Transp