VIJAYA AHRODYAMA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER UDUPI DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Persons having no right either in law or on facts and who make a habit of coming to this Court on one pretext or the other invoking writ jurisdiction and if this Court, more often than not, out of sheer sympathy and only to ensure that clear opportunity is given to any person if any adverse order is passed, if remands to original authority, it does not mean it creates any right in favour of any person who had approached this Court invoking writ jurisdiction.

(2.) Writ jurisdiction is not one to confer rights on any person much less to grant lands or other properties belonging either to the Government or private persons. Any person who has right otherwise constitutional, statutory or even private property rights if is affected by a public authority by misuse of the statutory powers, administrative powers or even constitutional powers conferred on such public authority, can come to this Court complaining of violation of such existing rights. Writ jurisdiction cannot be one for creating rights or for recognition of disputed rights for grant of relief.

(3.) Even assuming some rights are affected by the action of some public authority, if the statute provides for a remedy by way of appeal or revision, such affected persons are normally relegated to avail the statutory remedies as disputed facts while can never be looked into in writ jurisdiction, even questions of law can also be examined by the Appellate Authorities who have been conferred with such powers.