(1.) The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and not under Article 227 thereof. Before adverting to the merits of the case, it becomes necessary to address the preliminary issue pertaining to the maintainability and the appropriate constitutional provision under which the present petition has been instituted.
(2.) The distinction between the scope and ambit of jurisdiction exercisable under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been the subject of extensive judicial interpretation. While Article 226 confers upon the High Court the power to issue directions, orders, or writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and certiorari for enforcement of fundamental rights or for any other purpose, Article 227 vests in the High Court the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction. Thence, the choice of provision has material bearing on the nature of relief, the extent of judicial review, and the availability of appellate or revisional remedies.
(3.) In the instant case, the petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 challenging the following actions of the respondents: