Bank Of India vs Muthyala Saibaba Suryanarayana Murthy 2025 INSC 373 - Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Sympathy Considerations
Constitution of India - Article 226 - In exercise of writ powers under Article 226 of the Constitution, the high courts of the country do not come to the aid of the tardy, the indolent, and the lethargic. This golden truth has to borne in mind by all courts exercising high prerogative writ jurisdiction. While mandamus will issue to reach injustice, wherever found, it is equally true that exercise of discretion should not unnecessarily be coloured by considerations of sympathy or grace or compassion or charity. These are beyond the scope of the high courts’ writ powers. In cases such as these, where acceptable justification for the failure to act with expedition is not proffered, the high courts should stay at a distance. (Para 18) - Quoted from Mani Subrat Jain v. State of Haryana (1977) 1 SCC 486 : no one can ask for a mandamus without a legal right. There must be a judicially enforceable right as well as a legally protected right before one suffering a legal grievance can ask for a mandamus. A person can be said to be aggrieved only when a person is denied a legal right by someone who has a legal duty to do something or to abstain from doing something. (Para 16)
