Question map
Not attempted Correct Incorrect ★ Bookmarked
Loading…
Q88 (IAS/2022) Polity & Governance › Judiciary › High Court jurisdiction Official Key

With reference to the writs issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements: 1. Mandamus will not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public duty. 2. Mandamus will not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company. 3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto. Which of the statements given above are correct?

Result
Your answer: —  ·  Correct: D
Explanation

The correct answer is Option 4 (1, 2 and 3) based on the following legal principles under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution:

  • Statement 1 is correct: Mandamus is a judicial remedy in the form of an order to a public body to do its duty. It generally does not lie against private individuals or organizations. However, if a private entity performs a public duty or is backed by a statute, Mandamus can be issued against it.
  • Statement 2 is correct: While a Government Company is an "agent" of the State, it is legally a separate juristic entity. Courts have historically held that Mandamus does not lie against a company unless it is performing a statutory duty. In the context of specific judicial precedents often cited in UPSC, this statement is considered technically correct as Mandamus is primarily for administrative/statutory authorities.
  • Statement 3 is correct: Unlike other writs where the "Locus Standi" rule is strict, Quo Warranto can be sought by any public-spirited person, even if they are not personally aggrieved, provided it involves a public office of a substantive nature.
How others answered
Each bar shows the % of students who chose that option. Green bar = correct answer, blue outline = your choice.
Community Performance
Out of everyone who attempted this question.
50%
got it right
PROVENANCE & STUDY PATTERN
Full view
Don’t just practise – reverse-engineer the question. This panel shows where this PYQ came from (books / web), how the examiner broke it into hidden statements, and which nearby micro-concepts you were supposed to learn from it. Treat it like an autopsy of the question: what might have triggered it, which exact lines in the book matter, and what linked ideas you should carry forward to future questions.
Q. With reference to the writs issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements: 1. Mandamus will not lie against a private…
At a glance
Origin: From standard books Fairness: High fairness Books / CA: 10/10 · 0/10

This is a high-fairness 'Sitter' derived directly from the limitations sections of the Writs chapter in Laxmikanth. It tests the specific boundary conditions (Locus Standi and Amenability) rather than just the definitions. If you skimmed the 'Cannot be issued against' bullet points, you lost marks.

How this question is built

This question can be broken into the following sub-statements. Tap a statement sentence to jump into its detailed analysis.

Statement 1
In India, is the writ of mandamus maintainable against a private organisation only if that organisation is entrusted with a public duty?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 156
Presence: 5/5
“It demands some activity on the part of the body or person to whom it is addressed. In short, it commands the person to. whom it is addressed to perform some public or quasi-public II. Mandamus. It is clear that mandamus will not issue unless the applicant has a legal right to the performance of a legal duty of a public nature and the party against whom the writ is sought is bound to perform that duty. (a) For the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whenever a public officer or a Government has done some act which violates the Fundamental Right of a person, the court would issue a writ of mandamus restraining the public officer or the Government from enforcing that order or doing that act against the person”
Why this source?
  • Expressly states mandamus will not issue unless the applicant has a legal right to performance of a legal duty of a public nature.
  • Requires that the party against whom the writ is sought be bound to perform that public duty.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 157
Presence: 5/5
“whose Fundamental Right has been infringed (b) Apart from the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, mandamus is available from a high court for various other purposes, eg,— (i) To enforce the performance of a statutory duty where a public officer has got a power conferred by the Constitution or a statute. The court may issue a mandamus directing him to exercise the power in case he refuses to do it. (ii) The writ will also lie to compel any person to perform his public duty where the duty is imposed by the Constitution or a statute or statutory instrument. (iii) To compel a court or judicial tribunal to exercise its jurisdiction when it has refused to exercise it. (iv) To direct a public official or the Government not to enforce a law which is unconstitutional.”
Why this source?
  • Specifies mandamus lies to enforce the performance of a statutory duty by a public officer.
  • States the writ will lie to compel any person to perform a public duty where that duty is imposed by the Constitution or a statute.
Statement 2
In India, can the writ of mandamus be issued against a company, including a government company?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > Mandamus > p. 99
Presence: 5/5
“It literally means 'we command'. It is a command issued by the court to a public official asking him/ her to perform his/ her official duties that he/she has failed or refused to perform. It can also be issued against any public body, a corporation, an inferior court, a tribunal or government for the same purpose. The writ of mandamus can not be issued (a) against a private individual or body; (b) to enforce departmental instruction that does not possess statutory force; (c) when the duty is discretionary and not mandatory; (d) to enforce a contractual obligation; (e) against the president of India or the state governors; and (f) against the chief justice of a high court acting in judicial capacity.”
Why this source?
  • Explicitly states mandamus can be issued against a corporation.
  • Lists categories against which mandamus lies: public body, a corporation, inferior court, tribunal or government.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 156
Presence: 4/5
“It demands some activity on the part of the body or person to whom it is addressed. In short, it commands the person to. whom it is addressed to perform some public or quasi-public II. Mandamus. It is clear that mandamus will not issue unless the applicant has a legal right to the performance of a legal duty of a public nature and the party against whom the writ is sought is bound to perform that duty. (a) For the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whenever a public officer or a Government has done some act which violates the Fundamental Right of a person, the court would issue a writ of mandamus restraining the public officer or the Government from enforcing that order or doing that act against the person”
Why this source?
  • Explains mandamus compels performance of a legal duty of a public nature imposed by statute or the Constitution.
  • Implies mandamus lies against any person or body bound to perform such statutory or public duties (which can include companies performing public functions).
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 157
Presence: 4/5
“whose Fundamental Right has been infringed (b) Apart from the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, mandamus is available from a high court for various other purposes, eg,— (i) To enforce the performance of a statutory duty where a public officer has got a power conferred by the Constitution or a statute. The court may issue a mandamus directing him to exercise the power in case he refuses to do it. (ii) The writ will also lie to compel any person to perform his public duty where the duty is imposed by the Constitution or a statute or statutory instrument. (iii) To compel a court or judicial tribunal to exercise its jurisdiction when it has refused to exercise it. (iv) To direct a public official or the Government not to enforce a law which is unconstitutional.”
Why this source?
  • Describes mandamus as available to enforce performance of a statutory duty by a public officer or to compel any person to perform a public duty.
  • Reinforces that bodies bound by statutory/public duties can be directed by mandamus.
Statement 3
In India, can any public-spirited person file a petition seeking the writ of quo warranto to challenge a public office-holder?
Origin: Direct from books Fairness: Straightforward Book-answerable
From standard books
Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > Quo-Warranto > p. 100
Presence: 5/5
“This wTit ca n be issued only in case of a substantive publi c office of a permanent character created by a statute or by the Constitution. It cannot be issued in cases of ministerial office or private office. This writ can be sought by any public minded person and not necessarily by the”
Why this source?
  • Explicitly states the writ of quo-warranto 'can be sought by any public minded person'.
  • Directly links petitioner status to public-minded individuals rather than only aggrieved persons.
Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 23: THE HIGH COURT > p. 367
Presence: 3/5
“It should not be merely a cloak for attaining private ends of a third party or of the party bringing the petition. The court can examine the previous records of public service rendered by the litigant. 25 An advocate filed a writ petition against the State or its instrumentalities seeking not only compensation to a victim of rape committed by its. Control over Subordinate Courts. As the head of the judiciary in the State, the high court has got an administrative control over the subordinate judiciary in the State in respect of certain matters, besides its appellate and supervisory jurisdiction over them.”
Why this source?
  • Explains courts reject petitions that are 'a cloak for attaining private ends', implying public-spirited motive is relevant to acceptance.
  • Notes courts may examine prior public service of the litigant, tying petitioner credibility to public-mindedness.
Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 6: JUDICIARY > Some Early PILs > p. 137
Presence: 3/5
“cannot easily approach the courts. For this purpose, the judiciary allowed public spirited citizens, social organisations and lawyers to file petitions on behalf of the needy and the deprived. It must be remembered that the problems of the poor …are qualitatively different from those which have hitherto occupied the attention of the Court and they need ….a different kind of judicial approach. If we blindly follow the adversarial procedure in their case, they would never be able to enforce their fundamental rights. — Justice Bhagwati in Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs. Union of India, 1984.”
Why this source?
  • Describes judiciary allowing public-spirited citizens and social organisations to file petitions on behalf of the needy, supporting broader locus principles.
  • Provides broader PIL context that public-minded persons can approach courts for public causes.
Pattern takeaway: UPSC Polity questions now rigorously test the 'boundary conditions' of legal concepts. Knowing the definition is insufficient; you must know the exceptions (e.g., private bodies with public duties) and the locus standi rules (who can file).
How you should have studied
  1. [THE VERDICT]: Sitter. Direct lift from Laxmikanth (Chapter: Fundamental Rights > Writs > Mandamus/Quo-Warranto).
  2. [THE CONCEPTUAL TRIGGER]: Constitutional Remedies (Art 32 & 226). Specifically, the 'Exceptions' and 'Prerequisites' for the 5 writs.
  3. [THE HORIZONTAL EXPANSION]: Memorize the 'Against Whom' matrix: 1) Habeas Corpus: Public & Private. 2) Mandamus: Public duties only (No private contracts, no President/Governors). 3) Prohibition/Certiorari: Judicial/Quasi-judicial bodies. 4) Quo Warranto: Substantive public office only (No ministerial/private office).
  4. [THE STRATEGIC METACOGNITION]: The examiner is moving from 'What does the writ mean?' to 'When does the writ FAIL?'. Focus on the negative lists: Mandamus does NOT lie for discretionary duties; Quo Warranto does NOT require personal aggrievement.
Concept hooks from this question
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Public-duty requirement for mandamus
💡 The insight

Mandamus requires the existence of a legal duty of a public nature and a corresponding legal right to its performance.

High-yield for questions on writ jurisdiction: it distinguishes when judicial compulsion is available and when private disputes must be resolved by ordinary civil remedies. Connects to topics on public law remedies and locus standi; useful for fact-pattern questions asking whether a writ lies against non-state actors.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 156
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 157
🔗 Anchor: "In India, is the writ of mandamus maintainable against a private organisation on..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Statutory or constitutional basis for the duty
💡 The insight

Mandamus can compel performance where the duty is imposed by the Constitution or a statute.

Essential for analysing whether an obligation is justiciable by writs versus contractual; helps answer whether duties arising from statute/Constitution attract public-law remedies. Enables candidates to classify duties as public/statutory versus private/contractual in exam scenarios.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 157
🔗 Anchor: "In India, is the writ of mandamus maintainable against a private organisation on..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S1
👉 Writ-issuing authority under Articles 32 and 226
💡 The insight

The Supreme Court and High Courts are the constitutional forums empowered to issue mandamus and other writs.

Core constitutional knowledge: knowing which courts can issue writs frames remedial options in problems on fundamental rights and administrative law. Links to questions on separation of powers, remedies, and court competence.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > WRITS-TYPES AND SCOPE > p. 98
🔗 Anchor: "In India, is the writ of mandamus maintainable against a private organisation on..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Mandamus lies against public bodies and corporations
💡 The insight

Mandamus can be issued to corporations and public bodies that are bound to perform public duties.

High-yield for constitutional law questions on writs; helps determine when public entities (including corporate forms) are enforceable by writ. Connects to topics on Article 32/226 and remedies against administrative bodies, enabling questions that ask which entities are amenable to judicial compulsion.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > Mandamus > p. 99
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 156
🔗 Anchor: "In India, can the writ of mandamus be issued against a company, including a gove..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Mandamus requires a statutory or public duty
💡 The insight

Mandamus commands performance of a legal duty of a public nature imposed by statute or the Constitution.

Essential for distinguishing cases where mandamus is maintainable versus where it is not (e.g., private/contractual matters). Links to administrative law and remedies, and helps answer scenario-based questions about writ relief and prerequisites for issuance.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 156
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 157
🔗 Anchor: "In India, can the writ of mandamus be issued against a company, including a gove..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S2
👉 Key limits on mandamus (private bodies, discretion, contractual obligations)
💡 The insight

Mandamus does not lie against private individuals/bodies, nor to enforce non-statutory departmental instructions, discretionary duties, or contractual obligations.

Important for negative testing in exams—helps eliminate wrong options and craft answers on limits of judicial review. Connects to questions on scope of writs and distinctions between public law and private law remedies.

📚 Reading List :
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > Mandamus > p. 99
🔗 Anchor: "In India, can the writ of mandamus be issued against a company, including a gove..."
📌 Adjacent topic to master
S3
👉 Quo-warranto — purpose and scope
💡 The insight

Quo-warranto challenges a person holding a public office who is not entitled to it and addresses lack of qualification or usurpation.

High-yield for questions on writs and constitutional remedies; distinguishes quo-warranto from other writs (mandamus, certiorari). Mastering this clarifies when courts may remove or restrain office-holders and links to topics on public offices and disqualifications.

📚 Reading List :
  • Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.). > Chapter 8: FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL DUTIES > Scope of the Writs: I. Habeas corpus. > p. 159
  • Indian Constitution at Work, Political Science Class XI (NCERT 2025 ed.) > Chapter 2: RIGHTS IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION > RIGHT TO CONSTITUTIONAL REMEDIES > p. 41
  • Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.) > Chapter 8: Fundamental Rights > Quo-Warranto > p. 100
🔗 Anchor: "In India, can any public-spirited person file a petition seeking the writ of quo..."
🌑 The Hidden Trap

The 'Next Logical Question' is on the applicability of Res Judicata to writs. Fact: The principle of Res Judicata applies to writ proceedings, barring successive petitions on the same facts, EXCEPT for Habeas Corpus (where technicalities are relaxed to protect liberty).

⚡ Elimination Cheat Code

Apply 'Welfare State Logic' to Statement 2. It claims Mandamus won't lie against a Government Company. A Govt Company uses public funds and performs state functions. Why would the Constitution shield a state-funded entity from accountability? It defies the logic of Article 12 ('State'). Thus, Statement 2 is inherently contradictory and likely False.

🔗 Mains Connection

Connect Quo Warranto's 'public-minded petitioner' rule to the evolution of PIL (Public Interest Litigation) in GS-2. This relaxation of Locus Standi was the jurisprudential seed that allowed the Supreme Court to transform from a purely legal adjudicator to a guardian of social justice (SP Gupta case).

✓ Thank you! We'll review this.

SIMILAR QUESTIONS

IAS · 2025 · Q59 Relevance score: 2.67

With reference to the Indian polity, consider the following statements : I. The Governor of a State is not answerable to any court for the exercise and performance of the powers and duties of his/her office. II. No criminal proceedings shall be instituted or continued against the Governor during his/her term of office. III. Members of a State Legislature are not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said within the House. Which of the statements given above are correct?

CDS-II · 2010 · Q77 Relevance score: 2.55

Which of the following statements is/are correct ?, 1. In India the constitutional remedy under Article 32 is available only in case of fundamental rights, not in the case of rights which follow from some other provision in the Constitution. . 2. Both the Supreme Court and High Courts can issue the writs of habeas corpus, mandamus prohibition, certiorari and quo warranto only for the purpose of enforcement of . fundamental rights. Select the correct answer using the code given below :

IAS · 2020 · Q88 Relevance score: 2.01

With reference to the provisions contained in Part IV of the Constitution of India, which of the following statements is/are correct ? 1. They shall be enforceable by courts. 2. They shall not be enforceable by any court. 3. The principles laid down in this part are to influence the making of laws by the State. Select the correct answer using the code given below :

IAS · 2008 · Q66 Relevance score: 1.99

Consider the following statements: 1. Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer was the Chief Justice of India. 2. Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer is considered as one of the progenitors of public interest litigation (PIL) in the Indian judicial system. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

CDS-I · 2016 · Q63 Relevance score: 1.95

As per the Constitution of India, the Writ of Prohibition relates to an order : 1. issued against judicial and quasijudicial authority 2. to prohibit an inferior Court from proceeding in a particular case where it has no jurisdiction to try 3. to restrain a person from holding a public office to which he is not entitled Select the correct answer using the code given below :