How to Draft a Writ Petition Under Article 226: From Facts to Final Prayer
EduLaw EditorialAdvocate PlaybookLearn how to draft a writ petition under Article 226 before Indian High Courts. Understand maintainability, jurisdiction, facts, grounds, prayers, annexures, interim relief and a realistic mock writ petition format.
Edu Law Home › Advocate Playbook › Writ Petition Under Article 226 On this page Opening hook Research snapshot What is a writ petition? Article 226 vs 32 The five writs Writ type selector Maintainability checker 7-step framework Facts to final prayer Anatomy of a petition Mock writ petition Grounds drafting lab Prayer clause builder Interim relief Annexure mapper Common mistakes Writ vs appeal vs suit Why it matters in 2026 Drafting checklist FAQs Advocate Playbook 011 · Constitutional Remedies · Updated 14 June 2026 How to Draft a Writ Petition Under Article 226: From Facts to Final Prayer A practical drafting playbook for turning a grievance against a public authority into a legally sustainable High Court writ petition. Start Drafting Framework Check Maintainability Open Mock Writ Petition 01 The petition usually fails before the hearing begins A writ petition does not fail because the grievance is weak. It often fails because the drafting is weak. Every junior advocate has watched it happen. A client walks in genuinely wronged — a result withheld, a promotion denied, a licence cancelled without a hearing — and yet the petition is dismissed at the admission stage in under three minutes. The injustice was real. The drafting was not ready for it. High Courts do not entertain every grievance merely because it feels unfair. The writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is plenary, but it is also discretionary. Before a judge looks at the merits, the petition must clear a series of gates: it must show that the right court has been approached, that a legal or constitutional right has been affected, that a public authority owed and breached a public duty, that the cause of action arose within that court's territorial reach, that the matter is maintainable despite any alternative remedy, and that the relief asked for is precise enough to be granted. Most weak petitions stumble not on law but on structure. They open with emotion instead of facts. They argue unfairness without naming the public duty. They bury the impugned order in narrative. They ask the court to "do justice" instead of asking for a specific writ. A strong petition does the opposite: it converts a human grievance into a legal architecture the court can act on. That conversion is a craft, and it can be learned. The difference between a petition that is admitted and one that is rejected is rarely the facts — it is the discipline of drafting. This playbook shows how senior advocates move from facts to grounds, from grounds to prayers, and from grievance to constitutional remedy. 02 Research snapshot Provision Article 226 Court High Court Remedy type Constitutional / public law remedy Best used against State, public authority, statutory body or body performing a public function Core test Right + Duty + Breach + Remedy Updated till 14 June 2026 Reading time 12–15 minutes 03 What is a writ petition under Article 226? A writ petition is a direct request to a High Court to exercise its constitutional power to command, quash, restrain or correct the action or inaction of a public authority. Article 226 of the Constitution of India empowers every High Court, throughout the territory in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority directions, orders or writs — including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari. Two features make it powerful in practice. First, it covers both the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and "any other purpose." That second phrase is what makes Article 226 broader than Article 32: a High Court can act not only when a Fundamental Right is breached but also when any other legal right — statutory, contractual in a public law sense, or even an enforceable expectation — is violated by a public authority. Second, the Supreme Court has held that this power is part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be taken away by amendment or legislation. At the same time, courts treat it as a discretionary jurisdiction governed by self-imposed rules — alternative remedy, delay, disputed facts and the need for a genuine public law element — which is exactly why drafting decides outcomes. In short: Article 226 is wider in scope than Article 32, but it is invoked at the court's discretion, and it is almost always directed against the State, an instrumentality of the State, a statutory body, or a private body discharging a public function. 04 Article 226 vs Article 32 Both provisions deal with writs, but they sit very differently in the constitutional scheme. The table below is the comparison junior advocates are most often tested on. Scroll horizontally on mobile to view all columns. Point Article 226 Article 32 Court High Court Supreme Court only Scope Fundamental Rights and "any other purpose" (legal rights) Enforcement of Fundamental Rights only Nature Constitutional power — discretionary A Fundamental Right in itself Rights covered Wider — fundamental, statutory and other legal rights Narrower — only Fundamental Rights Alternative remedy Generally relevant; court may decline if efficacious remedy exists (subject to exceptions) Less of a bar since it enforces a Fundamental Right Territorial connection Cause of action must arise wholly or in part within the High Court's territory (Art. 226(2)) No territorial limitation — pan-India When to use Most public law grievances; first stop for High Court relief Serious, direct Fundamental Rights violations of wider importance Practical tip: filing first under Article 226 is usually preferred, because the Supreme Court frequently expects litigants to approach the High Court before invoking Article 32. 05 The five writs explained Article 226 lets a High Court issue writs "in the nature of" the five classical prerogative writs. Knowing which one fits the grievance is the first drafting decision you make. Writ 1 Habeas Corpus Meaning "You shall have the body" — a command to produce a detained person and justify the detention. When used Against illegal or unlawful detention by the State or a private party. Simple example A person detained without being produced before a magistrate within the legally required time. Drafting caution: plead the fact and date of detention precisely; courts treat liberty matters as urgent, so vagueness on custody details weakens it. Writ 2 Mandamus Meaning "We command" — directs a public authority to perform a public or statutory duty it has failed to perform. When used Against administrative inaction — failure to decide a representation, release results, pay dues, or act on a statutory obligation. Simple example A university refusing to declare a student's result despite repeated representations. Drafting caution: you must first show a clear legal right and a corresponding public duty, and usually a prior demand that was refused or ignored. Writ 3 Certiorari Meaning "To be certified" — quashes an order of a court, tribunal or quasi-judicial authority. When used Where an order is passed without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, in breach of natural justice, or on a clear error of law. Simple example A tribunal passing a penalty order without giving the affected party a hearing. Drafting caution: identify the exact jurisdictional or natural justice defect; certiorari corrects legal errors, not mere factual disagreement. Writ 4 Prohibition Meaning Restrains a lower court or authority from continuing to act beyond its jurisdiction. When used While proceedings are still pending — to stop an authority acting without authority of law. Simple example A tribunal proceeding with a matter that clearly falls outside its statutory powers. Drafting caution: prohibition is preventive (before the order); certiorari is corrective (after the order). Choosing the wrong one signals weak drafting. Writ 5 Quo Warranto Meaning "By what authority" — questions a person's right to hold a public office. When used Where a person holds or usurps a public office without satisfying the eligibility conditions prescribed by law. Simple example Appointment to a statutory post made in violation of mandatory qualification requirements. Drafting caution: it lies only for a public office created by statute or the Constitution, not for private employment. 06 Interactive: which writ fits your grievance? Writ Type Selector What is your grievance mainly about? Someone is illegally detained A public authority is not performing a duty A tribunal or authority passed an illegal order A lower court / authority is acting beyond jurisdiction Someone is holding public office without eligibility Educational guidance only. This selector indicates the likely writ category; the correct writ in a real matter depends on the full facts and applicable law. It is not legal advice. 07 Maintainability checker Before you draft a single ground, test whether the petition can even survive admission. Answer honestly — the court will. Maintainability Checker Answer the questions to see your assessment. Indicative self-assessment only. A weighted score does not replace a lawyer's judgement on maintainability under Article 226. 08 The senior advocate's 7-step drafting framework Strong petitions are built in a fixed order. Skipping a step is what produces weak drafts. Find the legal right Pin down the exact right affected — a Fundamental Right, a statutory entitlement, or a legitimate expectation. No identifiable right, no writ. Identify the public duty Match that right to a corresponding duty the respondent owes in public law. Mandamus and most reliefs collapse without a clear duty. Test maintainability Check the respondent's public character, territorial jurisdiction, alternative remedy and delay before drafting, not after the court raises them. Build the chronology Reduce the facts to a clean list of dates and events. The List of Dates is the spine the whole petition hangs on. Convert facts into grounds Translate each unfair act into a legal proposition — arbitrariness under Article 14, breach of natural justice, jurisdictional error, non-speaking order. Draft interim and final prayers Write the relief precisely. The interim prayer must logically flow from, and stay within, the final prayer. Attach documents and verify affidavit Paginate annexures, reference them in the facts, and ensure the supporting affidavit and verification are correctly sworn. 09 From facts to final prayer: the core drafting flow Every well-drafted writ moves along a single logical line. Each node feeds the next. Facts → Cause of Action → Legal Right → Breach → Grounds → Interim Relief → Final Prayer → Annexures 10 Anatomy of a writ petition Click any component to see what it contains, why it matters, and a senior advocate's drafting tip. Select a component above Each part of a writ petition has a precise job. Click through them in order to understand how the document is assembled. 11 Realistic mock writ petition The scenario below is fictional but realistic — it follows the structure a High Court expects. Use it to study form, not to copy for filing. Educational Mock Draft — Not for Filing 📋 Copy draft text IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ____________ (EXTRAORDINARY CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION) CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. ______ OF 2026 (Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) IN THE MATTER OF: Mr. A.B. (Aged 22 years), final-year LL.B. student, R/o ____________, District ____________ … PETITIONER VERSUS 1. State University of ____________, through its Registrar, having its office at ____________ … Respondent No. 1 2. The Controller of Examinations, State University of ____________ … Respondent No. 2 3. State of ____________, through the Secretary, Department of Higher Education … Respondent No. 3 Synopsis The present petition challenges the arbitrary withholding of the Petitioner's final-year examination result by Respondent No. 1, a statutory State University performing a public function. Despite having appeared in and completed all examinations, and despite three written representations, the Petitioner's result has been withheld without any reason, communication or order, thereby preventing him from enrolling for higher studies and applying for employment within the prescribed window. The inaction is arbitrary, violative of Article 14, contrary to the principles of natural justice, and amounts to a failure to perform a public duty correctable by a writ of mandamus. List of Dates and Events 10.04.2026 — Petitioner completes the last final-year examination. 20.05.2026 — University declares results of all candidates except the Petitioner; result shown as "withheld" with no reason. 23.05.2026 — Petitioner submits first written representation to the Controller of Examinations. (Annexure P-2) 02.06.2026 — Petitioner submits a reminder representation. (Annexure P-3) 09.06.2026 — No response received; admission window for higher studies closing on 30.06.2026. 14.06.2026 — Petition filed before this Hon'ble Court. Facts The Petitioner is a bona fide final-year student duly registered with Respondent No. 1, a statutory university established under the State Act, and is therefore amenable to writ jurisdiction. The Petitioner appeared in and completed all prescribed examinations. There is no allegation of unfair means, no show-cause notice, and no order of any kind against him. On 20.05.2026 the results were declared. The Petitioner's result alone was marked "withheld" without any reason, order or communication. The Petitioner submitted representations dated 23.05.2026 and 02.06.2026, which remain undecided. The continued withholding is causing irreparable prejudice as the Petitioner is unable to apply for higher studies and employment within the closing window. Grounds Because the action is arbitrary and violative of Article 14. Withholding a result without any reason, order or communication is the very definition of arbitrary State action. Because there is a breach of natural justice. No notice, no opportunity of hearing and no reasoned order preceded the adverse action affecting the Petitioner's career. Because the impugned inaction is a non-speaking, reasonless decision incapable of being tested, and therefore unsustainable. Because Respondent No. 1 has failed to perform a public duty. A statutory university is duty-bound to declare results of candidates who have validly appeared, and its failure is correctable by mandamus. Because the Petitioner had a legitimate expectation that his result would be declared along with his cohort, absent any disqualifying reason communicated to him. Interim Prayer It is respectfully prayed that pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to permit the Petitioner to participate provisionally in the higher-studies admission process, subject to the final outcome, and to restrain the Respondents from taking any coercive or prejudicial action against the Petitioner. Final Prayer It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to: Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ directing Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to forthwith declare the Petitioner's final-year examination result; In the alternative, direct the Respondents to decide the Petitioner's representations dated 23.05.2026 and 02.06.2026 by a reasoned and speaking order within a time fixed by this Hon'ble Court; Declare the continued withholding of the result, without reason or hearing, as arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution; Award costs of the petition to the Petitioner; and Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. Affidavit (in support) I, A.B., the Petitioner above-named, do hereby solemnly affirm and declare that the contents of the accompanying petition are true to my knowledge, and that nothing material has been concealed therefrom. Verified at ____________ on this 14th day of June 2026. — Deponent. Annexure List Annexure P-1: Copy of the Petitioner's enrolment / registration with Respondent No. 1. Annexure P-2: Representation dated 23.05.2026. Annexure P-3: Reminder representation dated 02.06.2026. Annexure P-4: Screenshot / copy of the result page showing "withheld". Annexure P-5: Higher-studies admission notification showing the closing date. 12 Grounds drafting lab A ground is not a complaint — it is a legal proposition the court can rule on. Compare how the same grievance reads when it is sharpened into law. 1. Natural justice Weak The respondent acted illegally and did not listen to us. Strong Because the impugned action was taken without issuing any show-cause notice or affording the Petitioner an opportunity of hearing, it violates the principle of audi alteram partem and is liable to be quashed. 2. Arbitrariness (Article 14) Weak The decision is unfair and against the petitioner. Strong Because the respondent's failure to decide the Petitioner's representation dated ____, despite a clear public duty, is arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 3. Non-speaking order Weak The order is wrong and gives no reasons. Strong Because the impugned order is a non-speaking order devoid of any reasons, it denies the Petitioner the ability to know the basis of the decision and is unsustainable, reasons being the heartbeat of every quasi-judicial decision. 4. Jurisdictional error Weak The authority had no right to pass this order. Strong Because the impugned order was passed in excess of, and without, the jurisdiction conferred by Section ____ of the governing statute, it suffers from a jurisdictional error apparent on the face of the record and warrants a writ of certiorari. 5. Legitimate expectation Weak We expected to be treated like everyone else. Strong Because the consistent practice and representations of the respondent created a legitimate expectation in the Petitioner that ____ would follow, its sudden departure without reasons is arbitrary and actionable. 6. Delay by the authority Weak They are just sitting on the file. Strong Because the respondent has, despite repeated representations dated ____ and ____, failed to decide the Petitioner's matter within a reasonable time, the inaction defeats the Petitioner's accrued rights and amounts to a failure of public duty correctable by mandamus. 13 Prayer clause builder Select the reliefs you need. The tool assembles them into draft prayer language you can adapt. Prayer Clause Builder Select one or more reliefs above to generate sample prayer language. 📋 Copy prayer Sample language for learning. Adapt to your facts, the impugned order and the governing statute before any real use. 14 Interim relief Interim relief keeps the petitioner's position alive while the petition is pending. It is often what the client actually came for. What it is: temporary protection granted during the pendency of the petition — a stay, a status quo order, or permission to do something provisionally — so that the final relief is not rendered meaningless by the passage of time. When to seek it: whenever waiting for final hearing would cause harm that cannot be undone — an exam you cannot re-sit, a job window that will close, a demolition that cannot be reversed. Why it must match the final relief: courts grant interim relief only in aid of the final relief. If your interim prayer asks for more than your final prayer can deliver, it is liable to be refused as a disguised final order. The three classic ingredients must co-exist: Prima facie case There must be a serious, arguable question to be tried — not certainty of success, but a triable case. Balance of convenience The inconvenience to the petitioner if relief is refused must outweigh that to the respondent if it is granted. Irreparable injury The harm must be incapable of being adequately compensated in money or undone later. Sample interim prayers Situation Sample interim prayer Stay on impugned order "...stay the operation and effect of the impugned order dated ____ pending final disposal." Provisional participation "...permit the Petitioner to appear in the examination / interview provisionally, subject to the final outcome of this petition." No coercive action "...direct the Respondents not to take any coercive action against the Petitioner during the pendency of this petition." Status quo "...direct the parties to maintain status quo as on date in respect of ____ until further orders." 15 Annexure mapper Every fact you plead should be backed by a document, and every document should map to a purpose. Use this as a working evidence checklist. Document Purpose Suggested annexure Impugned order Proves the action being challenged Annexure P-1 Representation Shows the petitioner asked the authority to act Annexure P-2 Reminder email/letter Establishes continued, unanswered demand Annexure P-3 Acknowledgement Proves the authority received the representation Annexure P-4 Government circular Establishes the public duty or applicable rule Annexure P-5 Exam notification Shows eligibility, schedule and deadlines Annexure P-6 Eligibility certificate Proves the petitioner's entitlement/qualification Annexure P-7 RTI response Surfaces the authority's own admissions or silence Annexure P-8 Prior correspondence Builds the chronology and good-faith conduct Annexure P-9 Identity proof Establishes the petitioner's identity and standing Annexure P-10 Annexures must be paginated, legible and cross-referenced in the facts. An unreferenced annexure is dead weight. 16 Common drafting mistakes The same avoidable errors sink petitions across every High Court. Watch for these. Starting with emotions instead of facts Opening with how unfair or shocking the action is, instead of clean facts and dates, makes the petition read like a complaint, not a legal case. Not showing the public law element Failing to establish that the respondent is the State or performs a public function is the fastest route to dismissal on maintainability. Filing despite disputed facts Writ courts decide on record, not by trial. Heavily disputed facts belong in a suit, not a writ. Ignoring alternative remedy Not explaining why the statutory appeal or remedy is inadequate invites the court to relegate you to it. Poor territorial jurisdiction Filing where no part of the cause of action arose breaches Article 226(2) and gets the petition returned. Vague prayers Asking the court to "do justice" instead of seeking a specific writ gives the judge nothing concrete to grant. Missing annexures Pleading a document without attaching it leaves the assertion unproven on the face of the record. Suppressing material facts Writ jurisdiction is equitable; concealment of inconvenient facts can defeat the petition entirely, however strong its merits. Overloading grounds Twenty diluted grounds are weaker than five sharp ones. Quantity signals a lack of confidence in any single point. Asking for impossible relief Seeking relief the court cannot grant — or that no respondent can perform — undermines the credibility of the whole prayer. 17 Writ vs appeal vs civil suit vs PIL Not every grievance belongs in a writ. Answer the questions to see which path may fit. (Indicative only.) Remedy Decision Tree ↺ Start over Educational decision aid. The right remedy in a real matter depends on the full facts, the governing statute and professional advice. 18 Why Article 226 still matters in 2026 Across reported matters in recent years, High Courts continue to use Article 226 as the front line against administrative excess and inaction. The drafting lessons matter more than any single outcome. Education and exam disputes Withheld results, re-evaluation refusals and admission denials remain common. Lesson: plead the public duty of the institution and the closing window that creates urgency. Service law and recruitment Selection irregularities, delayed appointments and promotion disputes recur. Lesson: address the alternative remedy of service tribunals head-on and justify the writ. Demolition and municipal action Courts have repeatedly scrutinised demolition without notice. Lesson: natural justice and the absence of a prior hearing are the drafting spine. Police inaction Failure to register or investigate complaints draws mandamus petitions. Lesson: show the statutory duty and the specific refusal or silence. Tender and blacklisting matters Blacklisting without a hearing is regularly challenged. Lesson: frame arbitrariness under Article 14 and the civil consequences of blacklisting. Detention and personal liberty Habeas corpus remains the swiftest liberty remedy. Lesson: precise custody facts and urgency drive admission. Administrative silence Undecided representations are textbook mandamus territory. Lesson: prove repeated demand and unreasonable delay. PIL misuse and court scrutiny Courts have grown sceptical of PILs filed for publicity or private ends. Lesson: file a PIL only with genuine public interest, clean hands and disclosed credentials. These are general drafting observations on recurring categories of reported matters, not commentary on the outcome of any specific case. 19 Pre-filing drafting checklist Before you file 🖨 Print checklist 20 Frequently asked questions Advocate Playbook Daily Docket Case Repository Judgment Roundups Want to learn drafting like a courtroom professional? Explore EduLaw Advocate Playbook, Daily Docket, Case Repository and Judgment Roundups — built for advocates who draft to win, not just to file. Start Legal Intelligence at ₹1/day EduLaw · Advocate Playbook 011 Constitutional Remedies · Updated 14 June 2026 Educational content only. This playbook explains drafting principles under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and does not constitute legal advice. The mock petition is fictional and not for filing. Consult a qualified advocate for any actual matter. Check Maintainability Mock Petition /* ============================================================ READING PROGRESS BAR ============================================================ */ (function(){ var bar=document.getElementById('progress-bar'); function update(){ var h=document.documentElement; var max=h.scrollHeight-h.clientHeight; var pct=max>0?(h.scrollTop||document.body.scrollTop)/max*100:0; bar.style.width=pct+'%'; } window.addEventListener('scroll',update,{passive:true}); window.addEventListener('resize',update);update(); })(); /* ============================================================ TOC ACTIVE-SECTION HIGHLIGHT (scroll spy) ============================================================ */ (function(){ var links=[].slice.call(document.querySelectorAll('#toc-list a')); var map={}; links.forEach(function(l){var id=l.getAttribute('href').slice(1);map[id]=l;}); var secs=Object.keys(map).map(function(id){return document.getElementById(id);}).filter(Boolean); if(!('IntersectionObserver'in window))return; var io=new IntersectionObserver(function(entries){ entries.forEach(function(e){ if(e.isIntersecting){ links.forEach(function(l){l.classList.remove('active');}); var a=map[e.target.id];if(a)a.classList.add('active'); } }); },{rootMargin:'-20% 0px -70% 0px'}); secs.forEach(function(s){io.observe(s);}); })(); /* ============================================================ WRIT TYPE SELECTOR ============================================================ */ (function(){ var data=[ {t:'Habeas Corpus',x:'A grievance about illegal detention calls for a writ of habeas corpus — commanding the authority to produce the detained person and justify the custody. Plead the date and fact of detention precisely; liberty matters are treated as urgent.'}, {t:'Mandamus',x:'Where a public authority fails to perform a public or statutory duty, the writ of mandamus directs it to act. You must show a clear legal right, a corresponding duty, and usually a prior demand that was refused or ignored.'}, {t:'Certiorari',x:'An illegal order by a tribunal or quasi-judicial authority is corrected by a writ of certiorari, which quashes the order for want of jurisdiction, excess of jurisdiction, breach of natural justice, or error of law apparent on the record.'}, {t:'Prohibition',x:'When an authority is still acting beyond its jurisdiction, a writ of prohibition restrains it from continuing. Prohibition is preventive (before the order); certiorari is corrective (after it).'}, {t:'Quo Warranto',x:'Where a person holds a public office without satisfying the legal eligibility, a writ of quo warranto questions the authority to hold that office. It applies only to public offices created by statute or the Constitution.'} ]; var box=document.getElementById('writ-result'); var ti=document.getElementById('writ-rtitle'), tx=document.getElementById('writ-rtext'); document.querySelectorAll('input[name="writq"]').forEach(function(r){ r.addEventListener('change',function(){ var d=data[+this.value];ti.textContent='Suggested writ: '+d.t;tx.textContent=d.x;box.classList.add('show'); }); }); })(); /* ============================================================ MAINTAINABILITY CHECKER (weighted yes/no) ============================================================ */ (function(){ // positive=good if YES; for alternative remedy & delay, NO is good var qs=[ {q:'Is the respondent a State, public authority, statutory body or body performing a public function?',good:'y',w:2}, {q:'Is a legal or constitutional right of the petitioner affected?',good:'y',w:2}, {q:'Is there a public duty involved?',good:'y',w:1}, {q:'Is the cause of action within this High Court\u2019s territorial jurisdiction?',good:'y',w:2}, {q:'Is there an unexhausted alternative statutory remedy? (No is generally safer)',good:'n',w:1}, {q:'Is there urgency or a violation of natural justice?',good:'y',w:1}, {q:'Is there significant delay / laches? (No is safer)',good:'n',w:1}, {q:'Are the facts supported by documents (largely undisputed)?',good:'y',w:1}, {q:'Is the prayer precise and specific?',good:'y',w:1} ]; var wrap=document.getElementById('maint-list'); var state=qs.map(function(){return null;}); var totalW=qs.reduce(function(a,q){return a+q.w;},0); qs.forEach(function(q,i){ var row=document.createElement('div');row.className='check-row'; row.innerHTML=' '+q.q+' '+ ' Yes '+ ' No '; wrap.appendChild(row); }); var meter=document.getElementById('maint-meter'), verdict=document.getElementById('maint-verdict'); wrap.addEventListener('click',function(e){ var b=e.target.closest('button');if(!b)return; var i=+b.dataset.i, v=b.dataset.v; state[i]=v; var par=b.parentNode; par.querySelectorAll('button').forEach(function(x){x.classList.remove('sel-y','sel-n');}); b.classList.add(v==='y'?'sel-y':'sel-n'); score(); }); function score(){ var answered=state.filter(function(s){return s;}).length; if(!answered){return;} var got=0; qs.forEach(function(q,i){if(state[i]===q.good)got+=q.w;}); var pct=Math.round(got/totalW*100); meter.style.width=pct+'%'; var label, color; if(pct>=75){label='Strong Article 226 case';color='#1f5e3a';} else if(pct>=45){label='Needs caution';color='#9a7b34';} else{label='Weak writ maintainability';color='#6b1f2a';} verdict.style.color=color; verdict.textContent=label+' \u2014 '+pct+'% '+(answered '+p.n+' '+ ' What it contains: '+p.c+' '+ ' Why it matters: '+p.m+' '+ ' Senior advocate tip: '+p.tip+' '; }); grid.appendChild(b); }); })(); /* ============================================================ PRAYER CLAUSE BUILDER ============================================================ */ (function(){ var opts=[ {l:'Quash the impugned order',t:'issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ quashing the impugned order dated ____;'}, {l:'Direct authority to decide representation',t:'issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to decide the Petitioner\u2019s representation dated ____ by a reasoned and speaking order within a time fixed by this Hon\u2019ble Court;'}, {l:'Declare action arbitrary',t:'declare the impugned action of the Respondents as arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India;'}, {l:'Grant interim protection',t:'grant interim protection to the Petitioner by restraining the Respondents from taking any coercive or prejudicial action during the pendency of this petition;'}, {l:'Maintain status quo',t:'direct the parties to maintain status quo as on date in respect of the subject matter until further orders;'}, {l:'Produce records',t:'call for and examine the records of the case from the Respondents in connection with the impugned action;'}, {l:'Permit provisional participation',t:'permit the Petitioner to participate provisionally in ____, subject to the final outcome of this petition;'}, {l:'Award costs',t:'award the costs of this petition to the Petitioner.'} ]; var wrap=document.getElementById('prayer-opts'), out=document.getElementById('prayer-out'); opts.forEach(function(o,i){ var lab=document.createElement('label');lab.className='pchk'; lab.innerHTML=' '+o.l+' '; wrap.appendChild(lab); }); wrap.addEventListener('change',function(){ var chosen=[].slice.call(wrap.querySelectorAll('input:checked')).map(function(c){return opts[+c.value].t;}); if(!chosen.length){out.innerHTML='Select one or more reliefs above to generate sample prayer language.';return;} var html='It is most respectfully prayed that this Hon\u2019ble Court may be pleased to: '; chosen.forEach(function(t){html+=' '+t.charAt(0).toUpperCase()+t.slice(1)+' ';}); html+=' Pass such other and further order(s) as this Hon\u2019ble Court may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. '; out.innerHTML=html; }); })(); /* ============================================================ REMEDY DECISION TREE ============================================================ */ (function(){ var steps=[ {q:'Is the grievance against a public authority or a body performing a public function?', yes:1,no:{r:'Civil suit may be better.',d:'A purely private dispute is generally not maintainable as a writ; an ordinary civil suit is the usual forum.'}}, {q:'Is it a personal grievance, or does it raise a genuine public interest affecting a class of persons?', // yes = public interest yesLabel:'Public interest',noLabel:'Personal grievance', yes:{r:'PIL may be suitable \u2014 only with genuine public interest.',d:'A PIL is appropriate where the matter affects the public at large and is filed bona fide, with clean hands and disclosed credentials. Avoid PILs for private or publicity ends.'}, no:2}, {q:'Are the facts heavily disputed, requiring evidence and trial?', yes:{r:'Civil suit may be better.',d:'Writ courts decide on record and avoid disputed questions of fact. A suit allows leading of evidence.'}, no:3}, {q:'Is an efficacious statutory appeal or remedy available?', yes:4,no:{r:'Article 226 writ may be suitable.',d:'With a public authority, a clear right and no adequate alternative remedy, the High Court\u2019s writ jurisdiction is the appropriate forum.'}}, {q:'Is there a breach of natural justice, a jurisdictional error, or urgent constitutional relief needed?', yes:{r:'Article 226 writ may be suitable.',d:'Even where an alternative remedy exists, the writ may be entertained on recognised exceptions \u2014 breach of natural justice, an order wholly without jurisdiction, or enforcement of a fundamental right.'}, no:{r:'Statutory appeal may be better.',d:'Where an efficacious statutory remedy exists and no exception applies, the court is likely to relegate the petitioner to that appeal.'}} ]; var qEl=document.getElementById('dt-question'),aEl=document.getElementById('dt-actions'),oEl=document.getElementById('dt-out'),pEl=document.getElementById('dt-progress'),rEl=document.getElementById('dt-reset'); var cur=0,count=0; function render(i){ var s=steps[i];count++; pEl.textContent='Question '+count; qEl.textContent=s.q; aEl.innerHTML='';oEl.classList.remove('show'); mkBtn(s.yesLabel||'Yes',s.yes); mkBtn(s.noLabel||'No',s.no); rEl.style.display='inline-flex'; } function mkBtn(label,target){ var b=document.createElement('button');b.className='btn btn-ghost';b.type='button';b.textContent=label; b.addEventListener('click',function(){ if(typeof target==='number'){render(target);} else{showResult(target);} }); aEl.appendChild(b); } function showResult(o){ aEl.innerHTML=''; oEl.innerHTML=' '+o.r+' '+o.d+' '; oEl.classList.add('show'); qEl.textContent='Suggested path'; pEl.textContent=''; } rEl.addEventListener('click',function(){count=0;render(0);}); render(0); })(); /* ============================================================ PRE-FILING CHECKLIST ============================================================ */ (function(){ var items=['Correct High Court (territorial jurisdiction satisfied)','Correct parties named through the right officer','Maintainability checked (public law element present)','Alternative remedy addressed or distinguished','Delay / laches explained where relevant','Facts supported by paginated documents','Grounds legally framed, not emotional','Prayers precise and specific','Interim relief justified and within final relief','Annexures paginated and cross-referenced','Affidavit and verification properly sworn','Court format and registry rules followed']; var wrap=document.getElementById('checklist-items'); items.forEach(function(t,i){ var row=document.createElement('div');row.className='cl-item'; row.innerHTML=' '+t+' '; wrap.appendChild(row); }); })(); /* ============================================================ FAQ ACCORDION ============================================================ */ (function(){ var faqs=[ ['What is Article 226?','Article 226 empowers every High Court to issue writs, directions and orders for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose, within its territorial jurisdiction. It is a constitutional public law remedy that is wider than Article 32 but discretionary in nature.'], ['Can a writ petition be filed against a private person?','Generally no. Article 226 is a public law remedy that lies against the State, statutory bodies, instrumentalities of the State, or private bodies performing a public function. A purely private dispute governed by contract is ordinarily not maintainable as a writ.'], ['What is the difference between Article 226 and Article 32?','Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right enforceable only by the Supreme Court and only for enforcing Fundamental Rights. Article 226 is a constitutional power of the High Courts covering both Fundamental Rights and any other legal right, making it wider but discretionary.'], ['Can a writ be filed if an alternative remedy exists?','The alternative remedy rule is a self-imposed rule of discretion, not an absolute bar. As recognised in Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, a High Court may still entertain a writ where there is a breach of Fundamental Rights, a violation of natural justice, an order wholly without jurisdiction, or a challenge to the vires of a statute.'], ['What is mandamus?','Mandamus is a writ commanding a public authority to perform a public or statutory duty it has failed or refused to perform. It is the most common writ for administrative inaction, such as failure to decide a representation.'], ['What is certiorari?','Certiorari is a writ that quashes an order of a court, tribunal or quasi-judicial authority that acted without jurisdiction, in excess of jurisdiction, in violation of natural justice, or on an error of law apparent on the record.'], ['What documents are needed?','Typically the impugned order, representations and reminders, acknowledgements, relevant rules or notifications, supporting correspondence, identity proof, a sworn affidavit and a vakalatnama \u2014 all filed as paginated annexures.'], ['What is a prayer clause?','The prayer clause is the operative part stating the precise relief sought \u2014 quashing an order, directing the authority to act, declaring action