Mandamus is a judicial remedy that compels a public authority to perform a legally obligated duty and is rare due to its potential to disrupt legal processes. The conditions for issuing mandamus include that the petitioner must have a legal right, there must be a demand for justice that was refused, and it cannot be meant to harass. Types of mandamus include certiorarified mandamus, continuing mandamus, and anticipatory mandamus, each serving unique purposes in ensuring justice.

2. Introduction
 Mandamus is a judicial remedy in the form of an order
from a court to any government, subordinate
court, corporation, or public authority, to do (or forbear
from doing) some specific act which that body is obliged
under law to do (or refrain from doing), and which is in
the nature of public duty, and in certain cases one of a
statutory duty.
 In State of Mysore v. K.N. Chandrasekhara (AIR 1965
SC 532), the apex court have termed Mandamus as “An
order issued by a court to a public authority asking it to
perform a public duty imposed upon it by the
Constitution or by any other law.”

3. Getting to the bottom of Writs of
Mandamus
 The primary objective of mandamus is to supply defect of
justice. Writs of mandamus are unique because they can be
made without completing the judicial process or before a case
has concluded. They are powerful. However, they are rarely
used because a petitioner must prove there are no other
remedies to the situation and that someone is suffering an
injustice due to the failure to comply with the law. Judges
prefer not to issue writs unless it is completely necessary
because of the disruption they cause to the legal process.
 Mandamus is of English origin. The first reported case of
Mandamus was that of Middleton case (3 Dyer 332b: 73 ER
752) wherein the citizen’s franchise was restored. Further, the
Bagg case (1615) was a ,leading decision by which a
membership of local body was restored to applicant.

4. continued..
 In India, the first case was reported in R v. Warren
Hasting (1775) where the statutory recognition to grant
mandamus was granted by Section 50 of the Specific
Relief Act, 1877.
 Writs of mandamus can be made before a trial has
concluded and without completing the judicial process.
But, it is also pertinent to mention that Writs of
mandamus are powerful but rarely used because they
disrupt the legal process. Hence, the discretion to issue
mandamus also must be exercised fairly, reasonably
and on well-established legal principles.

5. Conditions for issuing Writs of
Mandamus
1. The condition precedent is the petitioner must have the legal
right. In Umakant Saran v. State of Bihar (AIR 1973 SC 964), the
existence of right is the foundation of the jurisdiction of a writ-court
to issue mandamus.” A person is said to be aggrieved only when he
is denial of legal right by someone who has legal duty to do
something or abstain from doing something.
2. There must be in the applicant a right to compel the performance of
some legal duty cast on the opponent. Such duty must be statutory and
of public nature. The duty. It is also pertinent to note that such duty must
not be contractual in nature. It was held in various decisions of the apex
court that, “If a public authority invested in discretionary power abuses
the power, or exceeds it, or acts mala fide, or there is non-applicationof
mind by it, or irrelevant considerations have been taken into account, the
writ of mandamus can be issued.”

6. 3.The petition for a writ of mandamus must be preceded by a
demand of justice and its refusal. In Halsbury’s Laws of
England, it is stated: “As a general rule the order will not be
granted unless the party complained of has known what it was
he required to do so, so that he had the means of considering
whether or not he should comply, and it must be shown by
evidence that there was a distinct demand of that which the party
seeking the mandamus desires to enforce, and that the demand
was met by a refusal.”
4. A petition for mandamus albeit made in good faith, will not be
granted, if designed to harass the respondent or with a view to
wreak personal grievances.
continued..

7. Who can apply mandamus and against whom
it may be applied?
 A person whose right has been infringed may apply for
the writ of mandamus. In Raj Rani Sekhri v. U.P. Govt.
(AIR 1954 All 492) the court affirmed that, “ In case any
individual makes an application for the enforcement of
any right of an instruction, he must disclose facts to
relate what entitled him to make an application on behalf
of said institution.” Mandamus is a remedy in public law.
 On the other hand, writ of mandamus is available to the
authorities called “State” under Article 12 of the
Constitution like parliament, state legislature, courts,
tribunals, government, and its officials, local authorities,
universities, and other educational institutions, election
authorities etc.

8. continued..
 It is pertinent to note that the writ of mandamus is not
available against President and Governor for exercise
of powers and duties of his office or for any act done
or purporting to be done by him in the exercise and
performance of those powers and duties, as enshrined
in Article 361 of the Indian Constitution. Further, it will
not lie against the State legislature to prevent them
from considering enacting a law alleged to be violative
of constitutional provisions. Further, the writ of
mandamus is not available against who is an inferior or
ministerial officer, bound o obey the orders of a
competent authority, to compel him to do something
which is part of his duty in that capacity. It does not
against a private individual or any incorporated body.

9. Types of Mandamus

10. Certiorarified Mandamus
 The writ of mandamus and certiorari can be combined,
In State of Kerala v. T.P. Roshana (AIR 1975 SC 765), it
was held that, “By issuing certiorari, a decision can be
quashed and simultaneously by issuing mandamus,
certain direction can also be given. This is known as
certiorarified mandamus.”

11. Continuing Mandamus
 In some cases, the court may feel that mere issuance
of mandamus may not serve the purpose unless there
is monitoring by the court. In such cases, instead of
disposing the matter and issuing final direction, the
court may issue interim direction from time to time
and requires authority to implement them. This is
technically known as “continuing mandamus”. This is
adopted especially in PIL and environmental cases.

12. Anticipatory Mandamus
 In Maganbhai Ishwar Patel v. Union of India (AIR 1969
SC 783) it was held that, “ Threat to legal right cannot
generally be a subject of mandamus. But if such threat
is real or genuine or there is imminent danger of
invasion of right, a petition for mandamus would lie.”

13. Conclusion
A writ or order of mandamus is an
extraordinary court order because it is
made without the benefit of full judicial
process, or before a case has concluded. It
may be issued by a court at any time that it
is appropriate, but it is usually issued in a
case that has already begun. The position
of this writ in India is also extraordinary. It
is the most popular, extensively and
successfully used by the aggrieved party.

14. Thank You