Hari Vishnu Kamath v Ahmad Ishaque

AIR 1955 Supreme Court 233Supreme Court of India1955Administrative Law

Rule established

Certiorari corrects jurisdictional errors and errors of law on the face of the record; it does not correct errors of fact made within jurisdiction.

Facts

Election Tribunal determined disputed questions of fact in an election petition
Petitioner (Kamath) was dissatisfied with the factual findings
Sought certiorari to have the High Court correct the Tribunal's findings of fact

Issue

Whether certiorari lies to correct errors of fact made by a tribunal acting within its jurisdiction?

Held

Certiorari is not a general right of appeal. It corrects: (i) jurisdictional errors; (ii) errors of law apparent on the face of the record. It does not correct errors of fact made within jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi

Certiorari is supervisory, not appellate. Its scope is limited to jurisdictional error and error of law on the face of the record. Factual errors within jurisdiction are immune from certiorari.

How to use it in an exam

Critical limit of certiorari in ADM-5.3. Certiorari does not lie to correct factual errors within jurisdiction.

Source

Source: AIR 1955 Supreme Court 233

This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.

Cited in study notes

Administrative LawWrits Certiorari and ProhibitionCertiorari corrects jurisdictional and legal errors only; not factual errors within jurisdiction