Introduction
Article 227 gives every High Court the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction. This power helps High Courts maintain discipline, legality, and uniformity in the judicial system. The High Court does not act as an appellate court under this Article. Instead, it ensures that subordinate courts function within the limits of their authority and follow established legal principles. The objective is to prevent misuse of power and correct serious legal errors that may result in injustice.
Why Was Article 227 Introduced?
Article 227 has its roots in Section 107 of the Government of India Act, 1915. The framers of the Constitution retained this provision to preserve judicial hierarchy and accountability. It strengthens the role of High Courts as constitutional guardians of the justice delivery system. By granting supervisory control, the Constitution ensures that lower courts do not act arbitrarily or beyond their jurisdiction.
How Does Article 227 Differ from Appellate Jurisdiction?
The power under Article 227 is supervisory and not appellate. This means the High Court cannot re-examine evidence or substitute its own decision for that of a subordinate court. The High Court only intervenes when there is a grave error of law, jurisdictional excess, perversity, or failure to exercise jurisdiction. The focus remains on legality rather than correctness of every factual finding.
What Is the Textual Scope of Article 227?
Article 227 consists of four clauses that define the extent of High Court supervision. The first clause grants general superintendence over courts and tribunals within the High Court’s territorial limits. The second clause allows the High Court to call for returns, frame procedural rules, and prescribe formats for records. The third clause authorizes the High Court to regulate fees of court officers, subject to existing laws and approval of the Governor. The fourth clause clearly excludes courts and tribunals related to armed forces from this supervisory power.
What Is the Nature of Power Under Article 227?
The power under Article 227 is both judicial and administrative in nature. Judicial superintendence allows the High Court to correct jurisdictional errors, arbitrary orders, and legal perversity. Administrative superintendence ensures smooth functioning of subordinate courts through procedural rules and oversight. This dual nature makes Article 227 wider than writ jurisdiction, but also demands cautious and limited exercise.
When Can High Courts Intervene Under Article 227?
High Courts exercise this power sparingly and only in exceptional cases. Intervention is justified when a subordinate court acts without jurisdiction, exceeds its jurisdiction, or refuses to exercise jurisdiction vested in it. The High Court may also step in to prevent grave injustice caused by biased proceedings, non-speaking orders, or disregard of settled legal principles. Routine errors or factual disputes are not grounds for invoking Article 227.
How Is Article 227 Different from Article 226?
Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs for enforcement of fundamental and other legal rights. It is an original jurisdiction exercised against persons or authorities, mainly in public law matters. Article 227, on the other hand, operates only against courts and tribunals. While Article 226 focuses on rights enforcement, Article 227 focuses on judicial discipline and jurisdictional control. The scope of Article 227 is territorially strict and procedurally supervisory, whereas Article 226 is broader in terms of remedies.
Why Is Article 227 Considered Broader Than Writ Jurisdiction?
Article 227 is not limited to specific writs like certiorari or mandamus. It allows High Courts to intervene even where no writ is technically applicable. The power extends to correcting procedural irregularities and jurisdictional lapses that may not directly violate a fundamental right. However, despite this breadth, the power is exercised with restraint to respect judicial independence of subordinate courts.
What Are the Supreme Court Interpretations of Article 227?
In Waryam Singh v. Amarnath (1954), the Supreme Court clarified that Article 227 exists to keep subordinate courts within the bounds of their authority. The Court emphasized that this power is wider than certiorari but does not convert the High Court into an appellate forum. In Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai (2003), the Court reaffirmed that Article 227 is meant to correct jurisdictional errors and grave injustice. In K. Valarmathi v. Kumaresan (2025), the Supreme Court held that High Courts cannot reject plaints under Article 227 by bypassing the Civil Procedure Code.
How Does Article 227 Strengthen Judicial Hierarchy?
Article 227 works alongside Article 235, which deals with control over subordinate judiciary. Together, they reinforce the supervisory and administrative authority of High Courts. This structure ensures accountability without compromising independence. It preserves judicial purity by preventing abuse of power at lower levels while maintaining respect for procedural autonomy.
For any specific query call at +91 – 8569843472
Conclusion
Article 227 plays a role in maintaining rule of law within the judicial system. It empowers High Courts to act as constitutional supervisors rather than appellate bodies. By ensuring that subordinate courts function legally and fairly, Article 227 protects public confidence in justice delivery. Its restrained use reflects judicial maturity and constitutional balance.
