Maintainability of a writ of quo warranto

Dear Client,
A writ of Quo Warranto is filed before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India when a citizen challenges the legitimacy or legality of an individual occupying a public office, questioning whether the person has the legal authority to hold that post. A writ of quo warranto is intended to control executive actions in public appointments and prevent the "usurpation" of public offices by unqualified individuals. Even if the appointment is labelled "contractual," if it is against a sanctioned post and violates mandatory eligibility conditions set out in the rules/advertisement, the legality of holding that office can be challenged. But, certain essential conditions must be fulfilled for admission of a writ of Quo Warranto challenging a public appointment, 1) The office in question must be public, i.e., created by a statute or the Constitution. 2) The position must be of a permanent nature, involving rights, duties, and responsibilities. 3) The person holding the post must lack the legal qualification or authority to do so. 4) If the authority responsible for the appointment violated statutory provisions. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of University of Mysore v. C.D. Govinda Rao (1963) ruled that a writ of Quo Warranto can be issued when a person holds a public office without the necessary qualifications. Further, in the case of B. Srinivasa Reddy Vs. Karnataka Urban Water Supply & Drainage Board Employees' Association and Ors. (2006) 11 SCC 731, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down the ratio that only when there is a violation of statutory provisions, a writ of quo warranto can be sought, and a petition seeking quo warranto does not lie alleging violation of a mere circular or guideline etc which does not have statutory force. In the case of Ramandeep Singh vs Union Of India And Ors on 17 January, 2018 the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that even if appointment is contractual, there can be no doubt that it be open to challenge in a writ of quo-warranto if it is a 'public office'. So given the conditions required for admission of a writ of quo-warranto challenging a public appointment and the averments of the Apex Court and High Court, it is recommended to consult with an Advocate practicing in the High Court and specialising in constitutional and administrative matters to understand your rights and remedies to navigate the matter effectively.