Article 226 locus standi requires personal legal injury; an advocate cannot file a writ in his own name for clients.

Article 226 writ jurisdiction ordinarily requires the petitioner to show a personal legal right or legal injury. Recognised exceptions are habeas corpus, quo warranto, and bona fide public interest litigation where the affected persons cannot approach the court because of poverty, helplessness, disability, or a similar disadvantage. An advocate who is not personally affected cannot invoke writ jurisdiction in his own name merely because he represents the affected parties, and section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 does not permit substitution of the client in that manner.

---

---

Issues: Whether an advocate, not personally affected and not filing the case in public interest, has locus standi to maintain a writ petition in his own name challenging an order affecting his clients.

Analysis: The right to invoke writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India ordinarily depends on the existence of a legal right or legal injury in the person approaching the court. The recognised exceptions are proceedings in the nature of habeas corpus or quo warranto, and bona fide public interest litigation where the affected persons are unable to approach the court because of poverty, helplessness, disability, or comparable disadvantage. The petition did not disclose any circumstance showing that the affected accused persons were prevented from approaching the court, and it was not a public interest petition. Section 30 of the Advocates Act, 1961 only enables an advocate to practise law; it does not authorise the advocate to substitute himself for the client by filing a petition in his own name.

Conclusion: The advocate had no locus standi to maintain the writ petition, and the dismissal of the petition was justified.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable only at the instance of a person who is personally affected or otherwise entitled to invoke the court's extraordinary jurisdiction, save in recognised exceptional cases such as public interest litigation, habeas corpus, or quo warranto; an advocate cannot file such a petition in his own name merely because he represents the affected parties.

---