With reference to the writs issued by the Courts in India, consider the following statements: 1. Mandamus will not lie against a private organisation unless it is entrusted with a public duty. 2. Mandamus will not lie against a Company even though it may be a Government Company. 3. Any public minded person can be a petitioner to move the Court to obtain the writ of Quo Warranto. Which of the statements given above are correct?

Answer: D. All three statements about writs are correct. (1) Mandamus and private organisations: CORRECT. The writ of MANDAMUS is generally not issued against a private body. However, it CAN be issued against a private organisation if it is entrusted with a PUBLIC DUTY or performing public functions (e.g., a private contractor performing statutory functions). This principle was clarified in K.S. Puttaswamy and earlier judgments. (2) Mandamus against Government Company: CORRECT. Government Companies (defined under Section 2(45) of Companies Act 2013) are separate legal entities. Mandamus does not lie against a Government Company in respect of its commercial functions, even though majority government-owned. This was held in Praga Tools Corporation v Imanual (1969). (3) Quo Warranto by public-minded person: CORRECT. Quo Warranto challenges a person's right to hold a public office. Locus standi for Quo Warranto is RELAXED — any public-minded citizen can file the petition, not just an aggrieved person. This is a unique feature among writs; for habeas corpus or certiorari, generally only the aggrieved person can file. Source: Articles 32 and 226 of Constitution / Praga Tools v Imanual / various Supreme Court judgments on writs.