CHARLES HAYFRON-BENJAMIN JSC.: At first blush it would appear that this application raises grave and serious issues of law. The applicants suing in aid of the exercise of this court’s supervisory power of certiorari have stated no fewer than fourteen grounds upon which they consider this court should accede to their prayers in their motion. However, upon a close reading of the grounds, it is clear that the applicants have misconceived the laws on the issues which they have so raised. This court in Darbah v. Ampah, Supreme Court, Accra, 20 February 1990; unreported, in a similar case in which the applicant wanted to circumvent the appeal process by resort to an application for a prerogative writ, conceded that:
“there are situations in which the court show anxiety to deal with cases by adopting methods which are faster than the usual processes of normal appeals by resorting to the remedies being sought in the present application.”
This court then stated the two hallowed grounds upon whic…