Short answer. A petition for certiorari under Rule 65. When a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions acts without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and no appeal or other adequate remedy exists, the aggrieved person may file a verified petition in the proper court.
What the law says
or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, a person aggrieved thereby may file a verified petition in the proper court
Rule 65, Section 1 — Petition for certiorari. Read the full provision →
What the law says
praying that judgment be rendered annulling or modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer
Rule 65, Section 1 — Petition for certiorari. Read the full provision →
The two conditions built into the remedy
Rule 65, Section 1 makes certiorari available when a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction, and there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law. Both halves must be true. The complaint must go to jurisdiction — power abused so gravely it amounts to acting without it — and there must be no ordinary remedy left. The question wording is therefore exactly right: grave abuse plus no available appeal is the Rule 65 situation.
Grave abuse is not ordinary error
The rule's phrase is grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction — abuse of such character that the tribunal effectively stopped exercising its lawful power. A ruling you consider wrong on the facts or the law is not, by itself, within it; errors of judgment are what appeals are for, where an appeal exists. Certiorari is the extraordinary lane, and courts police the boundary strictly, because if every unfavourable order could be recast as grave abuse, the ordinary appellate process would be bypassed at will. Expect the petition to stand or fall on showing abuse of that magnitude.
What the petition asks for and must contain
The remedy is a verified petition in the proper court, alleging the facts with certainty and praying that judgment be rendered annulling or modifying the proceedings of such tribunal, board or officer, with such incidental reliefs as law and justice may require. The rule also lists the attachments: a certified true copy of the judgment, order or resolution complained of, copies of all relevant and pertinent pleadings and documents, and a sworn certification of non-forum shopping. These are not decorative — a petition missing its certified copy or its certification invites outright dismissal before the merits are ever reached.
Choosing this lane is a strategic decision
Because certiorari presupposes that there is no appeal, or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, the first task with a lawyer is an honest inventory of the remedies still open — a motion for reconsideration, an available appeal, some other recourse in the case itself. Filing a Rule 65 petition where an appeal was available is a classic way to lose without a hearing on the merits; so is letting deadlines lapse while deciding. Bring counsel the order itself, everything filed before and after it, and the dates, and decide the lane quickly.