Article 227 of the Constitution of India confers upon every High Court the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction, subject to the constitutional exclusion relating to courts and tribunals constituted under laws concerning the Armed Forces. Although constitutional in form, this jurisdiction has a pre-Constitutional lineage traceable to Section 15 of the Indian High Courts Act, 1861, Section 107 of the Government of India Act, 1915, and Section 224 of the Government of India Act, 1935. A significant constitutional development occurred when Article 227 was enacted without reproducing Section 224(2) of the 1935 Act, which had prohibited High Courts from questioning judgments of inferior courts not otherwise subject to appeal or revision. In Waryam Singh v. Amarnath, the Supreme Court treated this omission as material and recognised that Article 227 restored the High Court’s power of judicial superintendence under the earlier statutory framework. The jurisdiction has since evolved through a substantial body of Supreme Court jurisprudence. While Article 227 remains supervisory and cannot be converted into appellate or revisional jurisdiction, it is sufficiently wide to correct jurisdictional errors, perversity, grave dereliction of duty, flagrant violation of law, serious procedural illegality and manifest miscarriage of justice. The post-2002 curtailment of revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 has further increased the practical significance of Article 227, particularly in challenges to interlocutory orders. This paper examines the historical genealogy, constitutional design, judicial development and contemporary scope of Article 227, and argues that its true character lies in constitutional judicial superintendence: broad in source, restrained in exercise, and directed towards ensuring that subordinate courts and tribunals remain within the limits of lawful authority.