(a) Mandamus shall not lie as a private remedy between individuals to enforce private rights nor to a public officer who has an absolute discretion to act or not to act unless there is a gross abuse of such discretion. However, mandamus shall not be confined to the enforcement of mere ministerial duties.
§ 9-6-21.Not a private remedy; enforcement of officer’s discretionary acts
Chapter 6. Extraordinary Writs · Article 2. Mandamus · Last amended 1933 · Last verified July 17, 2026
In one sentenceThis section states that mandamus does not resolve private disputes between individuals and does not reach an officer’s absolute discretion absent gross abuse, while also authorizing citizens to obtain mandamus against the county board of commissioners, the judge of the probate court, or the overseers of the public roads — alone, together, or in any combination — to compel repair of public roads that fall below the legal standard.
Full Text of § 9-6-21
(b) On the application of one or more citizens of any county against the county board of commissioners where by law supervision and jurisdiction is vested in such commissioners over the public roads of such counties and the overseers of the public roads complained of; or against the judge of the probate court where by law supervision, control, and jurisdiction over such public roads is vested in the judge and the overseers of the public roads that may be complained of; or against either, both, or all of the named parties, as the facts and methods of working the public roads in the respective counties may justify, which application or action for mandamus shall show that one or more of the public roads of the county of the plaintiff’s residence are out of repair; do not measure up to the standards and do not conform to the legal requirements as prescribed by law; and are in such condition that ordinary loads, with ordinary ease, cannot be hauled over such public roads, the judges of the superior courts are authorized and given jurisdiction and it is made their duty, upon such showing being made, to issue the writ of mandamus against the parties having charge of and supervision over the public roads of the county; and to compel by such proceedings the building, repairing, and working of the public roads as are complained of, up to the standard required by law, so that ordinary loads, with ordinary ease and facility, can be continuously hauled over such public roads. The judges of the superior courts shall, by proper order, in the same proceedings compel the work done necessary to build, repair, and maintain such public roads up to the standard so prescribed.
Plain-English Summary
Subsection (a) fences off two situations where mandamus does not belong. It is not a private remedy for resolving disputes between individuals, and it does not reach a public officer’s decision when that officer has absolute discretion to act or not — unless the officer has grossly abused that discretion. At the same time, the statute makes clear mandamus is not confined to purely ministerial duties, leaving room for it to reach some discretionary official conduct when the abuse is severe enough.
Subsection (b) then works out one detailed, real-world application of mandamus against local government. Citizens of a county can bring mandamus against the county board of commissioners, against the judge of the probate court, against the overseers of the public roads complained of, or against either, both, or all of these named parties, depending on who holds supervision over the county’s public roads. The application has to show that a road in the plaintiff’s home county is out of repair, falls below the standard the law requires, and cannot be traveled by ordinary loads with ordinary ease.
Once that showing is made, superior court judges are not just permitted to act — the statute makes it their duty to issue the writ and to order the road built, repaired, and worked up to the legal standard, and to keep ordering that work done as needed to maintain the road going forward.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can mandamus be used to resolve a private dispute between two individuals?
No. Subsection (a) states that mandamus shall not lie as a private remedy between individuals to enforce private rights.
When can mandamus reach a public officer’s discretionary decision?
Only where there has been a gross abuse of the officer’s absolute discretion to act or not to act; short of that, mandamus does not reach discretionary decisions.
Does mandamus apply only to purely ministerial duties?
No. Subsection (a) states that mandamus shall not be confined to the enforcement of mere ministerial duties.
Who can seek mandamus to compel repair of public roads under subsection (b)?
One or more citizens of the county may bring the application against the county board of commissioners, the judge of the probate court, the overseers of the public roads complained of, or against either, both, or all of these named parties, depending on who holds supervision over the roads.
What must an application under subsection (b) show about the roads in question?
It must show that the public roads are out of repair, do not measure up to legal standards, and are in such condition that ordinary loads cannot be hauled over them with ordinary ease.
Amendment History
Orig. Code 1863, § 3131; Code 1868, § 3143; Code 1873, § 3199; Code 1882, § 3199; Civil Code 1895, § 4868; Ga. L. 1903, p. 41, § 1; Civil Code 1910, § 5441; Code 1933, § 64-102.
Source & verification. Section text and amendment history are
reproduced verbatim from the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, published by the
Official Code of Georgia Annotated, Georgia Code Revision Commission / LexisNexis. Last verified July 17, 2026.
· Official source
Also known as: georgia mandamus discretionary officermandamus public road repair georgiageorgia mandamus county commissionersgross abuse of discretion mandamus georgiamandamus private rights georgia