pertinent part, that “[e]very court of common pleas shall have power to issue, under its judicial seal, every lawful writ and process to or to be served or enforced by system and related personnel as such courts have been heretofore authorized by law or usage to issue.” 42 Pa.C.S. § 912. Section 981(a Pa. 360, 192 A.2d 707 (1963) (noting that the issuance of a writ of prohibition is not within the powers, of a common pleas court and discussing the Act of May 22, 1722, 1 Sm.P.L. 131, which established a Supreme Court and County Courts of Common Pleas for Pennsylvania and invested the former with all the powers of the High Court Justices at Westminster, including the power to issue writs of prohibition and mandamus); Carpentertown Coal & Coke Co. v. Laird, 360 Pa. 94, 61 A.2d 426 (1948) (<HOLDING>). ■ Moreover, although section 721 states that
holding that district court had jurisdiction to consider claims under the all writs act holding that district courts have power to issue writs of prohibition to administrative agencies to prevent them from exceeding their jurisdiction recognizing that the supreme courts earliest uses of the kings bench powers  commonly implicated the common law writs of mandamus and prohibition holding that district courts do not have appellate jurisdiction over state courts recognizing the supreme courts longstanding jurisdiction over writs of prohibition and mandamus to courts of inferior jurisdiction