Introduction
The Indian judiciary, structured as a single, integrated system, places the High Courts at the apex of the state judicial hierarchy, overseeing a network of subordinate courts. Part VI (Articles 214-237) of the Constitution deals with the State Judiciary, providing for the organisation, appointment, powers, and jurisdiction of High Courts and subordinate courts.
The High Courts, acting as guardians of the Constitution and Fundamental Rights at the state level, play a pivotal role in ensuring justice delivery and upholding the rule of law within their territorial jurisdiction. This section explores the key aspects of the state judicial system, including the controversial appointment process, powers, and the challenges faced by the judiciary at the state and local levels.
Constitutional Mandate & Role
Apex of State Judiciary
The High Court stands at the top of the judicial administration in a state, with a hierarchy of subordinate courts below it.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.Guardians of Rights
High Courts, like the Supreme Court, act as guardians of the Constitution and protectors of Fundamental Rights (Article 226) within their territorial jurisdiction.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.Constitutional Interpretation
They interpret the Constitution, particularly in matters concerning state laws and the fundamental rights of individuals within the state.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.Supervision & Control
High Courts exercise supervision and control over all subordinate courts and tribunals within their territorial jurisdiction (Articles 227 and 235).
Source: M. Laxmikanth.Integrated Judicial System
India follows a single, integrated judicial system ensuring uniformity of law and justice administration across the country.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.High Courts (Articles 214-231)
There shall be a High Court for each State.
Article 231: Parliament can by law establish a common High Court for two or more States or for two or more States and a Union Territory (e.g., Bombay High Court for Maharashtra and Goa; Punjab and Haryana High Court).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 214, 231.
Every High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other Judges as the President may from time to time deem necessary to appoint.
The Constitution does not fix the strength of a High Court; it is left to the discretion of the President (unlike the Supreme Court where Parliament determines the number).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 216.
Every Judge of a High Court shall be appointed by the President by warrant under his hand and seal.
- For Chief Justice of a High Court: President consults the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the Governor of the state concerned.
- For other Judges of a High Court: President consults the CJI, the Governor of the state concerned, and the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court.
Collegium System (Judicial Primacy): As per the Second Judges Case (1993) and Third Judges Case (1998):
- Recommendation made by a Collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court and two senior-most judges of that High Court.
- This recommendation then goes to the Supreme Court Collegium (CJI + 2 senior-most SC judges) for approval, and then to the President for appointment.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 217; M. Laxmikanth; SC judgments.
A person to be eligible for appointment as a judge of a High Court must:
- Be a citizen of India.
- Have held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least 10 years; OR
- Have been an advocate of a High Court or of two or more such Courts in succession for at least 10 years.
Note: The Constitution makes no provision for the appointment of a 'distinguished jurist' as a High Court judge (unlike for a Supreme Court judge).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 217; M. Laxmikanth.
Before entering office, a judge of a High Court takes an oath before the Governor of the state or some person appointed by him.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 219.
Tenure (Art 217(1)): A judge of a High Court holds office until he attains the age of 62 years (earlier 60 years, raised to 62 by 15th Amendment, 1963).
Can resign by writing to the President.
Removal (Art 217(1) proviso (b) read with Art 124(4)): A judge can be removed by an order of the President on the grounds of 'proved misbehaviour or incapacity'. The procedure for removal is the same as that for a Supreme Court judge (parliamentary address supported by special majority in each House, in the same session, as per Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 217, 124.
Article 202(3): Salaries, allowances, and pensions of High Court judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State.
Article 221: Salaries, allowances, and privileges cannot be varied to their disadvantage after their appointment (except during a Financial Emergency).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 202, 221.
Article 223 (Acting CJ): President can appoint an Acting Chief Justice when the office of CJ is vacant or when the CJ is unable to perform duties.
Article 224 (Additional & Acting Judges): President can appoint duly qualified persons as:
- Additional Judges: For a temporary period (not exceeding 2 years) due to increased business or arrears.
- Acting Judges: When a judge (other than CJ) is appointed temporarily due to absence or inability.
Article 224A (Retired Judges): CJ of a High Court can, with President's consent, request any retired judge of that or any other High Court to sit as a judge temporarily.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 223, 224, 224A.
The President can transfer a judge from one High Court to another High Court after consultation with the Chief Justice of India.
Consent: Originally not mandatory, but SC in Second Judges Case (1993) held consent crucial.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 222.
The Constitution does not specify the seat of a High Court. The President determines the principal seat.
The Governor (after consultation with the CJ of the HC and the CJI) can establish permanent Benches or Circuit Benches of the High Court at other places within the state.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
Subject to the provisions of any law made by the appropriate Legislature, High Courts can make rules for regulating their own practice and procedure.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 225.
Independence of the High Court
The Constitution ensures the independence of High Courts through various provisions similar to those for the Supreme Court.
Mode of Appointment
The Collegium system gives primacy to the judiciary in appointments, minimizing executive interference.
Security of Tenure
Judges hold office until 62 years and can only be removed by a complex parliamentary impeachment process (same as SC judges).
Fixed Service Conditions
Salaries determined by Parliament, charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State (non-votable), and cannot be varied to their disadvantage.
Charged Expenses
Administrative expenses, including salaries and pensions of judges and staff, are charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State (Article 202(3)).
Conduct Not Discussable
Article 211 prohibits discussion on the conduct of any HC judge in a state legislature (Article 121 for Parliament, unless removal motion).
Court of Record
Article 215 declares High Court as a 'Court of Record' with power to punish for its own contempt.
Freedom to Appoint Staff
Article 229 allows High Courts to appoint officers and servants without executive interference, subject to state laws.
Jurisdiction Not Curtailed
The Constitutionally defined jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be curtailed by the state legislature; Parliament can extend it.
Separation from Executive
Article 50 of DPSP mandates separation of judiciary from executive, promoting independence at all levels.
Ban on Practice (Art 220)
A permanent HC judge is restricted from practicing in any court/authority in India, EXCEPT the Supreme Court and other High Courts.
Note: Unlike SC judges, HC judges can practice after retirement in SC or other HCs.
Jurisdiction & Powers of High Courts
Power to hear cases in the first instance, not by way of appeal.
- Writ Jurisdiction (Art 226): Wider than SC's.
- Election Petitions: Disputes for MP/State Legislatures.
- Revenue Matters: Now full original jurisdiction.
- Other Matters: Marriage, divorce, company law, admiralty, contempt of court, probate matters (especially in Presidency towns).
- Cases transferred from subordinate courts involving substantial questions of law relating to constitutional interpretation (Art 228).
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
High Courts have the power to issue directions, orders, or writs (habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo-warranto, certiorari).
- Wider than SC's: Can be issued for enforcement of Fundamental Rights AND for any other purpose (i.e., for enforcement of ordinary legal rights).
- Not a Fundamental Right: The right to move a High Court for writs is not a Fundamental Right (unlike Article 32 for SC).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 226; M. Laxmikanth.
High Courts primarily hear appeals against judgments of subordinate courts.
- Civil Appeals: First Appeals (from District Courts, on questions of law and fact); Second Appeals (from District Courts, on questions of law only).
- Criminal Appeals: From Sessions Courts (e.g., imprisonment > 7 years, death sentence confirmation).
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
Every High Court shall have superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout its territorial jurisdiction.
- Calling for returns.
- Making and issuing general rules and forms for practice/proceedings.
- Prescribing forms for books, entries, accounts.
- Settling tables of fees.
Exclusion: Does not extend to military tribunals or courts.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 227.
Control over district courts and subordinate courts, including the posting, promotion, and grant of leave to persons belonging to the judicial service of a State and holding any post inferior to that of a district judge, shall be vested in the High Court.
This power is crucial for maintaining judicial independence at the lower levels.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 235.
Every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
Similar to the Supreme Court (Article 129).
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 215.
High Courts also possess the power of judicial review to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders of both the Central and State governments that fall within their territorial jurisdiction.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
Can withdraw cases from subordinate courts to itself if they involve substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
Also has power to issue injunctions, declaratory judgments, and other equitable remedies.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 228.
Subordinate Courts (Articles 233-237)
The subordinate courts function under the direct supervision and control of the High Court of the respective state.
Hierarchy & Classification
Highest judicial authority in the district is the District and Sessions Judge (civil cases as District Judge, criminal cases as Sessions Judge).
Below District Judge (Civil Side):
- Subordinate Judge
- Munsiff
Below Sessions Judge (Criminal Side):
- Chief Judicial Magistrate
- Judicial Magistrate
- Metropolitan Magistrate (in metropolitan areas)
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
Key Constitutional Provisions
Appointments, posting, and promotion of district judges in any State shall be made by the Governor of the State in consultation with the High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to such State.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 233.
Appointments of persons (other than district judges) to the judicial service of a State shall be made by the Governor in accordance with rules made by him after consultation with the State Public Service Commission (SPSC) and with the High Court.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 234.
The High Court exercises control over District Courts and courts subordinate thereto, including posting, promotion, and grant of leave. This power is crucial for maintaining judicial independence at the lower levels.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 235.
Role in Justice Delivery
Subordinate courts are the primary courts for citizens to access justice. They deal with a vast number of civil and criminal cases, including original jurisdiction for most disputes, and hear appeals from lower courts within their district.
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
NALSA & Legal Aid
Constitutional Basis (Art 39A - DPSP)
Article 39A (added by 42nd Amendment, 1976) mandates the state to promote equal justice and provide free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of society.
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
Enacted by Parliament to give effect to Article 39A. Its purpose is to provide free and competent legal services to eligible weaker sections of society and to organize Lok Adalats for amicable settlement of disputes.
Network & Mechanisms
- NALSA: The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) was constituted in 1995 under this Act. It lays down policies and principles for making legal services available.
- SLSAs / DLSAs: State Legal Services Authorities (SLSAs) and District Legal Services Authorities (DLSAs) form a nationwide network to implement NALSA's programs.
- Lok Adalats: Non-adversarial systems of dispute resolution where disputes are settled amicably through conciliation and compromise. The award is final and binding and has the status of a civil court decree.
- Permanent Lok Adalats: Statutory bodies for pre-litigation conciliation and settlement of disputes related to public utility services for claims up to Rs. 1 crore.
- Gram Nyayalayas: Established by the Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008, to provide speedy and affordable justice to rural areas, primarily for petty civil and criminal cases.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 39A; Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987; NALSA website.
Tribunals (Part XIV-A)
Rationale: Tribunals are quasi-judicial bodies established for special matters to reduce the burden on regular courts, provide specialized expertise, and ensure speedy and inexpensive justice.
Constitutional Status: Added by the 42nd Constitutional Amendment Act, 1976, by inserting Part XIV-A.
Article 323A: Administrative Tribunals
- Empowers Parliament to establish administrative tribunals for adjudication of disputes regarding recruitment and service conditions of persons appointed to public services (Union, states, local bodies, public corporations, etc.).
- Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT): Established in 1985 for Central government employees.
- State Administrative Tribunals (SATs): Can be established by Parliament at the request of concerned state legislatures for state government employees.
- Exclusion: Military tribunals are excluded.
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 323A; M. Laxmikanth.
Article 323B: Other Tribunals
- Empowers Parliament AND state legislatures to establish tribunals for adjudication of disputes relating to other specific matters such as:
- Taxation
- Land reforms
- Foreign exchange, imports and exports
- Industrial and labour disputes
- Elections to Parliament and state legislatures
- Rent and tenancy rights
Source: The Constitution of India, Art 323B; M. Laxmikanth.
Feature Comparison: Administrative vs. Other Tribunals
| Feature | Administrative Tribunals (Art 323A) | Other Tribunals (Art 323B) |
|---|---|---|
| Authority | Only Parliament can establish. | Parliament and State Legislatures can establish. |
| Subject | Exclusively for service matters (public service personnel). | For specific matters (taxation, land reforms, elections etc.). |
| Hierarchy | No hierarchy of tribunals. | Hierarchy of tribunals may be created. |
Source: M. Laxmikanth.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)
The Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review of High Courts (under Art 226/227) and the Supreme Court (under Art 32) over the decisions of tribunals is part of the Basic Structure of the Constitution.
Implication: This means that the decisions of tribunals are not final and are subject to judicial review by the High Courts (and then appeal to the SC). This restored the supervisory role of High Courts over tribunals.
Source: L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (AIR 1997 SC 1125).
Challenges of Tribunals
- Independence: Concerns about executive influence in appointment, tenure, and service conditions of members.
- Accountability: Lack of clear mechanisms for accountability.
- Lack of Judicial Experience: Some members may not have judicial background, leading to concerns about quality of justice.
- Pendency: Tribunals themselves have started facing large pendency of cases.
Source: Law Commission Reports, expert analyses.
Current Issues & Challenges
Pendency of Cases & Arrears
The most significant challenge, particularly at the High Court and subordinate court levels, leading to prolonged delays in justice delivery.
Vacancies in Judicial Posts
Chronic vacancies for judges in High Courts and subordinate courts significantly contribute to pendency. Debates persist on Collegium and State PSC efficiency.
Accountability & Transparency
Concerns about transparency of the Collegium system and lack of robust mechanisms for addressing complaints against judges.
Cost & Access to Justice
High legal fees, complex procedures, and geographical distance create barriers to accessing justice at lower courts, especially for rural populations.
Inadequate Infrastructure
Many district and lower courts suffer from inadequate courtrooms, staff, digital infrastructure, and basic amenities.
Perception of Corruption
Allegations, though often isolated, erode public trust. Mechanisms for redressal are slow or inadequate.
Use of Technology in Judiciary
e-Courts Project (Phase III):
Aims to computerize district and subordinate courts, improving case management, data accessibility, and providing online services.
- Successes: Increased efficiency, transparency, information access.
Virtual Hearings:
Widely adopted during the pandemic, they continue to offer benefits like reduced travel and faster proceedings.
- Challenges: Digital divide, connectivity, training, security, maintaining solemnity of court.
Source: Department of Justice, e-Courts Mission Mode Project.
Conclusion & Significance
The State Judiciary, led by the High Courts and supported by a vast network of subordinate courts, forms the backbone of justice delivery in India. Their constitutional mandate as guardians of rights and interpreters of law is vital for the effective functioning of democracy at the grassroots level.
While mechanisms like NALSA and the integration of technology aim to enhance access and efficiency, persistent challenges like pendency, vacancies, and infrastructure gaps necessitate continuous reform efforts to ensure timely, accessible, and equitable justice for all citizens.
Study Aids & Practice
Prelims-ready Notes
- Constitutional Mandate: HC is apex court in State. Guardian of Constitution/FRs at state level. Integrated judiciary.
- High Courts (Art 214-231):
- Organisation (Art 214): HC for each state; Parliament can establish common HC for 2+ States/UTs (Art 231).
- Composition (Art 216): CJ + other Judges. Number fixed by President (not Constitution).
- Appointment (Art 217): By President. Consultations (CJI, Governor, HC CJ). Collegium System.
- Qualifications (Art 217(2)): Citizen, 10 yrs judicial office OR 10 yrs HC Advocate. (No 'distinguished jurist').
- Oath (Art 219): By Governor.
- Tenure (Art 217(1)): Until 62 years (15th Amend, 1963). Resigns to President.
- Removal: Same as SC Judge (President's order after special majority Parl. address, Judges (Inquiry) Act 1968).
- Salaries (Art 202, 221): By Parliament, charged on Consolidated Fund of State, not varied to disadvantage.
- Acting CJ (Art 223): By President.
- Additional & Acting Judges (Art 224): By President (temporary 2 yrs).
- Retired Judges (Art 224A): CJ of HC can request (with Pres. consent).
- Transfer of Judges (Art 222): By President after consultation with CJI. (Consent not mandatory).
- Seat (not in Constitution): Principal seat by President, benches by Governor.
- Independence of HC (Safeguards): Mode of Appointment (Collegium), Security of Tenure, Fixed Service Conditions (charged on State CFI), Conduct not discussable (Art 211, 121), Power to Punish for Contempt (Art 215), Freedom to Appoint Staff (Art 229), Jurisdiction not curtailed by State Legislature, Separation from Executive (Art 50).
- Ban on Practice after Retirement (Art 220): HC judges can practice in SC or other HCs. (Unlike SC judges).
- Jurisdiction & Powers:
- Original: Writ (Art 226), Election Petitions (MLA/MP), Revenue, Marriage, Company Law etc. (Presidency towns).
- Writ (Art 226): Wider than SC (FRs + any other purpose). Not a FR.
- Appellate: Civil (1st & 2nd appeals), Criminal (Sessions appeals, death sentence confirmation).
- Supervisory (Art 227): Over all subordinate courts/tribunals (except military).
- Control over Subordinate Courts (Art 235): Appointment, posting, promotion of District Judges & others.
- Court of Record (Art 215): Judgments binding, power to punish contempt.
- Judicial Review: Power to examine constitutionality of State/Central laws.
- Other: Transfer cases (Art 228).
- Subordinate Courts (Art 233-237):
- Hierarchy under HC.
- Appointment of District Judges (Art 233): By Governor (consultation with HC).
- Appointment of Other Judicial Officers (Art 234): By Governor (consultation with SPSC & HC).
- Control (Art 235): Vested in High Court.
- Classification: District & Sessions Judge (top), then Munsiff, Judicial/Metropolitan Magistrates.
- NALSA & Legal Aid: Constitutional Basis: Art 39A (DPSP). Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Mechanisms: NALSA, SLSAs, DLSAs, Lok Adalats, Permanent Lok Adalats, Gram Nyayalayas (Act 2008).
- Tribunals (Part XIV-A: Art 323A, 323B):
- 42nd Amendment, 1976.
- Administrative Tribunals (Art 323A): Only Parliament can establish. For service matters (CAT, SATs). Excludes military.
- Other Tribunals (Art 323B): Parliament and State Legislatures can establish. For specific matters (taxation, land reforms, elections etc.).
- Judicial Review: Decisions are subject to judicial review of HCs (Art 226/227) and SC (Art 32) (L. Chandra Kumar Case, 1997 - Basic Structure).
- Challenges: Pendency, Vacancies, Accountability/Transparency, Cost, Infrastructure, Corruption, Tech use.
Summary Table: High Courts at a Glance
| Feature | Description | Key Constitutional Provisions/Cases |
|---|---|---|
| Organisation | One HC per State, or Common HC for multiple States/UTs. | Art 214, Art 231 |
| Composition | CJ and other Judges (number decided by President). | Art 216 |
| Appointment | By President (via Collegium: CJI + 2 SC Judges, and HC CJ + 2 HC Judges). | Art 217, Second & Third Judges Cases (1993, 1998) |
| Qualifications | Citizen, 10 years judicial office or 10 years HC advocate. | Art 217(2) |
| Oath | Administered by Governor. | Art 219 |
| Tenure | Until 62 years of age. | Art 217(1) |
| Removal | Same as SC Judge (by President's order after Parl. special majority address). | Art 217(1) read with Art 124(4) |
| Independence Safeguards | Security of tenure, fixed service conditions, charged expenses (State CFI), contempt power. | Art 221, 202, 215 |
| Writ Jurisdiction | Art 226: For FRs and "any other purpose" (Wider than SC's Art 32). | Art 226 |
| Supervisory Power | Over all subordinate courts/tribunals (except military tribunals). | Art 227 |
| Control over Subordinate Courts | Vested in the High Court for appointments (District Judges) and discipline. | Art 235, Art 233, Art 234 |
| Court of Record | Yes, with power to punish for contempt. | Art 215 |
Mains-ready Analytical Notes
- High Courts - Pillars of Decentralized Justice: Vital for accessible remedies, powerful protectors of FRs (Art 226).
- Judicial Independence at State Level: Safeguards (appointment mode, tenure, service conditions, charged expenses, contempt power, control over subordinate courts) crucial for impartiality.
- Challenges in Judicial Appointments at State Level: Collegium transparency, accountability, delays, vacancies, impact on speedy justice. Debates on MoP.
- High Courts' Supervisory Role - Ensuring Subordinate Court Efficiency: Art 227 (supervisory) & Art 235 (control) are essential for judicial standards and efficiency.
- Tribunals - Balancing Specialization with Independence: Established for burden reduction, but independence and accountability are concerns. L. Chandra Kumar ruling ensured judicial review over tribunals.
- NALSA and Access to Justice: Framework (NALSA, SLSAs, DLSAs) and initiatives (Lok Adalats, Gram Nyayalayas) crucial for Art 39A (free legal aid) but face challenges in awareness, quality, implementation.
- Pendency and Vacancies - A Looming Crisis: Major challenges undermining public trust and right to speedy justice. Requires reforms, infrastructure, technology.
- Judicial Review at State Level: High Courts review constitutionality of state laws/executive actions, vital check on state government power.
- Contemporary Relevance: Role in inter-state water disputes, constitutional challenges to state laws, judicial accountability debates, e-Courts & digitalization.
UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)
1. No High Court has the jurisdiction to entertain a petition challenging the constitutional validity of any Central law.
2. An amendment to the Constitution of India can be initiated by an introduction of a Bill in the Lok Sabha only.
3. The Supreme Court of India has held that all the amendments to the Constitution of India made after 24th April 1973 are subject to judicial review.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 and 3 only
(c) 3 only
(d) 1 and 3 only
Answer: (c)
Hint: Statement 1 is incorrect: High Courts do have jurisdiction under Article 226 to entertain petitions challenging the constitutional validity of Central laws, subject to some limitations. The other statements relate to Parliament's amending power and SC's judicial review.
1. The Speaker of the Legislative Assembly shall vacate his office if he ceases to be a member of the Assembly.
2. Whenever the Legislative Assembly is dissolved, the Speaker shall vacate his office immediately.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) Both 1 and 2
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Answer: (a)
Hint: This question tests the role of the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly, who presides over state legislative business. Statement 1 is correct (Art 179). Statement 2 is incorrect (Speaker continues until first meeting of new Assembly).
(a) Reservation of a Bill for the consideration of the President of India.
(b) Appointment of the Chief Minister if no party has a clear majority in the State Legislative Assembly.
(c) Dismissing a Ministry if he is convinced that it has lost the confidence of the Legislative Assembly.
(d) Appointing the judges of the High Court.
Answer: (d)
Hint: This question checks a key distinction related to the Governor's executive powers. High Court judges are appointed by the President, not the Governor.
Mains Questions
Direction: This is a direct question on judicial independence. While primarily focused on the Supreme Court, it is crucial to extend the discussion to the High Courts and their similar constitutional safeguards for independence (mode of appointment, tenure, service conditions, charged expenses, contempt power, etc.), as they are equally vital for democratic functioning at the state level.
Direction: This question about FRs and their expansion is highly relevant. The High Courts (under Art 226) are the primary courts that citizens approach for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, including the Right to Privacy, at the state level. The judgment itself provides a framework for how High Courts would interpret and enforce this right.
Direction: This allows for discussion of NALSA and Legal Aid (a direct implementation of DPSP Art 39A) as a significant step towards achieving social justice and access to justice, goals enshrined in DPSPs, which are then enforced by the judiciary at all levels, including High Courts and subordinate courts.
Original MCQs for Prelims
1. The number of judges in a High Court is fixed by the Constitution of India.
2. A common High Court can be established for two or more states by a law made by Parliament.
3. A retired judge of a High Court is permanently prohibited from pleading or acting in any court within India after retirement.
Select the correct answer using the code given below:
(a) 1 only
(b) 2 only
(c) 1 and 3 only
(d) 1, 2 and 3
Answer: (b)
Explanation:
Statement 1 is incorrect. The number of judges in a High Court is determined by the President, not fixed by the Constitution (Art 216).
Statement 2 is correct (Art 231).
Statement 3 is incorrect. A retired High Court judge is prohibited from practicing in the High Court from which he retired, but can practice in the Supreme Court or in any other High Court (Art 220).
(a) Control over the posting and promotion of District Judges.
(b) Laying down policies concerning appointments of persons to the judicial service of the state (other than District Judges).
(c) General superintendence over all courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction.
(d) Power to make rules regulating the practice and procedure of subordinate courts.
Answer: (b)
Explanation:
Statement (a) is correct (Art 235).
Statement (c) is correct (Art 227).
Statement (d) is correct (Art 227 and 208 read with 235).
Statement (b) is incorrect. The Governor makes rules for appointments to the judicial service of the state (other than District Judges) after consultation with the SPSC and High Court (Art 234). The High Court is consulted, but it does not lay down the policies or make the rules directly for initial appointments; that power rests with the Governor (executive) in consultation with the SPSC. The High Court's control is more about subsequent postings, promotions, and discipline (Art 235).
Original Descriptive Questions for Mains
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Introduce High Courts as the apex of the state judiciary and key institutions for justice delivery.
- Extensive Jurisdiction and Powers:
- Original Jurisdiction: (Writ jurisdiction under Art 226 - 'for any other purpose', Election Petitions, Revenue, etc.). Emphasize its wider scope than SC's Art 32 for legal rights.
- Appellate Jurisdiction: (Civil and Criminal appeals from subordinate courts).
- Supervisory Jurisdiction (Art 227): Over all subordinate courts/tribunals.
- Control over Subordinate Courts (Art 235): Administrative control, appointments (district judges), promotion, discipline.
- Judicial Review: Power to examine constitutionality of state laws/executive actions.
- Court of Record (Art 215): Binding precedents, contempt power.
- Other Powers: (Transfer of cases, review own judgments).
- Acting as Crucial Checks on State Government Actions:
- Judicial Review: Striking down unconstitutional state laws or executive orders (e.g., discriminatory policies, arbitrary administrative actions).
- Writ Jurisdiction: Providing immediate remedies for citizens against state actions violating FRs or other legal rights.
- Supervisory Role: Ensuring subordinate courts function lawfully and efficiently.
- Upholding Rule of Law: Ensuring all state actions conform to constitutional principles.
- Maintaining Federal Balance: Resolving disputes between state entities, upholding distribution of powers.
- Contribution to Upholding Constitutionalism: Reinforce limited government, rule of law, and protection of individual liberties within the state's domain.
- Conclusion: Conclude that High Courts, with their broad powers and direct accessibility, are vital for ensuring constitutional governance, protecting citizens' rights, and maintaining the democratic fabric at the state level, serving as powerful bulwarks against potential abuses of power.
Key Points/Structure:
- Introduction: Define tribunals as quasi-judicial bodies and state their primary rationale.
- Constitutional Basis (Part XIV-A, 42nd Amendment, 1976):
- Article 323A (Administrative Tribunals): Exclusively for service matters, constituted by Parliament (CAT, SATs).
- Article 323B (Other Tribunals): For specific matters (taxation, land reforms, elections etc.), constituted by Parliament AND State Legislatures.
- Advantages of Tribunals: Reduced Burden, Speedy Disposal, Specialization, Less Formal/Expensive.
- Challenges in Fulfilling Mandate (Criticisms): Independence Concerns (executive influence), Lack of Accountability, Lack of Judicial Experience, Pendency (within tribunals), Lack of Uniformity, Impact of Judicial Review (L. Chandra Kumar case adds layer of litigation).
- Conclusion: Conclude that while tribunals serve a crucial purpose, reforms focusing on ensuring their independence, enhancing judicial expertise, streamlining procedures, and addressing vacancies are essential.