Prev   Next

Supreme Court of India

 The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial court and the final
court of appeal under the Constitution of India, the highest constitutional
court, with the power of judicial review.
 India is a federal State and has a single and unified judicial
system with three tier structure, i.e. Supreme Court, High Courts and
Subordinate Courts.

Brief History of the Supreme Court of India

 The promulgation of Regulating Act of 1773 established the Supreme
Court of Judicature at Calcutta as a Court of Record, with full power &
authority.
 It was established to hear and determine all complaints for any crimes and
also to entertain, hear and determine any suits or actions in Bengal, Bihar and
Orissa.
 The Supreme Courts at Madras and Bombay were established by King
George – III in 1800 and 1823 respectively.
 The India High Courts Act 1861 created High Courts for various provinces
and abolished Supreme Courts at Calcutta, Madras and Bombay and also
the Sadar Adalats in Presidency towns.
 These High Courts had the distinction of being the highest Courts for all
cases till the creation of Federal Court of Indiaunder the Government of India
Act 1935.
 The Federal Court had jurisdiction to solve disputes between provinces and
federal states and hear appeal against Judgements from High Courts.
 After India attained independence in 1947, the Constitution of India came
into being on 26 January 1950. The Supreme Court of India also came into
existence and its first sitting was held on 28 January 1950.
 The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all Courts within the
territory of India.
 It has the power of judicial review – to strike down the legislative and
executive action contrary to the provisions and the scheme of the constitution,
the distribution of power between Union and States or inimical to the
fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution.

Constitutional Provisions
 The Indian constitution provides for a provision of Supreme Court under Part
V (The Union) and Chapter 6 (The Union Judiciary).
 Articles 124 to 147 in Part V of the Constitution deal with the organisation,
independence, jurisdiction, powers and procedures of the Supreme Court.
 The Indian constitution under Article 124(1) states that there shall be a
Supreme Court of India constituting of a Chief Justice of India (CJI) and, until
Parliament by law prescribes a larger number, of not more than seven other
Judges.
 The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India can broadly be categorised
into original jurisdiction, appellate jurisdiction and advisory
jurisdiction. However, there are other multiple powers of the Supreme Court.

Organisation of Supreme Court

 At present, the Supreme Court consists of thirty-one judges (one chief
justice and thirty other judges). 

o Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Bill of 2019 has added four

judges to strength. It increased the judicial strength from 31 to 34,
including the CJI.
 Originally, the strength of the Supreme Court was fixed at eight (one chief
justice and seven other judges).
 The Parliament is authorised to regulate them.

Seat of Supreme Court

 The Constitution declares Delhi as the seat of the Supreme Court. It
also authorises the CJI to appoint other place or places as seat of the Supreme
Court.
 He can take decision in this regard only with the approval of the
President. This provision is only optional and not compulsory. This means
that no court can give any direction either to the President or to the Chief
Justice to appoint any other place as the seat of the Supreme Court.

Appointment of Judges
 The judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President. The
CJI is appointed by the President after consultation with such judges of the
Supreme Court and high courts as he deems necessary.
 The other judges are appointed by the President after consultation with the
CJI and such other judges of the Supreme Court and the high courts as he
deems necessary. The consultation with the chief justice is obligatory in the
case of appointment of a judge other than Chief justice.
 Appointment of Chief Justice From 1950 to 1973: The practice has been
to appoint the senior most judge of the Supreme Court as the chief justice of
India. This established convention was violated in 1973 when A N Ray was
appointed as the Chief Justice of India by superseding three senior
judges. Again in 1977, M U Beg was appointed as the chief justice of India by
superseding the then senior-most judge.
 o This discretion of the government was curtailed by the Supreme
Court in the Second Judges Case (1993), in which the Supreme Court
ruled that the senior most judge of the Supreme Court should alone be
appointed to the office of the Chief Justice of India.
Controversy over Consultation and Evolution of Collegium system

 The Supreme Court has given different interpretations of the word

‘consultation’ in the above mentioned provisions. 

o In the First Judges case (1982), the Court held that consultation

does not mean concurrence and it only implies exchange of views.
o In the Second Judges case (1993), the Court reversed its earlier
ruling and changed the meaning of the word consultation to concurrence.
o In the Third Judges case (1998), the Court opined that the
consultation process to be adopted by the Chief Justice of
India requires ‘consultation of plurality judges’.

 The sole opinion of the CJI does not constitute the

consultation process. He should consult a collegium of four senior
most judges of the Supreme Court and even if two judges give an
adverse opinion, he should not send the recommendation to the
government.
 The court held that the recommendation made by the
chief justice of India without complying with the norms and
requirements of the consultation process are not binding on the
government.

Collegium System
 Collegium system was born through “three judges case” and it is in
practice since 1998. It is used for appointments and transfers of judges in High
courts and Supreme Courts.
 There is no mention of the Collegium either in the original Constitution of
India or in successive amendments

Working of Collegium System and NJAC

 The collegium recommends of the names of lawyers or judges to the Central
Government. Similarly, the Central Government also sends some of its
proposed names to the Collegium.
 Collegium considers the names or suggestions made by the Central
Government and resends the file to the government for final approval. 

o If the Collegium resends the same name again then the

government has to give its assent to the names. But time limit is not
 fixed to reply. This is the reason that appointment of judges takes a long
time.
 Through the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 the National
Judicial Commission Act (NJAC) was established to replace the collegium
system for the appointment of judges.
 However, the Supreme Court upheld the collegium system and struck
down the NJAC as unconstitutional on the grounds that the involvement
of Political Executive in judicial appointment was against the “Principles of
Basic Structure”. I.e. the“Independence of Judiciary”.

Qualifications of Judges
 A person to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court should have the
following qualifications: 

o He should be a citizen of India.

o He should have been a judge of a High Court (or high courts in
succession) for five years; or
o He should have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in
succession) for ten years; or
o He should be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the
president.
 The Constitution has not prescribed a minimum age for appointment as a
judge of the Supreme Court.

Oath or Affirmation
 A person appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court, before entering upon
his office, has to make and subscribe to an oath or affirmation before the
President, or some other person appointed by him for this purpose. In his oath,
a judge of the Supreme Court swears:

o to bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India;

o to uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India;
o to duly and faithfully and to the best of his ability, knowledge and
judgement to perform the duties of the Office without fear or favour,
affection or ill-will; and
o to uphold the Constitution and the laws.

Tenure of Judges
 The Constitution has not fixed the tenure of a judge of the Supreme Court.
However, it makes the following three provisions in this regard:
 o He holds office until he attains the age of 65 years. Any question
regarding his age is to be determined by such authority and in such
manner as provided by Parliament.
o He can resign his office by writing to the President.
o He can be removed from his office by the President on the
recommendation of the Parliament.

Removal of Judges
 A judge of the Supreme Court can be removed from his office by an order of
the President. The President can issue the removal order only after an address
by Parliament has been presented to him in the same session for such removal.
 The address must be supported by a special majority of each House of
Parliament (ie, a majority of the total membership of that House and a majority
of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting).
The grounds of removal are two—proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
 The Judges Enquiry Act (1968) regulates the procedure relating to the
removal of a judge of the Supreme Court by the process of impeachment:

o No judge of the Supreme Court has been impeached so far.

Impeachment motions of Justice V Ramaswami (1991–1993) and the
Justice Dipak Misra (2017-18) were defeated in the Parliament.

Salaries and Allowances

 The salaries, allowances, privileges, leave and pension of the judges of the
Supreme Court are determined from time to time by the Parliament. They
cannot be varied to their disadvantage after their appointment except during a
financial emergency.

Acting Chief Justice

 The President can appoint a judge of the Supreme Court as an acting Chief
Justice of India when:

o the office of Chief Justice of India is vacant; or

o the Chief Justice of India is temporarily absent; or
o the Chief Justice of India is unable to perform the duties of his office.

Ad hoc Judge
 When there is a lack of quorum of the permanent judges to hold or
continue any session of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of
India can appoint a judge of a High Court as an ad hoc judge of the
Supreme Court for a temporary period. He can do so only after consultation
 with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned and with the previous
consent of the president.
 The judge so appointed should be qualified for appointment as a judge of
the Supreme Court. It is the duty of the judge so appointed to attend the
sittings of the Supreme Court, in priority to other duties of his office. While so
attending, he enjoys all the jurisdiction, powers and privileges (and discharges
the duties) of a judge of the Supreme Court.

Retired Judges
 At any time, the CJI can request a retired judge of the Supreme Court or a
retired judge of a high court (who is duly qualified for appointment as a judge of
the Supreme Court) to act as a judge of the Supreme Court for a temporary
period.
 He can do so only with the previous consent of the President and also of
the person to be so appointed. 

o Such a judge is entitled to such allowances as the president may

determine. He will also enjoy all the jurisdiction, powers and privileges of a
judge of the Supreme Court. But, he will not otherwise be deemed to be a
judge of the Supreme Court.

Procedure of Court
 The Supreme Court can, with the approval of the President, make rules for
regulating generally the practice and procedure of the court.
 The Constitutional cases or references made by the President
under Article 143 are decided by a Bench consisting of at least five
judges. All other cases are usually decided by a bench consisting of not less
than three judges. The judgements are delivered by the open court. All
judgements are by majority vote but if differing, then judges can give dissenting
judgements or opinions.

Independence of Supreme Court

 The Supreme Court is a Federal court, the highest court of appeal, the
guarantor of the fundamental rights of the citizens and guardian of the
Constitution. 

o Therefore, its independence becomes very essential for the effective

discharge of the duties assigned to it. It should be free from the
encroachments, pressures and interferences of the executive (council of
ministers) and the Legislature (Parliament). It should be allowed to do
justice without fear or favour.
 The Constitution has made the following provisions to safeguard and
ensure the independent and impartial functioning of the Supreme Court:
 o Mode of appointment
o Security of tenure
o Fixed service conditions
o Expenses charged on the consolidated fund
o Conduct of judges cannot be discussed
o Ban on practice after retirement
o Power to punish for its contempt
o Freedom to appoint its staff
o Its jurisdiction cannot be curtailed
o Separation from Executive

Jurisdiction and Powers of Supreme Court

Original Jurisdiction

 As a Federal court, the Supreme Court decides disputes between different

units of the Indian Federation. More elaborately, any dispute between:

o the Centre and one or more states; or

o the Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more
states on the other; or
o between two or more states.
 In the above federal disputes, the Supreme Court has exclusive original
jurisdiction.
 Further, this jurisdiction of the Supreme Court does not extend to the
following:

o A dispute arising out of any pre-Constitution treaty, agreement,

covenant,
o engagement, sanad or other similar instrument.
o A dispute arising out of any treaty, agreement, etc.,which specifically
provides that the said jurisdiction does not extent to such a dispute.
o Inter-state water disputes.
o Matters referred to the Finance Commission.
o Adjustment of certain expenses and pensions between the Centre
and the states.
 o Ordinary dispute of Commercial nature between the Centre and the
states.
o Recovery of damages by a state against the Centre.
Writ Jurisdiction

 The Supreme Court is empowered to issue writs, including habeas corpus,

mandamus, prohibition, quo-warranto and certiorari for the enforcement of
the fundamental rights of an aggrieved citizen. 

o In this regard, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction in the

sense that an aggrieved citizen can go directly to the Supreme Court, not
necessarily by way of appeal.
o However, the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not exclusive.
The High Courts are also empowered to issue writs for the enforcement of
the Fundamental Rights.
Appellate Jurisdiction

 The Supreme Court is primarily a court of appeal and hears appeals against
the judgements of the lower courts. It enjoys a wide appellate jurisdiction which
can be classified under four heads:

o Appeals in constitutional matters

o Appeals in civil matters
o Appeals in criminal matters
o Appeals by special leave
Advisory Jurisdiction

 The Constitution under Article 143 authorises the President to seek the

opinion of the Supreme Court in the two categories of matters:

o On any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen

or which is likely to arise.
o On any dispute arising out of any pre-constitution treaty, agreement,
covenant, engagement, sanador other similar instruments.
A Court of Record

 As a Court of Record, the Supreme Court has two powers:

o The judgements, proceedings and acts of the Supreme Court are

recorded for perpetual memory and testimony. These records are admitted
 to be of evidentiary value and cannot be questioned when produced before
any court.
o They are recognised as legal precedents and legal references.
o It has power to punish for contempt of court, either with simple
imprisonment for a term up to six months or with fine up to 2,000 or with
both.
Power of Judicial Review

 Judicial review is the power of the Supreme Court to examine the

constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders of both the
Central and state governments.

o On examination, if they are found to be violative of the

Constitution (ultra-vires), they can be declared as illegal,
unconstitutional and invalid (null and void) by the Supreme Court.
Consequently, they cannot be enforced by the Government.

Recent issues in Supreme Court

 Master of Roster: It refers to the privilege of the Chief Justice to constitute
Benches to hear cases.

o The controversy has emerged in the Supreme Court over absolute

power of Chief Justice on the judicial administration.
o The SC has upheld a number of times that “the Chief Justice is the
master of the roster and he alone has the prerogative to constitute the
Benches of the Court and allocate cases to the Benches so constituted.”
o Be it the Chief Justice of India or Chief Justice of any high court it is
he or she who heads the administrative side. This includes allocation of
matters before a judge as well.

 So, no Judge can take up the matter on his own, unless

allocated by the Chief Justice of India
 The Indian constitution under Article 124(1) states that
there shall be a Supreme Court of India consisting of a
Chief justice of India (CJI) and 34 judges including the
CJI. The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India can
broadly be categorised into original jurisdiction, appellate
jurisdiction and advisory jurisdiction. However, there are
other multiple powers of the Supreme Cour

Article 124(1) and Amendment act of 2008 states that there shall be a Supreme
Court of India consisting of a Chief justice of India (CJI) and 34 judges including the
CJI.  Article 124(2) states that every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed
by the President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of
the judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the states.
Here the collegium system(appointment of judges to the courts) was followed also
known as the three judges cases, which comprises of the Chief Justice of India and
four senior-most judges of the SC, one chief justice of a high court and two of its
senior-most judges. This system demanded a consensus decision of all the senior-
most judges in conformity with the Chief Justice of India.

However, due to lack of transparency and delay in the appointment, a new article 124
A was incorporated in the constitution, under which the National Judiciary
Appointments Commission (NJAC) replaced the collegium system for the
appointment of judges as mandated in the existing pre-amended constitution by a
new system.

The NJAC consists of the following persons:

1. Chief Justice of India ex officio (chairperson)

2. Two senior-most Supreme Court judges ex officio

3. The Union Minister of Law and Justice

4. Two eminent persons nominated by a committee consisting of CJI, Prime minister

of India and leader of the opposition.

Functions of the Commission are as follows:

 Recommending persons for CJI, judges of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice of
High court, Judges of High court,
 Transfer of Chief justices and judges from one court to other
 Ensure persons recommended are of ability and integrity
Jurisdiction (Articles 141, 137)
Articles 137 to 141 of the Constitution of India lay down the composition and
jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India. Art 141, states that Law declared by
Supreme Court is binding on all the courts in India and Art 137 empowers SC to
 review its own judgment. The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India can broadly
be categorised into three parts:

Original Jurisdiction- (Art 131)

This jurisdiction extends to cases originating in SC only and states that Indian SC
has original and exclusive jurisdiction in cases between:

 The government on one hand and one or more states on the other
 Government and one or more states on one side and other states on the other
 Two or more states
Appellate Jurisdiction- (Art 132,133,134)
The appeal lies with SC against the high court in the following 4 categories

1. Constitutional matters-if high court certifies that the case involves a substantial
question of law that needs interpretation of the constitution.

2. Civil matters- if the case involves a substantial question of law of general

importance

3. The criminal matters-if high court has on appeal reversed the order of acquittal of
an accused and sentenced him to death or has withdrawn for trial before itself any
case from subordinate court

4. Special leave to appeal is granted by SC if it is satisfied that the case does not
involve any question of law. However, it cannot be passed in case of the judgment
passed by a court or tribunal of armed forces.

However, under this jurisdiction, SC can transfer to itself cases from one or more
high courts if it involves the question of law in the interest of justice.

Advisory Jurisdiction (Art 143)

Article 143 authorises the President to seek an advisory opinion from the Supreme
Court in the two categories of matters-(a) matters of public importance (b) of any
question arising out of pre-constitution, treaty, agreement, engagement, Sanad or
other similar instruments.

Also Art 144 states that all authorities civil and judicial in the territory of India shall
act in aid of the Supreme Court.

Powers of the Supreme Court

1. Power to punish for contempt (civil or criminal) of court with simple imprisonment
for 6 months or fine up to 2000. Civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any
judgment. Criminal contempt means doing any act which lowers the authority of the
court or causing interference in judicial proceedings
2. Judicial review - to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and
executive orders. The grounds of review is limited by- Parliamentary legislation or
rules made by the Supreme Court.
3. Deciding authority regarding the election of President and Vice President

4. Enquiring authority in conduct and behaviour of UPSC members

5. Withdraw cases pending before high courts and dispose of them itself

6. Appointment of ad hoc judges-Art 127 states that if at any time there is lack of
quorum of Judges of Supreme Court, the CJI may with the previous consent of the
President and Chief Justice of High Court concerned request in writing the
attendance of Judge of High Court duly qualified to be appointed as Judge of SC.
7. Appointment of retired judges of supreme court or high court - Art 128- The CJI at
any time with the previous consent of the President and the person to be so
appointed can appoint any person who had previously held the office of a Judge of
SC.
8. Appointment of acting Chief Justice- Art 126- when the office of CJI is vacant or
when the Chief Justice is by reason of absence or otherwise unable to perform
duties of the office, the President in such case can appoint Judge of the court to
discharge the duties of the office.
9. Revisory Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court under Art. 137 is empowered to review
any judgment or order made by it with a view to removing any mistake or error that
might have crept in the judgement or order.
10. Supreme Court as a Court of Record

The Supreme Court is a court of record as its decisions are of evidentiary value and
cannot be questioned in any court.

Removal of Supreme Court Judge:

A judge of Supreme Court can be removed only from the office by the President on
the basis of a resolution passed by both the Houses of parliament with a majority of
the total membership and a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members
present and voting in each house, on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or
incapacity of the judge in question.

 The Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act 2019 increases the
maximum number of judges in the Supreme Court from 30 to 33 (excluding the CJI).
 According to Art124(1) of the constitution, there shall be a Supreme Court of India
constituting of a Chief Justice of India and, until Parliament by law prescribes a larger
number, of not more than seven other judges.
 According to Art124(2), every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the
President by warrant under his hand and seal after consultation with such of the judges
of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts in the States as the President may deem
necessary for the purpose and shall hold office until heattains the age of sixty five
 years: Provided that in the case of appointment of a judge other than the chief Justice,
the chief Justice of India shall always be consulted.

CJI of India accused in a sexual harassment case

On 19th April 2019, an ex-staff of the Supreme Court alleged that she
was sexually harassed by the former Chief Justice of India, Mr Ranjan
Gogoi who denied all the allegations made against him. A three-judge
bench began hearing the matter and an in house panel was set up to look
into the allegations made against the CJI. During the hearing, the bench
ordered to conduct an inquiry into the alleged conspiracy and the report
and the findings of the inquiry were submitted to the bench in a sealed
cover. The in-house panel concluded that Mr. Ranjan Gogoi should be
held free of all charges and was given a free chit. As the details of the
inquiry made were never shown to the public, many contended that the
method was unfair and discriminatory. Moreover, the complainant was
not allowed to show any video or audio during the proceedings, her
lawyer was not present during the proceedings and she was not informed
about the procedure adopted by the committee in reviewing the case.
Judgment: A three-judge bench held an inquiry against the former CJI,
Mr. Ranjan Gogoi in the matter of sexual harassment allegations made
against him by an ex-employee of the Court. Later, he was given a clean
chit.
(Case name: In re Matter of Great Public Importance touching upon the Independence of the
Judiciary, decided on 25.04.2019)
CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA COMES UNDER RTI

In November, the Supreme Court in its historic judgment held that the
CJI comes under the Right to Information Act and is a public authority
under Section 2(h) of the Act. This implies that the CJI is to be
transparent and is answerable to all questions raised by the citizens of
the County. However, the court also emphasized the importance of
maintaining confidentiality under certain aspects of the judiciary’s
working. The RTI will apply to CJI only when it is in the interest of the
public and does not hamper the proceedings of the judiciary in any
manner.

Judgment: CJI is a public authority under the RTI Act.

(Case name: Central Public Information Officer, Supreme

Court v Subhash Chandra Agarwal, decided on 13.11.2019)

1. Persons in Govt/Judicial service need not resign to

participate in District Judge Selection Process.
- Vijay Kumar Mishra and Anr vs High court of Judicature
at Patna and Ors

1. Ashok Pandey vs. Supreme Court of India Through Its

Registrar &Ors. - From an institutional perspective the
Chief Justice is placed at the helm of the Supreme
Court. In the allocation of cases and the constitution of
benches the Chief Justice has an exclusive prerogative.
As a repository of constitutional trust, the Chief Justice
is an institution in himself.
2. Kamini Jaiswal Vs. Union Of India & anr. (Master of
Roster) It was held that CJI alone had the power to
assign the case to a bench even if there were
allegations in the matter against him.
3. NJAC (S.C Judges selection) held unconstitutional -
Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association vs.
Union of India
In September 2019, Chief Justice of Madras High Court Vijaya Kamlesh
Tahilramani resigned after the collegium upheld their decision to
transfer her to the high court of Meghalaya

CJI Dipak Misra had passed on 3 October 2017. Current CJI Ranjan

Gogoi was a signatory to the resolution.
Titled “Transparency in collegium system”, the
resolution had stated: All “decisions henceforth taken by the
collegium indicating the reasons shall be put on the website of the
Supreme Court, when the recommendation(s) is/are sent to the
Government of India, with regard to the cases relating to initial
elevation to the High Court Bench, confirmation as permanent
Judge(s) of the High Court, elevation to the post of Chief Justice of
High Court, transfer of High Court Chief Justices/Judges and
elevation to the Supreme Court, because on each occasion the
material which is considered by the Collegium is different

The Collegium headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi has recommended

appointing Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjiv Khanna as judges o

Supreme Court has declared National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act,
2014 and 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014 unconstitutional an

Original Jurisdiction

Under article 131 of the Indian constitution, the supreme court has original
jurisdiction in the following cases

 If there is a dispute between the government of India and one or

more states
 Between the government of India and any state or states on the one
side and one or more states on the other side
 Between two or more states
Even the dispute arising in the election of the President and Vice President is
dealt with by the supreme court.In these matters, the Supreme Court has
original jurisdiction to exercise its power without the intervention of any
other judicial authority. As the Supreme court is the highest judicial authority
it protects the fundamental rights of an individual from any kind of
infringement. Under article 32 it has given the right to an individual to
approach the supreme if there is any violation of his fundamental rights.
Under article 32 a court an issue orders or writs( habeas corpus, certiorari,
mandamus, prohibition, quo-warranto)

This jurisdiction of the supreme court is subjected to certain limitations.

These limitations any kind of dispute arising from an agreement which was
executed even before the constitution was commenced. In case of
fundamental rights, it only covers the legal aspects whereas the rest of it is
left untouched.

Appellate Jurisdiction

The Supreme is the apex judicial authority of appeals and enjoys

constitutional, civil as well as criminal appeals.

Constitutional appeal: under article 132 of the constitution it has been

stated that appeal for any final judgement of the high court whether of civil
or criminal nature for which the high court issues a certificate stating that it
contains a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the
provisions of the constitution lies in the supreme court. Even if the high court
refuses to issue the certificate, the Supreme court has the power to grant
SLPin these matters.

Civil Appeals: Cases of civil nature shall lie in the supreme court if the high
court is satisfied with the following conditions and certifies that

 The matter involves a substantial question of law

 If the high court thinks that this case needs to be decided by the
supreme court
Criminal Appeals: under article 134(1) a criminal appeal shall lie in the
supreme court under the following  circumstances:

 If the high court in an appeal has reversed the judgment of the

lower court and sentenced death penalty to the accused who has
been acquitted.
 In the second situation when the high court itself has withdrawn a
case from a lower court and then sentenced the accused person
death penalty.
 If a case is certified by the high court that it is fit for the appeal in
the supreme court. Sometimes the supreme court is conferred with
powers by the parliament in order to deal with certain cases decided
by the high court.

The Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to grant special leave petition to the
final judgement given by any lower courts except for the courts or tribunal
which has been formed by the law relating to armed forces. However, if the
judgement or order is given by a high court(single judge bench) then the no
appeal for that matter will be entertained in the supreme court.

Under article 138 of the Indian Constitution the   law expands the jurisdiction
of the supreme court in respect of subjects contained under the union list
and shall also have jurisdiction over any other subject for which the consent
of state has been obtained.

Advisory Jurisdiction

Under article 143 it has been stated that the supreme court on many
occasions have given advice to the government as well as the president, if
the matter is related to the interest of the public or if there arises a
substantial question of law. The supreme court after the profound enquiry
reports to them.

Miscellaneous powers and functions

 Being the supreme judicial authority of the country it protects the
constitution and enlighten us with the provisions of the constitution
through its grand vision which is considered to be final.
 It is the custodian of the fundamental rights. Under article 32 every
citizen of India has the Locus Standi to move to court in order to
seek legal remedy if there is any kind of infringement to the
fundamental rights.
 Under article 129 supreme court is the court of record. Its judgment
unquestionable and are accepted by all the lower courts as
precedents. Under article 141 the decision of the high court is
considered to be final and binding upon all the lower courts and
regarded as law.
 If any law is passed by the parliament or the state legislature which
does not comply with the provisions of the Indian constitution or is
passed with the jurisdiction which they even do not possess will be
declared void by the supreme court through judicial review.
 The supreme court under article 137 has the power to review its
owns judgement
 If new evidence are found
 If a fact which is related to the records of the came to the light
 If there are enough reasons to suffice for a review Supreme court
itself states that nothing can restrain it from reviewing its own
decisions if it is satisfied with its effects over the general public.
 The supreme court is conferred with the power to make rules for
carrying out its practice and procedure.
 The supreme court has the power to appoint its officers and
servants. For example, chief justice of India or the other supreme
court judges is appointed by it to carry out its functions. Though the
person has to be qualified for the job.
 Supreme Court under article 129 has the power to punish a person
if found guilty of contempt of court. Contempt of court basically
means hampering the proceedings of the court neglecting its order,
defying its authority which ultimately results in disrespect of the
court. The consequences arising out of it includes both the civil or
criminal penalties depending upon the gravity of the consequences.
  Appeals under The Peoples Representation Act 1951 can be filed in
the supreme court.
 What the Law Commission said
 Back in March 1984, the Tenth Law Commission of India (95th Report) under Justice
K K Mathew recommended that “the Supreme Court of India should consist of two
Divisions, namely (a) Constitutional Division, and (b) Legal Division”, and that “only
matters of Constitutional law may be assigned to the proposed Constitutional
Division”. The Eleventh Law Commission under the chairmanship of Justice D A
Desai (125th Report, 1988) “reiterate(d) that the recommendation for splitting the
(Supreme) Court into two halves deserves to be implemented”. Thereafter, the
Eighteenth Law Commission under Justice A R Lakshmanan (229th Report, 2009)
recommended that “a Constitution Bench be set up at Delhi to deal with constitutional
and other allied issues”, and “four Cassation Benches be set up in the Northern
region/zone at Delhi, the Southern region/zone at Chennai/Hyderabad, the Eastern
region/zone at Kolkata and the Western region/zone at Mumbai to deal with all
appellate work arising out of the orders/judgments of the High Courts of the particular
region”. Indeed, many countries around the world have Courts of Cassation that
decide cases involving non-Constitutional disputes and appeals from the lower level
of courts. These are courts of last resort that have the power to reverse decisions of
lower courts. (Cassation: annulment, cancellation, reversal)

 Important Terms related to High Courts in India:

 Tribunal – A tribunal is a term for anybody acting judicially, whether or not it is called a
tribunal in its title. For example, an advocate appearing before a Court on which a single
Judge was sitting could describe that judge as ‘their tribunal’.
 Permanent Bench – A permanent bench comprises of one or more High Court judges
who sit yearlong at a particular location that is different from the permanent seat of the
High Court.
 Circuit Bench – A Circuit Bench is for territories which are far-flung but do not have too
many matters to justify a full-fledged permanent bench. As a result, once or twice a year,
some judges travel to these areas and dispose off all the High Court appeals of that
jurisdiction.
 Division Bench – In a Division Bench, a case is heard and judged by at least 2 judges.
 Full Bench – A Full bench refers to a court of law consisting of a greater-than-normal
number of judge

Composition of the High Court

 Every High Court comprises of a Chief Justice and other judges appointed by President.
  There is no fixed minimum number of judges for the High Courts. It varies from Court to
Court and from State to State.
Qualifications and Tenure

A person shall not be fit for appointment as a Judge of the High Court unless

 He is a citizen of India
 He should have held a judicial office in the territory of India for ten years
 He has been for at least 10 years an advocate of one or of two or more High Court
For detailed information on similar relevant topics given in the UPSC Syllabus, refer to the linked
article.

We have already come up with Powers and Functions of High Court. Here we are giving the list of
high courts and with the establishment year and jurisdiction areas. This will enhance your UPSC
IAS Prelims exam preparation.

The list of High Courts in India has been given below:

List of High Courts in India

Year Name Territorial Jurisdiction Seat & Bench

Maharashtra
Dadra & Nagar Haveli
Seat: Mumbai
1862 Bombay
Goa Bench: Panaji, Aurangabad, and Nagpur
Daman Diu

West Bengal Seat: Kolkata

1862 Kolkata
Andaman & Nicobar islands Bench: Port Blair

Tamil Nadu Seat: Chennai

1862 Madras
Pondicherry Bench: Madurai

Seat: Allahabad
1866 Allahabad Uttar Pradesh
Bench: Lucknow

Seat: Bengaluru
1884 Karnataka Karnataka
Bench: Dharwad and Gulbarga

1916 Patna Bihar Patna

1928 Jammu & Kashmir Jammu & Kashmir Srinagar and Jammu

Assam
Nagaland
Seat: Guwahati
1948 Guwahati
Mizoram Bench: Kohima, Aizawl, and Itanagar
Arunachal Pradesh

1949 Odisha Odisha Cuttack

 Seat: Jodhpur
1949 Rajasthan Rajasthan
Bench: Jaipur

Seat: Jabalpur
1956 Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh
Bench: Gwalior and Indore

1958 Kerala Kerala & Lakshadweep Ernakulam

1960 Gujarat Gujarat Ahmedabad

1966 Delhi Delhi Delhi

1971 Himachal Pradesh Himachal Pradesh Shimla

1975 Punjab & Haryana Punjab, Haryana & Chandigarh Chandigarh

1975 Sikkim Sikkim Gangtok

2000 Chattisgarh Chattisgarh Bilaspur

2000 Uttarakhand Uttarakhand Nainital

2000 Jharkhand Jharkhand Ranchi

2013 Tripura Tripura Agartala

2013 Manipur Manipur Imphal

2013 Meghalaya Meghalaya Shillong

2019 Telangana Telangana Hyderabad

2019 Andhra Pradesh Andhra Pradesh Amravati

How many High Courts are there in India?

There are 25 High Courts in India. Candidates can find the list of High Courts in India at the linked
article.

It was in 1858 when on the recommendation of the Law Commission, the Parliament passed the
Indian High Courts Act 1861 which suggested the establishment of High Courts in place of
Supreme Court in three Presidencies: Calcutta, Madras and Bombay. The Charter of High Court
of Calcutta was ordered in May 1862 and that of Madras and Bombay were order in June 1862.
Thereby, making the Calcutta High Court the first High Court of the country.

The reason for the implementation of this act was the need for a separate judiciary body for
different states. The British Government, therefore, decided to abolish the then-existing Supreme
Court and Sadar Adalat and replaced it with High Court.

Certain rules and eligibility criteria were set for the appointment of a Judge in any High Court and
later after independence as per Article 214 of the Indian Constitution, it was declared that every
Indian state must have their own High Court.
The British created laws were different from the ones that were stated in the Indian Penal code
and the entire legal system of the country changed after the independence of the country.

Which is the  Newest High Court of India?

Andhra Pradesh is the recent state to have the High Court. High Court was established in Andhra
Pradesh on 1st January 2019.

Constitution of High Court – Under the British rule, each High Court has a Chief Justice and
maximum 15 other puisne judges. But later certain changes were brought about in the
composition of the High Court in India:

 Every High Court shall have  a Chief Justice appointed by the President
 Unlike before, there was no fixed number of Judges who could be appointed for each
High Court
 Additional Judges can also be appointed for the clearance of cases pending in the court.
But their tenure cannot exceed more than two years
One thing that must be noted is that no one above the age of 62 years can be appointed as a
High Court Judge. There is no uniformity among the High Courts regarding the number of Judges
they will have. A smaller state shall have less number of judges in comparison to a larger state.

High Court Jurisdiction

The jurisdictions of a High Court are as mentioned below:

 Original Jurisdiction – In such kind of cases the applicant can directly go to the High
Court and does not require to raise an appeal. It is mostly applicable for cases related to
the State Legislative Assembly, marriages, enforcement of fundamental rights and
transfer cases from other courts.

 Power of Superintendence – It a special power enjoyed only by High Court and no other
subordinate court has this power of superintendence. Under this, the High Court holds
the right to order its subordinate offices and courts the way of maintaining records,
prescribe rules for holding proceedings in the court and also settle the fees paid to
sheriff clerks, officers and legal practitioners.

 Court of Record – It involves recording the judgments, proceedings and acts of high
courts for perpetual memory. These records cannot be further questioned in any court. It
has the power to punish for contempt of itself.

 Appellate Jurisdiction – This is for cases where people have risen a complaint about a
review of the judgement given by the district level or subordinate court of that territory.
This power is further divided into two categories:

1. Civil Jurisdiction – this includes orders and judgements of the district court, civil district
court and subordinate court 
2. Criminal Jurisdiction – this includes judgements and orders of the sessions court and
additional sessions court. 
High Court in India is one of the most important topics in terms of the UPSC exam and other
government exams in India.

How is a High Court Judge Appointed?

A High Court Judge is appointed by the President of India. He is solely responsible for the
appointment of any judge in a High Court. However, he may consult the Governor of the State,
the acting Chief Justice of India and Chief Justice of that particular state’s High Court. 

A High Court judge is also liable to get transferred to other High Courts. This decision is entirely
dependent on the Chief Justice of India. Transfer of judges is done with an aim to ensure proper
and just trial for every case fought in the court of law.

Eligibility Criteria for High Court Judge

There are certain eligibility criteria that need to be fulfilled to be appointed as a judge in any High
court in India. Given below are the set of eligibility criteria mandatory for the appointment of High
Court judges:

 Any of the given qualifications must be fulfilled:

1. The person should have been a Barrister for more than five years 
2. Has been a civil servant for over 10 years along with serving the Zila court for at
least 3 years 
3. A person who has been a pleader for over 10 years in any High Court.
 No judge should be of more than 62 years of age
The law states that every state must have a separate High Court, however, there still are certain
states that do not have an individual High Court. For example – both Punjab and Haryana come
under the jurisdiction of Punjab High Court sitting at Chandigarh. Besides, there is a common
High Court for seven states – Assam, Nagaland, Manipur, Tripura, Meghalaya, Arunachal Pradesh
and Mizoram.

Salary and Perks of High Court Judges

There has been a massive increase in the salary paid to a High Court judge. The table below
gives the salary description of a judge in the High Court:

Powers and Functions of the High Court

The High Court is the highest court in a state in India. Articles 214 to 231 in the Indian
Constitution talk about the High Courts, their organisation and powers. The Parliament can also
provide for the establishment of one High Court for two or more states. 

For instance, Haryana, Punjab and the Union Territory of Chandigarh have a common High Court.
The northeastern states also have one common High Court. In addition, Tamil Nadu shares a
High Court with Puducherry.

Currently, there are 25 High Courts in India.

The High Courts of Calcutta, Madras and Bombay were established by the Indian High Courts Act
1861.

What are the functions of the High Court?

The functions of the High Court are described in the below section under subsections such as its
jurisdiction, powers, role, etc.

High Court Jurisdiction

The various kinds of the jurisdiction of the High Court are briefly given below:

Original Jurisdiction

 The High Courts of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras have original jurisdiction in criminal
and civil cases arising within these cities.
 An exclusive right enjoyed by these High Courts is that they are entitled to hear civil
cases which involve property worth over Rs.20000.
 Regarding Fundamental Rights: They are empowered to issue writs in order to enforce
fundamental rights.
 With respect to other cases: All High Courts have original jurisdiction in cases that are
related to will, divorce, contempt of court and admiralty.
 Election petitions can be heard by the High Courts.

Appellate Jurisdiction

 In civil cases: an appeal can be made to the High Court against a district court’s
decision.
 An appeal can also be made from the subordinate court directly, if the dispute involves a
value higher than Rs. 5000/- or on a question of fact or law.
 In criminal cases: it extends to cases decided by Sessions and Additional Sessions
Judges.

o If the sessions judge has awarded an imprisonment for 7 year or more.

o If the sessions judge has awarded capital punishment.
 The jurisdiction of the High Court extends to all cases under the State or federal
laws.
 In constitutional cases: if the High Court certifies that a case involves a
substantial question of law.

High Court Powers

Apart from the above, the High Courts have several functions and powers which are described
below.

As a Court of Record
 High Courts are also Courts of Record (like the Supreme Court).
 The records of the judgements of the High Courts can be used by subordinate courts for
deciding cases.
  All High Courts have the power to punish all cases of contempt by any person or
institution.

Administrative Powers

1. It superintends and controls all the subordinate courts.

2. It can ask for details of proceedings from subordinate courts.
3. It issues rules regarding the working of the subordinate courts.
4. It can transfer any case from one court to another and can also transfer the case to itself
and decide the same.
5. It can enquire into the records or other connected documents of any subordinate court.
6. It can appoint its administration staff and determine their salaries and allowances, and
conditions of service.

Power of Judicial Review

High Courts have the power of judicial review. They have the power to declare any law or
ordinance unconstitutional if it is found to be against the Indian Constitution.

Power of Certification
A High Court alone can certify the cases fit for appeal before the Supreme Court.

Powers And Functions Of High Court – Indian Polity:-

High Court Autonomy

The independence of the High Courts can be corroborated by the points given below:

1. Appointment of Judges: The appointment of judges of the High Courts lies within the
judiciary itself and is not connected to the legislature or the executive.
2. Tenure of the Judges: High Court judges enjoy security of tenure till the age of
retirement, which is 62 years. A High Court cannot be removed except by an address of
the President.
3. Salaries and allowances: The High Court judges enjoy good salaries, perks and
allowances and these cannot be changed to their disadvantage except in case of a
financial emergency. The expenses of the High Court are charged on the Consolidated
Fund of the State, which is not subject to vote in the state legislature.
4. Powers: The Parliament and the state legislature cannot cut the powers and jurisdiction
of the High Court as guaranteed by the Constitution.
5. Conduct of judges: Unless a motion of impeachment has been moved, the conduct of the
High Court judges cannot be discussed in the Parliament.
6. Retirement: After retirement, High Court judges cannot hold an office of emolument
under the Government of India or that of a state. There is an exception to this clause,
however, when, with the consent of the Chief Justice of India, retired judges can be
nominated to a temporary office, and in situation of Emergencies.

!
UPSC Questions related to Powers of High Court

How many High Courts are there in India?

Currently, in India, there are 25 High Courts.

Which is the first High Court in India?

The first High Court in India is the Calcutta High Court. It was established in 1862 as the High
Court of Judicature at Fort William.

What is the salary of Chief Justice of India?

At present, judges of the High Courts gets a monthly salary of Rs.2.5 lakh.

How many judges are in High Court of India?

The number of judges in a High Court can vary. Currently, the Allahabad High Court has the
highest number at 160 while the Sikkim High Court has 4.

Which High Court has the highest number of benches in India?

The Guwahati High Court has the highest number of Benches in India.

Rajnesh Oswal takes oath as J-K High

Court judge