Judiciary Questions for UPSC CSE

Structure of the Indian Judiciary

India has a single integrated judicial system, unlike the US which has a dual court system. The Supreme Court sits at the apex, followed by High Courts in each state, then District Courts, and below them subordinate courts. This unified structure means even state courts ultimately fall under the SC's supervisory jurisdiction. The SC was established on 26 January 1950 under Article 124. Originally it had 8 judges including the CJI; the current strength is 34 (33 + CJI), set by Parliament.

• Single unified judiciary unlike USA's dual system — one hierarchy for both central and state laws
• SC strength: 34 judges (Parliament can increase by law under Article 124)
• High Courts established under Article 214; they have original, appellate, and writ jurisdiction
• Article 227 gives HCs supervisory jurisdiction over all subordinate courts in their territory
• District Courts are the highest courts of original jurisdiction at district level
• SC sits in New Delhi; HCs can have benches in multiple cities (e.g., Bombay HC has benches in Nagpur, Aurangabad, Goa)

Supreme Court Jurisdiction

The SC has four main types of jurisdiction. Original jurisdiction (Article 131) means only the SC can hear disputes between Centre and states, or between states — no other court can. Appellate jurisdiction (Articles 132-136) allows the SC to hear appeals from HC judgments on constitutional, civil, or criminal matters. Writ jurisdiction (Article 32) is a fundamental right in itself — Dr. Ambedkar called Article 32 the heart and soul of the Constitution. Advisory jurisdiction (Article 143) lets the President refer questions of law or fact of public importance to the SC, but the SC's opinion is not binding.

• Article 131: Original exclusive jurisdiction — Centre vs State or State vs State disputes only
• Article 132: Appeals on constitutional questions from any HC
• Article 136: Special Leave Petition (SLP) — SC's discretionary power to grant leave to appeal from ANY court or tribunal in India (except military tribunals)
• Article 32: Right to move SC directly for enforcement of Fundamental Rights — itself a FR
• Article 143: Advisory jurisdiction — President can seek opinion; SC CAN REFUSE to give opinion
• Article 137: SC can review its own judgments — rare but used in cases like Nirbhaya

Judicial Review and Basic Structure

Judicial review is the power of courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. It is implied in the Constitution through Articles 13, 32, 131, 136, 143, 226, and 246 — it is NOT a fundamental right. The Basic Structure doctrine emerged from Kesavananda Bharati case (1973): Parliament can amend any part of the Constitution but CANNOT destroy its basic structure. The SC itself decides what constitutes basic structure — no exhaustive list exists, making this a living doctrine.

• Judicial Review power comes from Articles 13, 32, 226 — not explicitly stated as a single provision
• Basic Structure doctrine: Kesavananda Bharati vs State of Kerala (1973) — 7:6 landmark verdict
• Basic structure includes: supremacy of Constitution, republican and democratic form, secularism, separation of powers, federalism, judicial review, free and fair elections
• Golaknath case (1967) said Parliament cannot amend FRs — overruled by Kesavananda Bharati
• Minerva Mills (1980) reinforced basic structure: Parliament cannot give itself unlimited amending power
• 42nd Amendment (1976) tried to exclude judicial review of amendments — struck down in Minerva Mills

Appointment of Judges and Collegium System

Originally, judges were appointed by the President in consultation with the CJI (for SC) and CJI plus relevant HC Chief Justice (for HC). Three Judges Cases transformed this into the collegium system. Now a collegium of the CJI and the 4 senior-most SC judges recommend appointments — the government can return recommendations once but must accept if re-sent. The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) via 99th Amendment (2014) tried to replace the collegium but was struck down by the SC in 2015 (Fifth Judges Case) as violating judicial independence, which is part of basic structure.

• First Judges Case (1981): Consultation with CJI is not binding on the President — government has primacy
• Second Judges Case (1993): Collegium system born — CJI + 2 senior judges; consultation means concurrence
• Third Judges Case (1998): Presidential reference expanded collegium to CJI + 4 senior-most SC judges
• NJAC struck down in 2015 (Fifth Judges Case) — judicial independence is basic structure
• Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) for appointments still being finalized — a live governance issue
• Judges of SC and HC can be removed only by impeachment — Parliament's joint address under Article 124(4)

High Courts, Writs, and PIL

Both SC (Article 32) and HC (Article 226) can issue writs, but HC's writ jurisdiction is wider — it can issue writs for enforcement of FRs AND for any other legal right. The five writs are Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, and Quo Warranto. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a judicial innovation — not mentioned in the Constitution — pioneered by Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer in the 1980s. PIL democratised access to justice: any public-spirited citizen can file on behalf of those who cannot approach courts.

• Habeas Corpus: produce the body — against illegal detention; can be filed by ANY person
• Mandamus: we command — directs public authority to perform a public duty; NOT against President or Governor
• Prohibition: issued by higher court to lower court to stop exceeding jurisdiction — only against judicial/quasi-judicial bodies
• Certiorari: quash the order — to correct errors of jurisdiction or law by lower courts
• Quo Warranto: by what authority — challenges a person's right to hold a public office
• Article 226 HC writ jurisdiction is wider than Article 32 SC jurisdiction — HC can act for any legal right, not just FRs

Key Articles and Special Powers

Article 142 gives the SC power to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice — it is called the SC's extraordinary power and has been used controversially. Article 141 makes SC law binding on all courts in India. Article 144 says all civil and judicial authorities must act in aid of the SC. Articles 124-147 deal with the SC; Articles 214-231 deal with HCs. Article 129 makes SC a court of record with power to punish for contempt.

• Article 141: SC judgment is binding on all courts in India (not on SC itself)
• Article 142: Complete justice power — used in Bhopal gas case settlement, Babri Masjid case, etc.
• Article 129 and 215: SC and HC are courts of record — their decisions have evidentiary value
• Article 32 is itself a Fundamental Right (Part III) — cannot be suspended except during Emergency under Article 359
• Ad hoc judges (Article 127) and retired judges (Article 128) can be called to SC when quorum is insufficient
• National Court of Appeal concept has been debated to reduce SC burden — not yet implemented

• Confusing Article 32 (SC writs, itself a FR) with Article 226 (HC writs, wider scope but NOT a FR) — a very common trap in MCQs
• Thinking the SC's advisory opinion under Article 143 is binding — it is NOT; the SC can also refuse to give the opinion
• Mixing up the Three Judges Cases: First (1981) favoured government, Second (1993) and Third (1998) favoured collegium — the sequence matters
• Believing Prohibition and Certiorari writs can be issued against administrative authorities — they apply only to judicial or quasi-judicial bodies
• Assuming Habeas Corpus is always suspended during Emergency — it was suspended in 1975 (ADM Jabalpur case) but the 44th Amendment (1978) now protects Articles 20 and 21 even during Emergency

• Five writs mnemonic: HMPCQ — Have Many People Come Quickly (Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, Quo Warranto)
• Three Judges Cases direction: 1981 = Government wins, 1993 = Collegium wins, 1998 = Collegium expands to 5 — remember GCE (Government, Collegium, Expansion)
• Article 32 vs 226 analogy: Article 32 is a pistol (only FRs), Article 226 is a rifle (FRs + any legal right) — HC has longer reach
• Basic Structure anchor: ROSEF — Republican form, Oversight by judiciary (judicial review), Separation of powers, Elections (free and fair), Federalism — these are always in basic structure

• Prelims frequently asks which writ applies to which situation — practice scenario-based questions; Quo Warranto is the most tricky as it challenges usurpation of PUBLIC office only
• Mains GS-II often asks to evaluate the collegium system — always mention the NJAC verdict, MoP delays, and suggest reforms like a transparent merit-based process while maintaining judicial independence
• Article 142 has appeared in context questions — link it to Bhopal gas case, Babri Masjid land transfer to Ram Mandir Trust, and the debate on judicial overreach
• Recent PYQ pattern shows increasing questions on tribunals (National Green Tribunal, Armed Forces Tribunal) and their relationship with HC and SC jurisdiction — study Articles 323A and 323B
• For Mains, the All India Judicial Service debate (recommended by Law Commission, opposed by states) is a high-probability 10-marker — frame it around federalism vs judicial quality