Indian Polity & Constitution Quiz: Judicial System in India | 15th Jan, 2021

A person to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court should have the following qualifications:
1. He should be a citizen of India.
2. (A) He should have been a judge of a High Court (or high courts in succession) for five years; or (B) He should have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in succession) for ten years; or (C) He should be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the president.
From the above, it is clear that the Constitution has not prescribed a minimum age for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court.
Source: Laxmikanth

The concept of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) originated and developed in the USA in the 1960s.
•In the USA, it was designed to provide legal representation to previously unrepresented groups and interests.
•It was undertaken in recognition of the fact that the ordinary marketplace for legal services fails to provide such services to significant segments of the population and to significant interests.
Such groups and interests include the poor, environmentalists, consumers, racial and ethnic minorities, and others.
Source: Laxmikanth

Article 39A of the Constitution of India provides for free legal aid to the poor and weaker sections of the society and ensures justice for all.
•Articles 14 and 22(1) of the Constitution also make it obligatory for the State to ensure equality before law and a legal system which promotes justice on the basis of equal opportunity to all.
•In the year 1987, the Legal Services Authorities Ac was enacted by the Parliament which came into force on 9th November, 1995 to establish a nationwide uniform network for providing free and competent legal services to the weaker sections of the society on the basis of equal opportunity.
•The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is a statutory body that has been constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to monitor and evaluate implementation of legal aid programmes and to lay down policies and principles for making legal services available under the Act.
Source: Laxmikanth

Amid nationwide protests against the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, or CAA, 2019, and the threat of non-cooperation by some States with the Central government’s plan to update the National Population Register (NPR) and possibly establish a National Register of Indian Citizens, Kerala has filed a suit in the Supreme Court of India seeking to declare the CAA as unconstitutional.
•Meanwhile, Chhattisgarh has also filed a similar suit, challenging the constitutional validity of the National Investigation Agency Act.
•Both have invoked Article 131, which confers exclusive jurisdiction on the top court to adjudicate disputes between two or more States, or between States and the Centre.
•Article 131 confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Supreme Court in disputes involving States, or the Centre on the one hand and one or more States on the other. This means no other court can entertain such a dispute.
•It is well-known that both High Courts and the Supreme Court have the power to adjudicate cases against the State and Central governments.
•In particular, the validity of any executive or legislative action is normally challenged by way of writ petitions — under Article 226 of the Constitution in respect of High Courts, and, in respect to fundamental rights violations, under Article 32 in the Supreme Court.
Source: Laxmikanth

The Legal Services Authorities Act (1987) has established a nation-wide network to provide free and competent legal aid to the poor and to organize lok adalat for promoting equal justice.
•Lok adalat is a statutory forum for conciliatory settlement of legal disputes.
•It has been given the status of a civil court.
•Its awards are enforceable, binding on the parties and final as no appeal lies before any court against them.
Source: Laxmikanth

The Constitution (Article 76) has provided for the office of the Attorney General for India.
•He is the highest law officer in the country.
•The Attorney General (AG) is appointed by the president.
•He must be a person who is qualified to be appointed a judge of the Supreme Court.
•In other words, he must be a citizen of India and he must have been a judge of some high court for five years or an advocate of some high court for ten years or an eminent jurist, in the opinion of the president.
Source: Laxmikanth

The Indian Constitution has established an integrated judicial system with the Supreme Court at the top and the high court’s below it.
•Under a high court (and below the state level), there is a hierarchy of subordinate courts, that is, district courts and other lower courts.
•This single system of courts, adopted from the Government of India Act of 1935, enforces both Central laws as well as the state laws.
Source: Laxmikanth

As a federal court, the Supreme Court decides the disputes between different units of the Indian Federation. More elaborately, any dispute:
•Between the Centre and one or more states; or
•Between the Centre and any state or states on one side and one or more other states on the other side; or
•Between two or more states.
Source: Laxmikanth

As mentioned earlier, the Supreme Court has not only succeeded the Federal Court of India but also replaced the British Privy Council as the highest court of appeal.
The Supreme Court is primarily a court of appeal and hears appeals against the judgments of the lower courts.
It enjoys a wide appellate jurisdiction which can be classified under four heads:
•Appeals in constitutional matters.
•Appeals in civil matters.
•Appeals in criminal matters.
•Appeals by special leave.
Source: Laxmikanth

The Constitution (Article 143) authorises the president to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court in the two categories of matters:
•On any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen or which is likely to arise.
•On any dispute arising out of any pre-constitution treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad or other similar instruments.
Source: Laxmikanth