Consider the following statements regarding the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts: 1. The writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is exclusive in nature. 2. Parliament may expand the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court beyond Fundamental Rights, by law. 3. The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. 4. An aggrieved citizen can directly approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Which of the statements given above are correct? |ForumIAS

[A] 1 and 2 only

[B] 2, 3 and 4 only

[C] 1, 3 and 4 only

[D] 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer: B

Notes:

Explanation:

The writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not exclusive; it is concurrent with High Courts. A citizen can approach either.
Parliament has the power to confer additional jurisdiction on the Supreme Court, including issuing writs for purposes beyond Fundamental Rights.
The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
An aggrieved citizen can directly approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.