RBSE Class 11 Political Science Important Questions Chapter 6 Judiciary

Rajasthan Board RBSE Class 11 Political Science Important Questions Chapter 6 Judiciary Important Questions and Answers. 

RBSE Class 11 Political Science Important Questions Chapter 6 Judiciary

Very Short Answer Type Questions

Question 1. 
Which is the apex court in India?
Answer: 
The Supreme Court

 

Question 2. 
Where is the Supreme Court situated? 
Answer: 
The Supreme Court is situated at New Delhi. 

Question 3. 
Who was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court?
Answer: 
Ms. Meera Sahib Fatima Bibi was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court.

Question 4.
Can the cases of Fundamental Rights be directly taken to the Supreme Court?
Answer: 
Yes, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction regarding Fundamental Rights.
 
Question 5. 
What is Judicial Review?
Answer: 
It means that the court is the guardian of the Constitution and it can declare any law or executive order to be unconstitutional if it is violative of the constitutional provisions.

Question 6. 
Can any judge of the Supreme Court do legal practice after his retirement?
Answer: 
No, the judge of the Supreme Court cannot do legal practice after his retirement.

Fill in the blanks:

Question 7. 
The ............ of the Supreme Court can be removed through impeachment.
Answer: 
Judges.
Correct and rewrite the sentence:

Question 8. 
The judges of the Supreme Court get a monthly salary of? 1,50,000.
Answer: 
The judges of the Supreme Court get a monthly salary of? 2,50,000.
Complete the sentence:

Question 9. 
There is Judicial Review system in  .
Answer: 
There is Judicial Review system in the Indian Constitution.

Question 10. 
Who said, "There is no better test of the excellence of a government than the efficiency of its judicial system"?
Answer: 
Lord Bryce

Multiple-Choice Questions

Choose the Correct Answers:
1. The Supreme Court consists of one Chief Justice and:
(a) 13 other judges 
(b) 25 other judges
(c) 20 other judges 
(d) 33 other judges
Answer: 
(d)

2. The judges of the Supreme Court of India retire at the age of:
(a) 62 years 
(b) 65 years
(c) 60 years 
(d) 50 years
Answer: 
(b) 65 years

3. The number of judges of the Supreme Court is fixed by:
(a) Parliament 
(b) Prime Minister
(c) President 
(d) Cabinet
Answer:
(a) Parliament 

4. The Supreme Court sits at:
(a) Chandigarh 
(b) Delhi
(c) Kolkata 
(d) Shimla
Answer: 
(b) Delhi

5. The salary of the Chief Justice of India is:
(a)? 90,000 
(b)? 2,80,000
(c)? 70,000 
(d)? 80,000
Answer: 
(b)? 2,80,000

Short Answer Type Questions

Question 1. 
What is Judiciary?
Answer: 
Judiciary is the third organ of the government. Without Judiciary, there can be no State worth the names. Its function is to do justice. The Judiciary decides disputes between the citizens and between the state and citizen. The Judiciary has the duty to punish all those people who break the law.

Question 2. 
Which method do you think is the best for the appointment of judges?
Answer: 
Among the various methods of appointment of judges, appointment by the executive is the most common and most satisfactory method for the choice of the judges. It prevails in Great Britain dominions as well as the federal government of the U.S.A., some states of the U.S.A. and in India also. Though political considerations play a part in making the selection, once appointed, the judges are independent and are not under the influence of the executive. This method makes way for the independence of the judiciary.

Question 3. 
Explain two functions of Judiciary.
And. 
(a) Decision of Disputes: The main function of the judiciary is to decide disputes of the citizens. It decides all those cases which are brought before it. The cases which come before the judges are normally of two kinds-civil and criminal.

(b) Interpretation of Laws: The judiciary interprets the laws and interpretation given by the judiciary is final.

Question 4. 
What is the meaning of Independence of Judiciary?
Answer: 
Independence of Judiciary means that it should be efficient, honest and not under the control of the executive or the legislature. The judges should be free to decide cases according to law in a bold and fearless manner. He should be granted independence of judicial tenure so that he should be able to administer justice with impartiality and according to the law.

Question 5. 
Mention any two factors for the independence of judiciary.
Answer: 
(a) Appointment of judges: Appointment of judges should be on merit basis.
(b) Separation from the Executive: The judiciary should be kept free from the influence of the executive.
 
Question 6. 
What are the qualifications of the judge of the Supreme Court?
Answer: 
A candidate for appointment as judge of the Supreme Court must fulfil the following qualifications:
(a) He must be a citizen of India.
(b) He must have been a judge of the High Court for five years.
(c) He must have been an advocate of one or more High Courts for ten years.
('d) If in the opinion of the President, he is a distinguished jurist.

Question 7. 
Mention four functions of the Supreme Court of India.
Answer: 
(a) The Supreme Court decides election disputes of the President and Vice-President.
(b) The Supreme Court exercises advisory functions.
(c) The Supreme Court is the court of record.
(d) The Supreme Court has original and appellate jurisdiction.

Question 8. 
What are the advisory powers to the Supreme Court?
Answer: 
Article 143 provides that if any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen or is likely to arise which is of public importance he may refer the question to the Supreme Court for consideration and opinion. The opinion of the Supreme Court is not binding on the President.

Question 9. 
Enumerate the miscellaneous powers of the Supreme Court.
Answer: 
(a) The Supreme Court has the power to inspect and supervise the working of the subordinate courts.
(b) Election petition of the Presidential and Vice- Presidential elections are filed directly in the Supreme Court.
(c) The Supreme Court has the power to hear cases relating to Income Tax Act, Custom Act, etc.

Question 10. 
State the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. (Imp.)
Answer: 
Cases relating to the following matters are brought directly to the Supreme Court:
(a) Disputes between the Union and one or more states regarding the division of powers or any Constitutional dispute
(b) Disputes between states
(c) Cases relating to Fundamental Rights
(d) Cases involving a point of law, i.e., where interpretation of the Constitution is involved 

Question 11. 
Mention the various writs which the Supreme Court can issue for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
Answer: 
For the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court can issue the following direction or order or writs:
(a) The Writ of Habeas Corpus
(b) The Writ of Mandamus
(c) The Writ of Quo-Warranto
(d) The Writ of Prohibition
(e) The Writ of Certiorari

Question 12. 
What steps have been taken to make the Judiciary independent in India?
Answer: 
(a) In India, the method of the appointment of the judges is devised in such a way that only able persons can become the judges.
(b) The judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are given a very good salary.
(c) The judges are kept in service for a pretty long period.
(d) Legal qualifications have been prescribed to become the judges of the Supreme Court and the High Court.
(e) Judiciary has been given vast powers in India.

Question 13. 
How are the judges of the High Court appointed? (Imp.)
Answer: 
All the judges of the High Court, including the Chief Justice, are appointed by the President of India. While appointing the Chief Justice of High Court, the President is required to consult the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the State. But when appointing the other judges of a High Court, the Chief Justice of India is required to consult two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court.

Question 14. 
Mention the qualifications of the judges of the State High Court.
Answer: 
(a) He must be a citizen of India.
(b) He has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least ten years or,
(c) He has been an advocate of one or more High Courts for at least ten years.

Question 15. 
Write down the Original Jurisdiction of the High Court.
Answer: 
(a) Cases regarding Fundamental Rights
(b) Cases relating to the subjects like will, contempt of Court, divorce, etc.
(c) Cases regarding the interpretation of the Constitution

Question 16. 
Describe two administrative powers of the High Court.
Answer: 
(a) The High Court can make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts.
(b) The High Court can prescribe the form in which book entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any court.

Question 17. 
Mention any two problems in the way of speedy justice.
Answer: 
1. Complicated Procedure: Due to
complicated procedure, justice is delayed. Complicated judicial procedure is a big problem in the way of speedy and cheap justice.

2. Justice is Expensive: In India, justice is very costly. It is very difficult for a poor man to get justice from the court. Very high fee is demanded by the lawyers and there are various other expenses which a poor man cannot afford.

Question 18. 
What do you mean by ‘Judicial-Over Reach’?
Answer: 
Judicial-over reach means, when Judiciary starts interferring with the proper functioning of the legislative or executive organs of the government. In other words, when the Judiciary crosses its own functions and enter the executive and legislative functions. Unfettered use of article 142 explains that the Judiciary is right in playing a more active role, however it should restrain itself from entering into explicit executive domain.

Short Answer Type Questions

Question 1. 
Why do we need independent judiciary?
Answer: 
Judiciary is an important organ of government. It played important role to secure liberty, right and democracy.
Judiciary is the third organ of the government. Without Judiciary, there can be no State worth the names. Its function is to do justice. The Judiciary decides disputes between the citizens and between the state and citizen. The Judiciary has the duty to punish all those people who break the law. Need of Independent judiciary Independence of judiciary is essential to maintain the impartiality of judges. The judges can perform their duties fearlessly only in the atmosphere of independence. Only independent judiciary can provide fair and speedy justice. It is an independent judiciary alone which can secure the Fundamental Rights of the citizens granted by the Constitution. 

Question 2. 
Match the following:

(a) Dispute between State of Bihar and Union of India will be heard by	(i) High Court
(b) Appeal from District Court of Haryana will go	(ii) Advisory Jurisdiction
(c) Single Integrated Judiciary	(iii) Judicial review
(d) Declaring a law unconstitutional	(iv) Original Jurisdiction Supreme Court
	(v) Single Constitution

Answer:

(a) Dispute between State of Bihar and Union of India will be heard by	(v) Single Constitution
(b) Appeal from District Court of Haryana will go	(i) High Court
(c) Single Integrated Judiciary	(iv) Original Jurisdiction Supreme Court
(d) Declaring a law unconstitutional	(iii) Judicial review

Question 3.
Describe the composition of the Supreme Court.
Answer: 
At the time of the commencement of the Constitution, the Supreme Court consisted of eight judges including the Chief Justice. In 1956, the maximum number of judges was raised to eleven, including the Chief Justice. This number was again raised in 1960 to fourteen including the Chief Justice. In April 1986, the number of judges was increased from 17 to 25. In July 2019, the number of judges was again increased from 30 to 33. Thus, at present, the Supreme Court consists of one Chief Justice and 33 other judges. Article 127 (I) makes provision for the appointment of ad hoc judges also.

Question 4. 
How are the judges of the Supreme Court appointed?
Answer: 
The Chief Justice of India is appointed by the President in consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as he may deem fit. In the appointment of other judges of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India must be consulted by the President. In a landmark order on 28 October 1998, the Supreme Court observed that the recommendation made by the Chief Justice of India should have the sole power to recommend appointments through consensus. Widening the scope of the consultation process, the Supreme Court said with regard to the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India should consult a collegium of four senior most judges of the Supreme Court and made it clear that even if two judges give an adverse opinion, the Chief Justice should not send the recommendations.

Question 5. 
Mention the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Answer: 
The Supreme Court has three types of Jurisdiction.
(a) Original Jurisdiction: Original jurisdiction means cases which start in the Supreme Court and regarding which the Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction.

(b) Appellate Jurisdiction: The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be divided into three main parts-Constitutional, Civil and Criminal.

(c) Advisory Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court has the power to advise the President on legal matters but the advice of the Supreme Court is not binding on the President.

Question 6. 
What are the three types of Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court? Explain its original jurisdiction.
Answer: 
Three types of jurisdiction of the Supreme Court: See Question No. 5.
Original Jurisdiction: Cases relating to the following matters are brought directly to the Supreme Court:
(a) Disputes between the Union and one or more states regarding the division of power or any Constitutional dispute
(b) Disputes between states
(c) Cases relating to Fundamental Rights
(d) Cases involving a point of law, i.e., where interpretation of the Constitution is involved

Question 7. 
State the appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Answer: 
The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction on the decision of the High Courts and those of other tribunals. The Appellate jurisdiction has two aspects
(a) Cases involving interpretation of the Constitution
(b) Review of judgements and decrees

(a) Cases involving interpretation of the Constitution:
An appeal can be made to the Supreme Court from any judgements, decree or final order of a High Court of India whether in a civil, criminal of other proceeding, if the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. There are three types of Constitutional disputes as follow:

• Civil disputes, 
• Criminal disputes, 
•  Special disputes.

(b) Review of judgement and decrees. The Supreme Court can review its own judgement or decrees given earlier.

Question 8. 
Write a short note on the Supreme Court’s power of Judicial Review,
Answer: 
The Supreme Court is the guardian and final interpreter of the Constitution. The Supreme 
Court is vested with the power of Judicial review. It is the power of the Supreme Court to declare any law null and void if that law violates the Constitution. It is the Supreme Court which by its Judicial review will decide whether a law in connection with the Fundamental Right is void or not. The Supreme Court has the power of Judicial review where a citizen moves for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights.

Under Article 32, when the court is so moved, it will have to decide whether legislation or executive action of the Union or of a state violates a Fundamental Right and if so, it will issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo- Warranto and Certiorari, whichever may be appropriate for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this part.

Question 9. 
Explain four functions of the Supreme Court.
Answer: 
The following are the four main functions of the Supreme Court:
(а) Original Jurisdiction: Original jurisdiction means cases which start in the Supreme Court and regarding which the Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction.

(b) Appellate Jurisdiction: The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be divided into three main parts, i.e., constitutional, civil and criminal.

(c) Advisory Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court has the power to advise the President on legal matters but the advice of the Supreme Court is not binding on the President.

(d) Protection of Fundamental Rights: The Supreme Court is empowered to protect the Fundamental Rights.

Question 10. 
Describe the composition of the High Court.
Answer: 
There is a Chief Justice and some other judges in a High Court. Their number is not fixed. The President decides the number from time to time. The Chief Justice and other judges of the High Court are appointed by the President. But in doing so, he consults the Governor of the State and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. If the High Court has surplus work or its work has been increased temporarily, the President can appoint additional judges on ad hoc basis for a period of two years. If a judge abstains for a long time or is incapable of his work, the President can appoint an acting judge in his place.

Question 11. 
What do you understand by the term Judicial Review?
Answer:
The essence of Judicial Review is the competence of a Court of law to declare the constitutionality or otherwise of a legislative enactment. Judicial Review means the power of the courts to review the acts and other orders of the legislative and executive wings of the government and to declare them, when challenged by the affected person, null and void if they are against the provision of the Constitution. According to Dimock, “Judicial review is the examination by the Court in case actually before them, of legislative states and executives or administrative acts to determine whether or not they are prohibited by a written Constitution or are excess of power granted it.”

Question 12. 
What are the weakness in the Indian Judicial System?
Answer: 
(a) Jurisdiction is over-burdened with Cases: In India, Judiciary is over-burdened with cases. The number of cases are increasing day-by¬day. Thousands of cases are pending in the Supreme Court and the High Courts which have not been heard for the last ten years or so. Hence, justice is delayed.

(b) Complicated Procedure: Due to complicated judicial procedure, justice is delayed. Sometimes, the judge is on leave and sometime, the lawyer is absent. Many times, long dates are taken simply to delay the case. Complicated judicial procedure is a big problem in the way of speedy and cheap justice.

(c) Justice is Expensive: In India, justice is very costly. It is very difficult for a poor man to get justice from the court. Very high fee is demanded by the lawyer and there are various other expenses which a poor man cannot afford.

Long Answer Type Questions

Composition of the Supreme Court of India

Question 1. 
Describe the composition of the Supreme Court of India. 
Answer: 
The Supreme Court established under the Indian Constitution (Art. 124) is the highest Judicial authority in the country. It stands at the apex of our Judicial system which is an integrated one. All the courts even those functioning in the states of India, are subjected to the authority and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Courts in India administer both the Federal laws as well as the State laws. Hence, Judiciary in India is unified.

Composition of the Supreme Court: At the time of the commencement of the Constitution, the Supreme Court consisted of eight judges, including the Chief Justice, But Article 124 empowers the Parliament to determine and raise the number of judges. In April 1986, the number of judges was increased from 17 to 25. In July 2019, the number of judges was increased from 30 to 33. Thus, at present, the Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice and 33 other judges.

Ad hoc judges: Article 127(1) makes provision for the appointment of ad hoc judges also. Ad hoc judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of India with the prior consent of the President from among the judges of any High Court duly qualified to be a judge of the Supreme Court for such period as may be necessary. Appointment of Retired judges: The Constitution of India also provides for the appointment of retired judges of the Supreme Court or the Federal Court, with the prior consent of the President and his consent, on a request being made by the Chief Justice of India to sit and act as a judge of the Supreme Court at any time. 

Appointment of the judges: The Chief Justice of India is appointed by the President in consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as he may deem fit. In the appointment of other judges of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India must be consulted by the President. On 28 October 1998, in a significant unanimous order, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that recommendations made by the Chief Justice of India on the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court without following the consultation process was not binding on the government. The consultation process to be adopted by the Chief Justice requires consultation of four senior most judges of the Supreme Court. Qualifications for appointment of judges: A candidate for the appointment as a judge of the Supreme 

Court must fulfil the following qualifications:

1. He should be a citizen of India.
2. He must have been a judge of one or more High Courts for five successive years or must have been an advocate of one or more High Courts for ten successive years.
3. If in the opinion of the President, he is a distinguished jurist. 

Term of office: judges of the Supreme Court hold office till they complete the age of 65 years. In case of any discrepancies about the age of a judge, the decision of the President shall be final. A judge may resign his office by writing to that effect to the President before the completion of his tenure. On 13 January 1983, Mr. Justice Baharul Islam resigned as a judge of the Supreme Court. The judge can be removed from office by the President after an address of each House and by a majority of not less than two-thirds of the members of that House present and voting has been presented to the President, in the same session for such removal on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. 

On 11 May 1993, the first-ever impeachment motion against a Supreme Court judge failed in the Lok Sabha when the opposition sponsored move for removal of Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami could not be carried for want of requisite majority after the ruling Congress enbloc abstained from voting. Salaries and Allowances of judges: The Chief Justice gets a salary of? 2,80,000 per month and the other apex court judges get? 2,50,000 per month. Every judge of the Supreme Court is entitled without payment of rent to the use of an official residence. The judges are also allotted travelling allowances when they undertake journey for the performance of their official duties. 

The salaries and allowances of the judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India and accordingly, are not subjected to the vote of the Parliament. Neither the privilege nor the allowances of a judge nor his rights in respect of leave or absence or pension shall be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment. The salaries and allowances of the judges can be reduced by the President during continuance of a Proclamation of Financial emergency. The Constitution, thus guarantees to the judges both security of service and emoluments. Prohibition of practice after retirement: 

The retired judges of the Supreme Court are debarred from pleading before any court in India. Even if a judge resigns, he is debarred from pleading. However, the retired judges can be invited to act as judges of the Supreme Court for some particular business or period of time. No retired judge of the Supreme Court can be asked to act as a judge of the Supreme Court without his consent. Such judges get allowances and not salary. Their allowances are determined by the President. Oath: On assuming office, each judge of the Supreme Court has to make and subscribe before the President or before any person appointed by the President for the purpose to an oath or affirmation according to a set form.

Immunities of judges: In order to further safeguard the independence of judiciary, the Constitution provides that there can be no discussion in the Parliament on the conduct of a judge in the discharge of his official duties nor can the actions and decisions of the judges in their official capacity be subjected to criticism so as to impute motive of any kind. Seat of the Supreme Court: The Supreme Court sits in Delhi. It can also sit at any other place or places as the Chief Justice of India may appoint from time to time with the approval of the President. Under this Article, the Supreme Court had held its sessions at Hyderabad and Srinagar. Jurisdiction and Functions of the Supreme Court

Question 2. 
Discuss in brief the powers of the Supreme Court of India.
Or
Discuss the powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India.
Answer: 
The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land. It has been vested with wider jurisdiction than other superior courts in any part of the world. According to Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, “The Supreme Court in the Indian Union has more powers than any Supreme Court in any part of the world.” The jurisdiction of the court may be divided into three categories—Original, Appellate and Advisory.

1. Original Jurisdiction: Original jurisdiction means cases which start in the Supreme Court and regarding which the Supreme Court has the exclusive jurisdiction. The Constitution of India divides powers between Centre and States. Howsoever neatly the powers between the two may have been distributed, there are always possibilities of doubt and dispute. New situations demand new interpretations. Thus, the Supreme Court decides cases 
(a) between the Government of India and one or more states 
(b) between the Government of India and any one state or states on one side and one or more other state on the other or
(c) between two or more states.

It should be noted that the Supreme Court can entertain such cases only if the disputes involve any questions, whether of law or fact, on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Where the claim made by one of the parties is not dependent on law but on legal considerations, the Supreme Court has no original jurisdiction. Enforcement of Fundamental Rights: The Constitution makes the Supreme Court the ultimate guardian of the Fundamental Rights and liberties of the people. Rights of the people have no meaning if they are not backed and upheld by judiciary. It is both  the jurisdiction as well as the responsibility of the Supreme Court to issue orders, directions and Writs of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo-warranto and Certiorari or any of them for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. 

However, this jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is not exclusive. State High Courts have also been given similar powers. To decide election disputes of the President and the Vice-President: The Supreme Court is also empowered to decide any dispute relating to the election of the President or the Vice-President of India and in this regard, the Supreme Court's decision is final and binding. In 1967, election of Dr. Zakir Hussain and in 1969, the election of President V.V. Giri was challenged in the Supreme Court. The Court decided that the election was valid.

2. Appellate Jurisdiction: The Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be divided into three main parts, i.e., Constitutional, Civil and Criminal.
(а) Appeal in Constitutional Cases: Article 132(1) provides that an appeal shall he to the Supreme Court from any judgement, decree or final order of a High Court in India whether in a civil, criminal or order proceeding, if the High Court certifies that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. Even if the High Court refuses to give such a certificate, the Supreme Court can grant special leave to appeal if the court is satisfied that the case involves a substantive question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.

(b) Appeals in Civil Cases: With regard to appeals in Civil cases, the 30th Amendment 1972 has brought significant changes. Prior to the 30th Amendment, appeal to the Supreme Court in civil proceeding against a judgement, decree or final order of a High Court certified that amount or value of the subject matter of the dispute was not less than t 20,000. The 30th Amendment seeks to do away with the monetary limits for invoking the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The amendment provides for the right to appeal to the Supreme Court on any judgement of a High Court if the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance and if in the opinion of the High Court, the said question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

(c) Appeal in Criminal Cases: With regard to criminal cases, Article 134 provides that an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgement, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court if,
(1) the High Court has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death,

(2) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death or,

(3) certifies that the case is fit for appeal to the Supreme Court. Under the Constitution, the Parliament may, by law, widen still further the criminal jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 44th Amendment inserts a new Article 134-A which provides that the High Court should consider the question of granting of certificate immediately on the delivery of the judgement, decree, final order, or sentence concerned on the basis of an oral application by a party or, if the High Court deems it fit to do so, on its own motion.

(d) Special Leave to Appeal: Article 136 of the Constitution vests the Supreme Court with a power which is utmost important. It provides that the Supreme Court may, in its directions, grant special leave to appeal from any judgement, decree determination, sentence or order in an}r cause or matter passed or made by any Court of Tribunal in the territory of India. The only exception to this all embracing power of judicial superintendence is the decisions of any court constituted under any law relating to the Armed Court can grant special leave to appeal even if the High Court has refused to grant certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court.

3. Advisory Jurisdiction: Under Article 143 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court exercises advisory or consultative functions also. Art. 143 provides that if at any time it appears to the President that a question of law or fact has arisen or is likely to arise which is of public importance, he may refer the question to the Supreme Court for consideration and opinion. Such a question is heard by a Bench consisting of at least five judges and the court follows the procedure of an ordinary trial. The majority opinion is sent to the President. The judges can hold dissenting opinion as well. The opinion of the Supreme Court is not binding on the President as it is not of the nature of a judicial pronouncement, nor is it obligatory for the Supreme Court to give its opinion.

4. Interpretation and Protection of the Constitution: The Constitution of India has placed this responsibility of interpreting the Constitution on the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court is the final authority to expound the meaning and intent of the Constitution. Likewise, it is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution. There are many instances where the Supreme Court exercised its power of judicial review. In 1967, in Golak Nath’s Case, the Supreme Court declared that the Parliament has no power to amend the provision of Fundamental Rights. The 24th and 25th Amendments were challenged by Kesavananda Bharati and others. 

In this case, the Supreme Court reversed its earlier decision of Golak Nath’s Case and gave the Parliament the power to amend the Fundamental Rights. On 9 May 1980, the Supreme Court struck down Section 55 of the 42nd Amendment Act 1976 which gave unlimited powers to the Parliament to amend the Constitution. The Supreme Court also struck down Section 4 of the 42nd Amendment Act amending Article 31-C giving primacy to Directive Principles of State Policy over Fundamental Rights.

5. Court of Record: The Supreme Court is the Court of record. The significance of a court of record is twofold: First, the records of the Supreme Court are admitted to be of evidentiary value and are not questioned when they are produced before any court, Secondly, it has the power to fine and imprison for contempt of its authority.

6. Power Regarding Transference of Cases: The Supreme Court is also empowered to transfer any case, appeal or other proceedings pending before any High Court to any other High Court.

7. Power to Review its Decisions: The Supreme Court has the power to review its own decisions. In other words, the Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions. Any such review is undertaken by a larger bench than the one which passed the original judgement. The Supreme Court's power to review its earlier decisions helps to correct any decision which may be erroneous. In 1971, in the case of Kesavananda Bharati, the Supreme Court reversed its judgement of Golak Nath's Case and gave the Parliament the power to amend the Fundamental Rights but the Parliament has no power to change the basic structure of the Constitution.

8. Miscellaneous Functions: The Supreme Court performs some miscellaneous functions also. They are as follows: 
(i) The Supreme Court is the highest court of the land. It has the power to inspect and supervise the working of the subordinate courts. It can also make rules for their efficient working.

(ii) The Supreme Court can also make rules for the persons practising before the court.

(iii) The Supreme Court can make rules for the maintenance of records by the lower courts.

(iv) The Supreme Court has the power to initiate contempt proceeding against any alleged offender indulging in malicious and tendentious criticism. It can fine and imprison anybody for contempt of its authority.

(v) For the enforcement of its decrees and orders, the Supreme Court can issue appropriate directions. It is the constitutional duty of all the civil and Judicial authorities in the territory of India to act in aid of the Supreme Court.

Position of the Supreme Court in India: 
The powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India, if not wider than the jurisdiction of the Supreme Courts of other countries of the world, is not lesser than the powers of the Supreme Courts of other countries of the world. In the words of Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar, “The Supreme Court in the Indian Union has more powers than any other Supreme Court in any part of the world.” The Supreme Court of India has been given vast powers by the Constitution. The decisions of the Supreme Court are binding on all the courts, and on all the authorities Central as well as States.

The Supreme Court can set aside any law or executive order which encroaches upon the rights of the people. In this way, the Supreme Court holds Executive and Legislature in check. While interpreting the Constitution and laws, the Supreme Court, in an indirect manner, makes new laws. In December 1982, the Supreme Court upheld the rights of the workers to be heard in the winding up proceedings of a Company. The Supreme Court's verdict breaks new ground in the history of Jurisprudence in this country in as much as it seeks to interpret old laws in the context of the new social and political milieu.

Commenting upon the role of the Supreme Court, Sir Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar said, “The future evolution of the Indian Constitution will thus depend to a large extent upon the work of the Supreme Court and the direction given to it by that Court.” In the words of M.V. Pylee: “The combination of such wide and varied powers in the Supreme Court of India makes it not only the supreme authority in the judicial field but also the guardian of the Constitution and law of the land.” Surely, the powers of the Supreme Court are wide and formidable. Composition and Jurisdiction of High Courts

Question 3. 
Describe the composition, jurisdiction and powers of the High Court.
Answer: 
The Constitution of India provides for a High Court in each state. However, the Parliament by law can provide a common High Court for two or more states. At present, the states of Punjab and Haryana have the common High Court known as the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The states of Assam, Nagaland, Meghalaya, Manipur and Tripura have also a common High Court. The High Court is the highest Court of the state. All other courts and tribunals working in a state are subjected to the authority of the High Court. Composition: Each High Court consists of a Chief Justice and such other judges as the President may from time to time, deem it necessary to appoint. 

It means that the number of judges in the State High Courts is neither uniform nor fixed. The total strength of the State High Courts has been left to the will of the President. He can appoint as many judges of a High Court as he deems necessary. Besides the regular judges, the President may also appoint additional judges for a period not exceeding two years in order to clear the arrears of work. A duly qualified person may be appointed by the President as an acting judge when a permanent judge is absent from the duties of his office or is acting as a Chief Justice. 

Appointment of the judges: All the judges of a High Court, including the Chief Justice are appointed by the President of India. While appointing the Chief Justice and other judges of a High Court, the President is required to consult the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the State. On 28 October 1998 in a significant unanimous order, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that recommendations made by the Chief Justice of India on the appointments of judges to the High Courts without following the consultation process was not binding on the government.

The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is required to consult two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court Bench stated, “Merit should be the predominant factor while making any recommendation for appointment as judges and that seniority above should not be the criteria.”

Chief Justice from other States: In July 1986, the Supreme Court recommended to the Government to appoint the Chief Justice of the High Courts from other states. Law Commission also makes this recommendation to the Government. Hence, the Chief Justice of High Courts are appointed from other states. Appointment of Additional judges: The President may appoint additional judges for a period not exceeding two years in order to clear the arrears of work.

Appointment of Acting judges: A duly qualified person may be appointed by the President as an Acting judge when a permanent judge is absent from the duties of his office or is acting as a Chief Justice. Appointment of Acting Chief Justice: If the office of the Chief Justice of High Court falls vacant temporarily due to some reasons, the President can appoint any judge of the High Court as an Acting Justice.
Qualifications for Appointment: No one can be appointed as a judge of the High Court, unless:

1. he is a citizen of India.
2. he has held a judicial office in the territory of India for at least ten years; or
3. he has been an advocate of one or more High Courts for at least ten years.

Terms of office: Judges of the High Courts retire at the age of 62. Judges can resign office earlier by writing to that effect to the President of India. The President can remove a judge from office on the ground of proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The procedure of removal is similar to the one used in the removal of a Supreme Court judge.
Jurisdiction of High Court.
Or
Power and Functions of High Court.
A State High Court has to perform various functions and has various powers. Besides the administration of justice, they perform administrative functions as well. Since all the courts working in the State are subjected to the authority of the State High Court, hence, the administrative functions of the High Court. The powers and functions of a High Court may be divided into two parts:
I. Judicial Powers.
II. Administrative Powers.

I. Judicial Powers: The main responsibility of a State High Court is to administer justice. The jurisdiction of the various High Courts under the Constitution is the same as it was before the commencement of the Constitution. This is, however, subjected to the provision of the Constitution and any future law that is to be made by the appropriate legislature. The jurisdiction of the High Court may be discussed as follows:
 
(1) Original Jurisdiction:
The original jurisdiction of the State High Court is limited.
(a) Under Article 226, every High Court has been empowered to issue writs, orders, directions including writs in the nature of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo-Warranto and Certiorari or any of them to any person or authority within its territory for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose.

(b) The original jurisdiction of the State High Courts also extends to matters of admiralty, probate, matrimonial, contempt of court and cases ordered to be transferred from a lower court involving the interpretation of the Constitution to its own file.

(c) The High Courts of Kolkata, Chennai and Mumbai exercise original civil jurisdictions when the amount involved is more than? 2000. In criminal cases, it extends to cases committed to them by Presidency Magistrates.

(d) The High Courts of Kolkata, Mumbai and Chennai have the original jurisdiction as they had before the enforcement of the new Constitution on hearing straight way cases involving the Christians and the Parsis.
(e) Election disputes can also be taken to the High Courts.

(2) Appellate Jurisdiction:
The Appellate Jurisdiction of the High Court extends to both civil and criminal cases.

(a) The High Court can hear appeals in civil cases, if the amount involved in the case is at least? 5000 or the dispute involves a property of that amount.

(b) The High Court can hear appeals in criminal cases in which the accused has been sentenced to four years imprisonment by the Session Judge.

(c) The Session judge of a district can award death sentence in criminal cases. But such a sentence is subjected to the approval of the High Court.

(d) The High Court can hear appeals against the
decisions of the lower courts in most of the revenue cases also. *

(e) Any case involving the interpretation of the Constitution or law is brought to the High Court in appeal.

(f) Appeal in cases of income tax, sales tax, etc. can be heard by the High Court.

(3) Judicial Review:
Like the Supreme Court of India, the State High Courts have also been vested with the power of Judicial Review. State High Court can strike down any law of the State or any order of the executive if it violates any provision of the
Constitution or curtails or takes away any of the Fundamental Rights of the people.

(4) Interpretation of the Constitution:
If the High Court feels that a case under consideration of a subordinate court involves an important question regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, it can withdraw a case from the subordinate court. Then the High Court interprets the Constitution and can decide the case or can send back the case to the subordinate court for the decision in the light of the interpretation of the High Court.

(5) Court of Record:
Like the Supreme Court of India, the State High Courts are also the Courts of Record. As a Court of Record, the State High Court has all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself. The records of such a court are admitted to be of evidentiary value and they cannot be questioned when produced before any court. Neither the Supreme Court nor the Legislature can deprive a High Court of its power of punishing a contempt for itself.

II. Administrative Powers: 
The High Court has also to perform many administrative functions within its territorial jurisdiction. The administrative powers of the High Court are as follows:
(1) Except the Military Tribunals, all other courts and tribunals working within the jurisdiction of the High Courts are subjected to the superintendence and control of the High Court.

(2) The High Court can make and issue general rules and prescribe forms for regulating the practice and proceedings of such courts.

(3) The High Court can prescribe the form in which book entries and accounts shall be kept by the officers of any court.

(4) The High Court has the power to call for returns from such courts.

(5) It is the responsibility of the High Court to see that the inferior court or tribunal exercises its jurisdiction in accordance with the provisions of laws which it has to administer.

(6) According to Article 228, if the High Court is satisfied that a case pending in a court subordinate to it involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, it is empowered to withdraw the said case to itself and may either dispose of the case itself or determine the said question of law and return the case to the Court concerned along with a copy of its judgement on that point.

(7) The High Court may transfer a case from one court to another court, if it deems necessary and in the interest of justice.

(8) The High Court can determine the salary, allowances and other conditions of service of the staff of the subordinate courts.

(9) The High Court has the power to make rules for the promotion, leave, pension and other allowances of the judges of subordinate courts.

(10) The High Court is consulted by the Governor of a state when the latter appoints and promotes district judges.

Position of the High Court: 
In the administration of justice, the role of the High Court is as vital as that of the Supreme Court. The High Court is the highest court of a state. All other courts and tribunals (except Military Tribunals) in the territory of a state are subjected to the super-intendence and control of the state High Court. Though the High Courts function in states, yet they are free and independent from the control of the state Governments. Neither in their composition nor in their salaries, allowances, pension and other conditions of service, do they depend on State Governments.

Judges of the High Court are appointed by the President in consultation with the Governors of the states and it should not be forgotten that State Governors are also appointed by the President. Then the High Courts are under authority of the Supreme Court. Every effort has been made to make the Judiciary independent and impartial. It is gratifying to note that the High Courts have not bellied the expectations of the framers of the Constitution.

Question 4. 
What do you mean by Judicial Activism? Write down its main devices.
Answer: 
During the last few years Judicial Activism have become an important feature of the Indian Judicial system. The area of Judicial intervention has been expanding through the devices of Public Interest Litigation and enforcement of Human Rights. Earlier the Judiciary used to examine the Constitutionality of the Act, but these days, judiciary also provides dictions-how to make an act, how to protect environment, where to dump garbage, how best Cauvery water can be used, how the governor should exercise his discretionary power etc.

This is what is described as Judicial Activism. According to former judge of the Supreme Court. Justice P.B. Sawant, “In short, exceeding the constitutional brief of interpreting and applying the law as it is and taking over executive and legislative functions in violation of the constitutional scheme of the separation of powers.” 

Causes of the Origin of Judicial Activism:
Problems relating to environment, pollution and natural resources of the nation, which have been tabled on a priority by the Parliament and executive are brought up through PIL before the Supreme Court and High Courts. In fact, lack of proper governance, non-governance and miss governance are probably more responsible for growing Judicial Activism.

Delivering Dr. Zakir Hussain Memorial Lecture in 1997, Former Chief Justice of India, Mr. A.M. Ahmadi asserted that judicial activism might be seen as a transient phase responding to the peculiar needs of the nation. According to former Justice, Krishna Iyer, the Judiciary is trying to reach where either the government has failed or has been indifferent. Judicial activism has been an important instrument for developing the law and to make its broad and general rules applicable to an ever-changing society.

According to Atul Setalvad, ‘Judicial Activism has in a way been forced on the courts, faced as they have been with mala fide and motivated actions by politicians and by the failure of the executive to enforce laws which Parliament has enacted. Though bonded labour was declared illegal, the government not only did little to enforce the law but its own agencies employed bonded labour, laws protecting the environment were passed but then, neglected. Somebody had to do something and the courts stepped in the fields. Where they would have had to role to play had the administration enforced.
The first major case of judicial activism through social action litigation was the Bihar Undertrial Case. 

After that, one finds number of cases identifying Judicial Activism by way of attainment of social justice, failure of executive to enforce laws, to enforce human rights, etc. Devices of Judicial Activism According to former Justice of the Supreme Court, Mr. P.B. Sawant, “Judicial activism falls into two categories. One is largely acceptable while other is not permissible.

The first consists of evolving new principles, new concepts, new maxims, new formulae, new equities, new procedures and reliefs  The second extends to laying down priorities, policies and programmes and giving directions to execute them when they are not obligatory, and are entirely in the discretion of the executive and the legislative or other authorities ”
According to S.P. Sathe, ‘Supreme Court’s activist contribution can be summarized in the following three patterns:

(I) Interpretational thrusts with a view of extending  judicial control over other organs of the state to ensure liberty, dignity, equality and justice to the individual and greater accountability of the governing institutions.

(II) Interpretational strategies with a view to facilitate social change which would promote greater protection of the minorities, weaker sections of society and political and religious dissenters.

(III) Innovating new methods for increasing access to Justice (like Public Interest Litigations).
The following are the devices of Judicial Activism:

1. Judicial Review:
Judicial Review has been an important feature of the Indian Judicial System. The Supreme Court and High Courts have the powers to declare acts of the legislature, executive or administration void if they find them in conflict with the Constitution or the law of the land. While using the power of Judicial Review, Indian Judiciary has laid down certain principles which have restricted the powers of the legislature and executive.

In Gopalan’s case, the Supreme Court upheld that our fundamental rights are not uncontrolled and absolute. In Golak Nath’s case, the Supreme Court decided that the Parliament has no power to amend the provisions of the Fundamental Rights. In Kesavananda Bharati’s case, the Supreme Court upheld that the Parliament has a power to amend the provisions of fundamental rights but it has no power to amend the basic structure of the Constitution. These judgements are examples of Judicial Activism.

2. Interpretation of the Constitution:
The Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the Indian Constitution. The parliament and executive are bound to accept the interpretation of the Constitution given by the Supreme Court. According to Article 124 (2) of the Constitution, “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.” In the appointment of other judges of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice of India must be consulted by the President. 

On 28 October 1998, in a significant unanimous order, a nine-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that recommendations made by the Chief Justice of India on the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court without following the consultation process was not binding on the government. The consultation process to be adopted by the Chief Justice requires consultation of four senior most judges of the Supreme Court. The sole opinion of the Chief Justice does not constitute consultation process. Hence,  recommendations made by the Chief Justice without complying with the norms and guidelines regarding the consultation process are not binding on the government. The Supreme Court made it clear that even if two judges give an adverse opinion, the Chief Justice should not sent the recommendation to the government.

3. Protection of Fundamental Rights: The
Supreme Court and High Courts are the guardian of the fundamental rights mentioned in the Indian Constitution. Many judgements of the Supreme Court related to the protection of fundamental rights symbolises judicial activism. In Sunil Batra Case, Justice Krishana Ayer stressed that the high pricing of legal publications monopolized by the government, amounted to denial of equal protection of laws. In Khatri Vs. State of Bihar, the Supreme Court held that the indigent accused has the right to free legal services not only at the commencement of trial, but also at the initial stage, when he is produced before the magistrate for the first time.

In 1995, the Supreme Court declared that health is the basic right of the people. Hence, doctors were brought under Consumer Law. In 2001, the Supreme Court held that right to access to clean drinking water is fundamental necessity to life and it is the duty of the state to provide the same. In 1993, the Supreme Court held that to get education up to the age of 14 years is a fundamental light of the children and they get this right enforced through courts.

4. Public Interest Litigation: Public Interest Litigation is the most important method of Judicial Activism. Public Interest Litigation is a process whereby the Courts admit petitions filed by concerned citizens on behalf of the poor or distressed or on issues of general public concern, without following prescribed judicial procedure and charging court fees, etc.

Justice P.N. Bhagwati opines that an individual in Public Interest Litigation can raise voice against injustice by simply writing a postcard to the Supreme Court. On 7 September 2005, Punjab and Haryana Court during the hearing of a PIL filed by the Public Interest and Common Cause Society, held that thousands of applicants, who have applied for residential plots advertised under various housing schemes floated by the HUDA but have neither been allotted plots and nor has their initial deposit been refunded, will be paid interest at the rate of 5.5 percent for annum.

Question 5. 
What do you understand by Judicial Activism? Give arguments in favour and against Judicial Activism.
Answer: 
Meaning of Judicial Activism: Sec Question No. 4. 
Advantages of Judicial Activism
Or
Justification of Judicial Activism
During the last few years, Judicial Activism has become very popular. The following are the arguments in favour of Judicial Activism:
1. Justice to the Poor: 
One of the main advantages of Judicial Activism is that it provides justice to the poor and innocent. The poor people cannot go to the court for the protection of their interests. The poor people have neither the means nor the knowledge about the legal procedures. Due to Judicial Activism, poor people are getting justice. In Hussainara Khatoon Vs. State of Bihar, Justice Bhagwati of the Supreme Court criticized the position where large number of persons were languishing in jail awaiting trial for years, simply because they were poor to furnish bail.

2. To make Legislature and Executive Active:
Inactiveness of the legislature and lack of proper governance on the part of the executive are responsible for the increasing popularity of Judicial Activism. In many cases, Judiciary has exposed the inactiveness of the executive and legislature. In 1996, Delhi witnessed dengue menace, which killed many people. The Delhi High Court issued notice to the Delhi government to explain the government efforts in combating denguemenace. Later, the Delhi High Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the steps taken in the hospitals.

3. Check on the Abuse of Powers by the Legislature and Executive: 
Through Judicial Activism, Judiciary has checked the misuse of powers by the legislature and executive. If powers are misused by any official or department, then any person has a right to go to the court under Public Interest Litigation. In December 1996, the Supreme Court while deciding the Public Interest Litigation, directed the government for setting up a Child-Labour-Rehabihtation-Workers Fund, in which employers were asked to pay a compensation of? 25,000 per child worker. Every offending employer was further asked to pay a compensation of? 2,000 for violating the Child Labour Act of 1986.

4. Protection of Human Right and Liberties:
In modern times, human rights have become the concerns of International Community. On 10 December 1948, United Nations made a declaration of Human Rights. In India, the Supreme Court and High Courts have played a very important role in protecting the Human Rights and liberties. In Kharak Singh vs State of U.P., the Supreme Court held that the term ‘Personal Liberty’ in Article 21 was a commendium term including within itself all varieties of rights, which go to make up the personal liberties of man, other than those dealt within several clauses of article 19 (1). In a landmark judgement, the Supreme Court upheld that tapping of a citizen’s telephone is an invasion on his right to privacy guaranteed under Articles 21 and 19 (1) (a) of the Constitution.

5. Useful in the Development of the Constitution: 
Indian judiciary is very helpful in the growth of the Indian Constitution. A good Constitution must change with times and circumstances. The Indian Constitution is changing rapidly by judicial interpretations. After 1977, the Supreme Court has announced its interpretation positively in a number of cases. Article 21 was interpreted very liberally in France’as Corolla Case. The Supreme Court held that the expression ‘life’ in Article 21 does not connote merely physical or animal existence, but includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes along with it, namely the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition, clothing and shelter.

6. Rule of Law: 
Through Judicial Activism, the Indian Judiciary has protected the rule of law. Rule of law means the everybody is equal before law and there is equal protection of law. No body is above the law. Law is the supreme law of the land. The Supreme Court and High Courts in number of cases have upheld the principle of Rule of Law. The Andhra Pradesh High Court held the cremation of the Tamil Nadu Governer at Indira Park and of N.T. Rama Rao at Budha Purnima Complex as illegal.

7. Supremacy of the Judiciary: 
Indian Judiciary has maintained its supremacy over the other two organs of the government by the use of Judicial Activism. In these days, Indian masses look towards the judiciary for the solution of their problems and not towards the executive for the solution of their problems. Common view is that only the judiciary can save them from the clutches of the corrupt ministers and corrupt bureaucracy.

8. Corruption Exposed in High Places: Through Judicial Activism, Indian Judiciary has succeeded in exposing corruption in high places i.e. Ministers and Bureaucrats. The Supreme Court exposed the corruption in high places, particularly in the housing scandal, fodder scam, St. Kitts forgery case, etc. The Supreme Court fined? 50 lakhs on the former Petroleum Minister Satish Sharma for the illegal and arbitrary allotment of 15 Petrol Pumps from discretionary quota. In March 1996, the Supreme Court gave directive to the C.B.I. to probe into? 500 crore Animal-Husbandry Scam in Bihar under the supervision of Patna High Court.

9. Attainment of Social Justice: Indian Judiciary has also played an important role for the attainment of social justice. In 1980, two professors of law wrote a letter to Editor, Indian Express, describing the barbaric conditions of detention in Agra Protective Home, which proved the basis for a writ petition under Article 21. The Supreme Court has taken cognizance of custody deaths, bride burning and rape in police stations. The Supreme Court held that no woman can be taken to a police station after dusk.
Criticism of Judicial Activism
Or
Arguments against Judicial Activism
No doubt, Judicial Activism has become very popular, but many have criticized the Judicial Activism on many grounds. The following are the main arguments given against Judicial Activism:

1. Judicial Activism is against Democratic Principle:
Critics point out that the Judicial Activism in undemocratic. In a democracy, supreme powers reside with the people and people exercise their power through their elected representatives. While making laws, these representatives are expected to act in accordance with the will of the people. But judges are not elected and hence they are not representative of the people. Therefore, the use of the legislative and executive powers by the Judiciary is against democratic principles.

2. Delay in Ordinary Cases:
Indian Judiciary is already over burdened with regular cases. More than two crores cases are pending in various courts of the country. The practice of Judicial Activism has further increased the workload of the Supreme Court and High Courts and it has adversely affected the normal functioning of the courts. Judges give preference to Public Interest Litigation and the result is more delay in regular cases.

3. Against the Principle of Separation:
In accordance with the provisions of the Indian Constitution, there are three organs of government
i. e. Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. Law making is the function of the legislature; enforcement of laws is the function of the Executive; and to do justice is the main function of Judiciary. The practice of Judicial Activision is against the principle of separation of powers. For efficient and good administration, it is essential that the three organs of government should function within their own area and one should not interfere in the work of other orgAnswer: But through Judicial Activism, Judiciary interfere, in sphere of legislature and executive which badly affects the efficiency of the administration. 

4. Judicial Activism is Unconstitutional:
In no article of the Constitution Judicial, Activism is mentioned. Judiciary has no power to play the role of legislature and executive. According to the Constitution, the Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution. Hence, the Supreme Court should not do these things which violates the Constitution.

5. Misuse of Judicial Activism:
Judicial Activism is being misused by vested interests, political opponents, publicity hunters and lawyer politiciAnswer:

6. No Expertise and Competence:
One important objection is regarding judicial interference in those areas where judiciary has no expertise and competence to undertake the regulation and management of the affairs.

7. Judicial Populism:
According to some critics, Judicial Activism is becoming ‘Judicial Populism’. Sometimes, judges entertain Public Interest litigations to earn false popularity. For example, the Supreme Court directed that all the factories should be taken out of the residential areas of Delhi without looking into the bad effects of this order on small factory owners.

8. Interferes in Public Policies:
The Supreme Court by exercising the power of Judicial Activism interferes with the policies of the legislature and executive which is not justified.

9. Enter Political Controversies:
Due to judicial Activism, sometimes judges involve themselves in political controversies which definitely affects their status and dignity. Conclusion: We can conclude safely that though Judicial Activism has many weaknesses but still it is the need of the hour. Moreover, the history of the cases so far shows that the courts have entered such area only when compelled to do so and have taken precautions to be guided by experts in the field. Former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court asserted the same. In fact, the Judiciary most of the times gives directions to perform mandatory functions under the law.

Question 6. 
What do you mean by Judicial Review? Give arguments in favour and against it.
Answer: 
Judicial Review has been an important feature of the Indian Judicial system. Dr. M.P. Jain has observed, “The doctrine of Judicial Review is firmly rooted in India and has the explicit sanction of the constitution.”
Definition and Meaning of Judicial Review: 
The power of Judiciary to review and determine validity of a law or an order may be described as the power of Judicial Review. Scholars have defined Judicial Review in following ways:
 
1. Dimock and Dimock has said, “Judicial Review is the examination by the courts in cases actually before them of legislative statues and executive or administrative acts to determine whether or not they are prohibited by a written constitution or are in excess of power granted to it.”

2. Prot Henry J. Abraham defines it to mean “the power of any court to hold unconstitutional and hence enforceable any law, and official action based upon it, and any illegal action by a public official that it deems to be in conflict with the Basic law.”

3. According to Redford, the term Judicial Review refers to “the power of court to inquire whether a law, executive order or other official action conflict with the written constitution and if the court concludes that it does, to declare it unconstitutional and void.” Thus, Judicial Review refers to the power of the court to interpret the constitution and to declare acts of the legislature, executive or administration void if it finds them in conflict with the constitution or the law of the land. On the basis of above quoted definitions, it can be said that following are the two main functions of the Judicial Review:

1. To legitimise the acts of the government
2. To protect the constitution against any undue encroachment by the government

Argument in favour of Judial Review:

The following are the advantages of this power:
1. Necessity in federal set up: India is a federation in which an independent and impartial judiciary is a necessity and it must be armed with such powers to keep the Union and the states within their allotted sphere. The Supreme Court had definitely checked the Federal government from interfering in the affairs of the states and has helped in preserving their rights and powers.

2. Essential for the protection of rights: Through the power of judicial review, the Supreme Court has acted as the guardian of rights and liber¬ties of the people.

3. Essential for maintaining the principles of Checks and Balances: The Supreme Court keeps a check upon the Legislature and the Executive and does not let them interfere in the sphere of the other and cross the limits prescribed by the Constitution.

4. Essential for the development of the Constitution: The Supreme Court, through the power of judicial review, has been able to develop the Constitution according to the changing social and economic conditions and has kept it in living condition.

The argument against Judicial Review:
1. The power is unconstitutional: The Constitution has not provided for the power of judicial review. It has been created by the Supreme Court itself. Therefore, the exercise of this power by the Supreme Court is itself an unconstitutional act. 

2. Against democratic principles: It is also said to be antidemocratic

3. Mostly Judgement are Political: According to late Mohan Kumar Mangalam, in most cases, the verdict given by the judges has manifestly been political. It is no use in cherishing the illusion that the court and the judges are superhuman creatures which stand above politics.3 Revision of previous judgement-A contradiction: The Court may sometimes contradict itself by revising its own previous judgement. An Act which is declared unconstitutional today, may be declared valid tomorrow.

Question 7. 
Study the passage given below carefully and answer the question that follow:
In 1991, the first-ever motion to remove a Supreme Court Justice was signed by 108 members of Parliament. Justice Ramaswamy, during his tenure as the Chief Justice of the Punjab High Court, was accused of misappropriating funds. In 1992, a year after the Parliament had started the impeachment proceedings, a high-profile inquiry commission consisting of judges of Supreme Court found Justice V. Ramaswamy “guilty of willful and gross misuses of office.

and moral turpitude by using public funds for private purposes and reckless disregard of statutory rules” while serving as the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana. Despite this strong indictment, Ramaswamy survived the parliamentary motion recommending removal. The motion recommending his removal got the required two-third majority among the members who were present and voting, but the Congress Party abstained from voting in the House. Therefore, the motion could not get the support of one-half of the total strength of the House.

• When did an impeachment procedure take place against a judge for the first time?
• Name the judge against whom the impeachment procedure took place.
• Was the impeachment procedure passed against the judge?

Answer: 

• The impeachment procedure took place against a judge for the first time in 1992.
• Justice Ramaswamy
• The Impeachment procedure did not succeed against Justice Ramaswamy.

Question 8.

Look at the above picture, and answer the following questions:
(a) What is explained in the above picture?
(b) Are such orders fair by court? Why?
Answer: 
(a) In the above picture, we saw that there is a postal strike and the court intervines in this matter.
(b) Yes, the order given by the court regarding strike is fair, because there is a big loss of money, time and disturbance for public as well.

Question 9. 
Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
In July, 2019 the number of judges was increased from 30 to 33. Thus, at present, the Supreme Court consists of Chief Justice and 33 other judges. The Chief Justice of India is appointed by the President in consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as he may deem fit. The Chief Justice gets a salary of ^ 2,80,000 per month and the other apex court judges? 2,50,000 per month. Every judge of Supreme Court is entitled without payment of rent to the use of an official residence.

9.1. What is the total strength of Supreme Court of India, including Chief Justice?
(a) 30 
(b) 34
(c) 36 
(d) 38
Answer: 
(b) 34

9.2. By whom, the Chief Justice of India is appointed?
(a) President 
(b) Vice-President
(c) Prime Minister
(d) Speaker
Answer: 
(a) President 

9.3. What is the monthly salary of Chief Justice of India?
(a) 2,00,000 
(b) 2,20,000
(c) 2,25,000 
(d) 2,80,000
Answer: 
(d) 2,80,000

9.4. What is the monthly salary of other judges of Supreme Court of India?
(a) 2,00,000 
(b) 2,20,000
(c) 2,50,000 
(d) 2,80,000
Answer: 
(c)

HOTS QUESTIONS

Question 1. 
Why do we need an independent judiciary?
Answer: 
Independence of judiciary is essential to maintain the impartiality of judges. The judges can perform their duties fearlessly only in the atmosphere of independence. Only independent judiciary can provide fair and speedy justice. It is an independent judiciary alone which can secure the Fundamental Rights of the citizens granted by the Constitution.

Question 2. 
In a federation, judiciary is assigned with a much more important role. Why?
Answer: 
In a federation, there is a division of power between the Centre and the State. In case of conflict between the Centre and the States, judiciary acts as an arbiter. The judiciary decides cases (a) between the Centre and one or more states; (b) between two or more states.

Question 3. 
‘The Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution.’ Discuss.
Answer: 
The Supreme Court is the final interpreter and the protector of the Constitution. It is the responsibility of the Supreme Court to uphold the supremacy of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has been given the power of judicial review. The Supreme Court can declare any law or executive order unconstitutional if it is contrary to the provision of the Constitution. Thus, the Supreme Court is the guardian of the Constitution.
 
Question 4. 
The Supreme Court has guaranteed the Fundamental Rights to the citizens. Discuss.
Answer: 
The Constitution makes the Supreme Court the ultimate guardian of the Fundamental Rights of the citizen. The Supreme Court has the power to issue orders, directives and writ of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo Warranto and Certiorari, or any of them for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. Thus, the Supreme Court has guaranteed the Fundamental Rights to the citizens.

Question 5. 
The Supreme Court is the highest Court of appeal. Discuss.
Answer: 
The Supreme Court has appellate jurisdiction on the decisions of the High Courts and those of other tribunals. The Supreme Court can grant special permission to appeal from any judgement of order in a cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in the territory of India. Thus, the Supreme Court is the highest Court of appeal.

Question 6. 
The President can remove a judge. Discuss.
Answer: 
The judge can be removed from office by the President after an address by each House of the Parliament supported by a majority of the total membership of that House and by a majority of not less than two-third of the total member of that House present and voting, has been presented to the President in the same session for such removal on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapability. 

SELF-EVALUATION TEST 

1. Which is the Apex court in India? 
2. Who was the first woman judge of the Supreme Court? 
3. What is Judicial Review? 
4. Correct and rewrite the sentence The judges of the Supreme Court get a monthly salary ofl 1,50,000. 
5. What is Judiciary?  
6. Which method do you think is the best for the appointment of a judge? 
7. What is the meaning of independence of Judiciary? 
8. What are the qualifications of the judges of the Supreme Court? 
9. Why do we need independent Judiciary? 
10. Describe the composition of the High Court. 
11. What do you understand by the term Judicial Review? 
12. What are the weaknesses in the Indian Judicial system? 
13. 

Look at the above picture, and answer the following questions: 
(a) What is explained in the above picture?
(b) Are such orders fair by the court? Why? 
14. Discuss the composition, powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. 
15. Describe the Composition, jurisdiction and powers of the High Court. 
16. What do you understand by Judicial Activism? Give arguments in favour and against Judicial Activism.