TRIBUNALS

What are the tribunals?

 Tribunal is a specialized, quasi-judicial body established to resolve

specific disputes, such as administrative or tax-related issues.
It adjudicates disputes, determines rights, and reviews administrative
decisions.

 They serve as alternatives to traditional courts and specialize in

providing faster, cost-effective, and expert resolutions for particular
kinds of cases.

 Objective: Tribunals reduce the burden on regular courts and provide

specialized dispute resolution that is swift, efficient, and accessible.

 The number of pending cases in India exceeds 4.5 crore (as per the
National Judicial Data Grid, 2024), highlighting the dire need for an
efficient system. According to the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021, the
Government has merged and rationalized several tribunals, aiming to
improve efficiency.

Key Characteristics:

 Specialization: They deal exclusively with matters requiring specific,

domain-based expertise (e.g., tax, telecom, or electricity).

 Faster Disposal: They aim to offer a quicker and more efficient

resolution mechanism than the regular civil courts.

 Less Formal: Procedures are generally simpler and less rigid than
those followed by civil courts, though principles of natural justice must
always be adhered to.

 Composition: They typically include both judicial members (retired

judges or lawyers) and administrative/technical members who
possess specialized knowledge in the relevant field.

What are the constitutional and legal provisions related to Tribunals

in India?

The original Constitution did not include provisions related to tribunals.

However, the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976 introduced Part XIV-A, titled
“Tribunals,” which consists of two articles:
  Article 323A – Pertains to administrative tribunals.

 Article 323B – Covers tribunals for other specific matters

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

To implement Article 323A, Parliament enacted the Administrative Tribunals
Act, 1985, empowering the Central Government to establish:

 Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) for central government

employees.

 State Administrative Tribunals (SATs) for state government

employees.

 Under Article 323 B, the Parliament and the state

legislatures are authorised to provide for the establishment of
tribunals for the adjudication of disputes relating to the
following matters:
 Taxation
 Foreign exchange, import and export
 Industrial and labour
 Land reforms
 Ceiling on urban property
 Elections to Parliament and state legislatures
 Food stuff
 Rent and tenancy rights

 What are the landmark judgement’s related to tribunals in India?

S.P. Sampath
Recognized tribunals as substitutes for High Courts and upheld their
Kumar v. Union of
constitutional validity.
India (1987)
L. Chandra Kumar
Declared that tribunals cannot act as substitutes for High Courts and must
v. Union of India
be subject to judicial review under Article 226 and 227.
(1997)

Madras Bar
Administrative support for all tribunals should come under the Ministry of
Association v.
Law and Justice.
Union of India 2014

Rojer Mathew
versus South The impact of amalgamation of tribunals should be analysed with judicial
Indian Bank impact assessment.
Limited & ors, 2019

Madras Bar
Association versus National Tribunals Commission should be set up to supervise appointments,
Union of India, as well as functioning and administration of tribunals.
2020

Madras Bar
Association versus Struck down various provisions in tribunal reforms that undermined judicial
Union of India, independence.
2021

 What are the key developments in the Indian tribunal system?

Pre-
Independence The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was established as India’s first tribunal to
Era (Before reduce court workload and expedite tax dispute resolution
1947)

Post- 1950: Industrial Disputes (Appellate Tribunal) Act provided for an appellate
Independence tribunal to handle industrial disputes.
Era (1947–1980) 1969: The First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended Civil
Services Tribunals at national and state levels for service-related disputes.
1974: The Sixth Law Commission suggested high-powered tribunals to reduce
High Court case backlogs.
1976: The Swaran Singh Committee recommended setting up:
a. Administrative Tribunals ((both at national level and state level) for service-
 related cases.
b. All-India Appellate Tribunal for labor disputes.
c. Sector-specific tribunals for revenue, land reforms, and essential
commodities.
d. Supreme Court oversight for tribunal decisions.

Establishment of several tribunals, including:

Golden Era of a. Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) – for administrative matters.
Tribunalization b. Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) – for financial sector disputes.
(1980–2000) c. Film Certification Appellate Tribunal – for film certification disputes.
d. Appellate Tribunal for Electricity – for tariff-related cases.

2000: Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) – for resolving disputes between banks
and borrowers.
2000–2016: 2002: Competition Commission of India (CCI) and Competition Appellate
Expansion of Tribunal (COMPAT) – to regulate fair competition.
Tribunals 2010: National Green Tribunal (NGT) – for environmental disputes.
2016: National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) & National Company Law
Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) – for corporate and insolvency matters.

2017- Merger of The Finance Act, 2017 reduced the number of tribunals from 26 to 19 based on
COMPAT with functional similarity. It gave the central government authority to define
NCLAT qualifications, appointments, and service conditions for tribunal members.

Tribunal The Tribunals Reforms (Rationalization and Conditions of Service) Bill, 2021
Reforms Act, aimed to streamline the tribunal system. Nine tribunals were abolished,
2021 transferring their functions to existing judicial bodies, mainly High Courts.

 Why are tribunals important, and what is their significance?

 1. Speedy Justice: Tribunals are designed to offer faster dispute
resolution compared to traditional courts. E.g. The Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commissions resolve cases within 3-6 months, NCLT expedited cases
under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), 2016, ensuring faster debt
recovery.
 2. Specialized Expertise: Tribunals were designed to handle complex, sector-
specific disputes requiring technical expertise. E.g. Power sector (APTEL),
taxation (ITAT), corporate law (NCLAT), copyright (IPAB).
 3. Reducing Court Burden: By handling specialized cases, tribunals reduce the
workload of high courts and the Supreme Court. E.g. The Central Administrative
 Tribunal (CAT) has significantly reduced litigation burden in service-related
disputes.
 4. Economic Governance: Tribunals like the NCLT and DRT play a critical role
in ensuring economic stability and ease of doing business. E.g. Creditors have
recovered approximately Rs 3.55 lakh crore by resolving 1,068 insolvency cases
under the IBC, 2016, as of September 2024 since 2016.
 5. Environmental Protection & Protecting Fundamental Rights: The National
Green Tribunal (NGT) has played a pivotal role in environmental protection cases
like the Vizag Gas Leak (2020). It is also instrumental in
addressing environmental issues, such as the Yamuna pollution case and illegal
mining in Aravalli Hills.
 6. Access to Justice: Tribunals provide a cost-effective and accessible forum
for resolving disputes, especially for marginalized groups.
 7. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Tribunals provide an alternative
dispute resolution mechanism, which can be less adversarial and more
conducive to finding mutually agreeable solutions.

 What are various challenges faced by Tribunals in India?

 1. Case Backlogs Rising: As of 2023, the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) has
over 215,431 pending cases, with an asset recovery rate of just 9.2% in 2022-
23, far below the desired efficiency.
 2. Mergers and Abolitions Causing Hindrance: The merger of tribunals
like COMPAT with NCLAT has led to overburdened benches and loss of
specialization.
 3. Lower Vacancies and Poor Infrastructure: Tribunals like APTEL face
chronic vacancies and lack adequate infrastructure, leading to
delays. NCLT operated at 50% capacity in 2023, delaying crucial insolvency
resolutions. Many tribunals lack digital case management systems, affecting
efficiency.
 4. Judicial Overreach: The Supreme Court’s intervention in the Telecom
Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal (TDSAT) ruling on the Adjusted
Gross Revenue (AGR) dispute has raised questions about the legal standing of
tribunals.
 5. Appointment Concerns: The trend of appointing retired judges and
bureaucrats raises questions about post-retirement
placements and expertise. E.g. The Ministry of Law and Justice controls
appointments and budgets which reduces the administrative independence.
 6. Lack of Uniformity: Different tribunals follow varying procedures, leading to
inconsistency. For instance, the Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT) and Central
Administrative Tribunal (CAT) have different rules for evidence submission.
 7. Ineffective Implementation: The appointment process for tribunal members
is slow and opaque, leading to prolonged vacancies. E.g. The Law Commission’s
272nd Report (2017) recommended a central nodal agency, but no progress has
been made.
 8. Economic Impact: Delays in tribunal decisions have significant economic
consequences. E.g. unresolved tax disputes worth ₹12 lakh crore are pending
before various tribunals, affecting government revenue and investor confidence.
 What is the Way Forward?
 1. Establish an Independent Tribunal Oversight Body: Inspired by the
National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), a Tribunal
Commission should oversee appointments, funding, and administration. E.g. The
Law Commission’s 162nd Report suggested a National Administrative Appellate
Tribunal above High Courts—an idea that needs revisiting.
 2. Structured Tribunal Management System: A Central Tribunal Division within
the Ministry of Law and Justice should be implemented to streamline
operations. Case management technology and AI-based analytics should be
deployed to track tribunal performance.
 3. Implement a Double-Shift System to Expedite Disposal: To clear the
backlog, tribunals should operate in two shifts, a proposal discussed in 2011 but
never implemented. This would increase case disposals without increasing
infrastructure costs.
 4. Strengthen the Specialization and Independence of Tribunals: Instead of
appointing retired bureaucrats, tribunals must have domain-specific technical
panels to ensure subject matter expertise. Reduce judicial interventions by
strengthening tribunal autonomy under the Tribunals Reforms Act.
 5. Digital Transformation of Tribunals: Fully digitalize tribunal processes
through an e-Tribunals initiative, ensuring real-time case tracking.
Integrate online dispute resolution (ODR) mechanisms to reduce case inflow into
traditional tribunals. E.g. The UK’s HM Courts & Tribunals Service.
 6. Minimizing Executive Control: The legislature should reduce bureaucratic
control over tribunal functioning, as recommended in Rojer Mathew (2019) case.
 7. Enhancing Judicial Autonomy: Ensure tribunals operate with minimal
interference from higher courts, as emphasized in the L. Chandra Kumar vs
Union of India (1997) case.
 Conclusion: Tribunals thus play a critical role in India’s legal system by
combining judicial powers with technical expertise to resolve disputes efficiently
in domains requiring specialized knowledge. The decisions of these tribunals are
generally subject to judicial review by the relevant High Court, and ultimately the
Supreme Court. They serve as essential pillars of an effective governance
system that requires specialized mechanisms for complex regulatory issues.

No. Court of Law Tribunal

A court of law is a part of the traditional judicial An Admini

1.
system whereby judicial powers are derived from the state. invested w
 Tribunal is
The Civil Courts have judicial power to try all suits of a civil
2. to try case
nature unless the cognizance is expressly or impliedly barred.
statutes

Judges of the ordinary courts of law are independent of the Tenure, te

3. executive in respect of their tenure, terms and conditions of of Admini
service etc. Judiciary is independent of Executive Executive

The presid
4. The presiding officer of the court of law is trained in law.
law. He m

A judge of a court of law must be impartial who is not An Admini

5.
interested in the matter directly or indirectly. by it.

A court of law is bound by all the rules of evidence and An Admini

6.
procedure. the princi

Administra
Court must decide all questions objectively on the basis of
7. departme
evidence and materials on record.
subjectiv

8. A court of law can decide vires of a legislation Administra

Powers and Procedures of Tribunals

Tribunals generally enjoy the powers of a civil court for effective functioning.
These powers include:

 Summoning and enforcing the attendance of witnesses.

 Examining witnesses under oath.

 Requiring the discovery and production of documents.

 Receiving evidence on affidavits.

  Issuing commissions to examine witnesses or documents.

 Reviewing and setting aside ex parte orders.

 Punishing for contempt where allowed by statute.

HIGH COURTS
The High Court stands as the apex judicial body within the State, holding
the pivotal responsibility of interpreting the law, safeguarding fundamental
rights, and ensuring the rule of law prevails across its jurisdiction.
Established as a cornerstone of the single integrated judicial system
envisioned by the Indian Constitution, the High Court serves as the highest
judicial authority at both the State and Union Territory levels. This
article aims to study in detail the High Court, including its history,
constitutional provisions, composition, powers, jurisdiction, and other related
aspects.

About High Court

 The High Court is the apex court in the judicial administration of

a State under the integrated judicial system established by the
Constitution of India.

 The High Courts have been envisaged as:

o The highest court of appeal in the state

o The guarantor of Fundamental Rights

o The guardian of the Constitution of India, and

o The interpreter of the Constitution of India.

About Indian Judiciary

 Inspired by the Government of India Act of 1935, the Indian

Constitution has established a single-integrated judicial
system with a three-tier structure:

o The Supreme Court

o The High Courts

o The Subordinate Courts (District Courts, and other Lower Courts)

 This single system of courts enforces both Central and State

Laws across the country.
Constitutional Provisions related to High Courts

 Articles 214 to 231 in Part VI of the Indian Constitution deal with

the provisions related to the High Courts.

 The constitutional provisions mentioned under these articles deal with

the organization, independence, jurisdiction, powers, and
procedures of the High Courts.

o The Parliament and State Legislature both are authorized to

regulate these provisions.

Territorial Jurisdiction of High Court

 The Constitution of India provides for a High Court for each State.

 However, the 7th Constitutional Amendment Act of

1956 authorized the Parliament to establish a common High
Court for two or more States or for two or more States and a Union
Territory. For example-

o The Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh have a

common High Court.

 The territorial jurisdiction of a High Court is co-terminus with the

territory of a State.

 The territorial jurisdiction of a common High Court is co-terminus with

the territory of a State as well as a Union Territory.

 The Parliament can extend the jurisdiction of a High Court to

any Union Territory or exclude the jurisdiction of a High Court from any
Union Territory.

Composition of Judges of High Court

 The Constitution does not specify the strength of a High Court and
leaves it to the discretion of the President.

o Thus, every High Court consists of a Chief Justice and such other
Judges as determined by the President.

 The President determines the strength of a High Court from time to

time depending upon the workload of the High Court.

Appointment of Judges of High Court

The Chief Justice and other judges of the High Court are appointed by
the President of India as can be seen in the following sections.

Appointment of Chief Justice of High Court

The Chief Justice is appointed by the President after consultation

with the Governor of the concerned State and the Chief Justice of India.

Appointment of Other Judges of High Court

 Other judges of the High Court are appointed by the President

after consultation with the Governor of the State, the Chief Justice
of India, and the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court.

 In the case of a common High Court for two or more States, the
Governors of all the States concerned are consulted by the President of
India.

 As per the Second Judges Case (1993), consultation with the Chief
Justice of India means concurrence and advice tendered by the
Chief Justice of India is binding on the President.

 As per the Third Judges Case (1998), the Chief Justice of India
should consult a collegium of 2 senior-most judges of
the Supreme Court before recommending the name to the President.

o The recommendations made by the Chief Justice of

India, without consulting the collegium, are not binding on
the President.

Qualifications of Judges of High Court

A person to be appointed as a judge of a High Court should have the

following qualifications:

 He/she should be a citizen of India, and

 He/she should have

o Held a judicial office in the territory of India for ten years.

OR

o Been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in

succession) for ten years.

It is to be noted that:
  Unlike in the case of the Supreme Court, the Constitution makes no
provision for the appointment of a distinguished jurist as a
judge of a High Court.

 There is no minimum age for appointment as a judge of a High

Court prescribed by the Constitution.

Oath and Affirmations of Judges of High Court

 The Chief Justice and the Judges of the High Court make and subscribe
to an oath or affirmation before the Governor of the State or some
person appointed by him for this purpose.

 In his/her oath, a judge of a High Court swears:

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

o to uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India.

o to duly and faithfully and to the best of his/her ability,

knowledge, and judgment perform the duties of the office
without fear or favor, affection or ill-will.

o to uphold the Constitution and the laws.

Salaries & Allowances of Judges of High Court

 The salaries, allowances, privileges, leave, and pension of the judges of

the High Court are determined by the Parliament from time to
time.

o They cannot be varied to their disadvantage after their

appointment except during a Financial Emergency.

Tenure of Judges of High Court

The Constitution has not fixed the tenure of a judge of the High Court.
However, the Constitution contains the following four provisions in this
regard:

 He/she holds office until he attains the age of 62 years.

o Any question regarding his/her age is to be decided by the

President after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and the
decision of the President is final.

 He/she can resign from his/her office by writing to the President.

  He/she can be removed from his/her office by the President
on the recommendation of the Parliament.

 He/she vacates his/her office when he/she is appointed as a judge of

the Supreme Court or when he/she is transferred to another High
Court.

Removal of Judges of High Court

 A judge of the High Court can be removed from his/her office by an

order of the President.

 They can be removed on the following two grounds:

o proved misbehaviour

o incapacity

 The procedure relating to the removal of a judge of the High Court is

regulated by the Judges Enquiry Act (1968) and is the same as that for
a judge of the Supreme Court.

 As per the Act, the process of removal goes as follows:

o A removal motion signed by 100 members in the case of Lok

Sabha or 50 members in the case of Rajya Sabha is to be given
to the Speaker/Chairman.

 The Speaker/Chairman may admit the motion or refuse to

admit it.

o If the motion is admitted, then the Speaker/Chairman constitutes

a three-member committee to investigate the charges. The
Committee consists of:

o the Chief Justice of India or a Judge of the Supreme Court,

o a Chief Justice of a High Court, and

o a distinguished jurist.

o If the committee finds the judge guilty of the charges, then both
the Houses of Parliament can take up the motion for
consideration.

 The motion must be passed by both Houses of Parliament

with a Special Majority (50% of the total membership of the
House + two-thirds of the members present and voting).
 o Once passed by both Houses of Parliament, an address is
presented to the President for the removal of the judge.

o Finally, the President passes an order, removing the judge.

Transfer of Judges of High Court

 The President of India can transfer a judge of one High Court to

another High Court after consulting the Chief Justice of India.

 As per Third Judges Case (1998), in case of transfer of a judge of the

High Court, the Chief Justice of India should consult, in addition to
a collegium of 4 seniormost judges of the Supreme
Court, the Chief Justices of the two High Courts concerned.

o The sole opinion of the Chief Justice of India does not constitute
the consultation process.

Acting, Additional and Retired Judges of High Court

Acting Chief Justice

 The President of India can appoint a judge of the High Court

as acting Chief Justice of the High Court when:

o the office of Chief Justice of the High Court is vacant, or

o the Chief Justice of the High Court is temporarily absent, or

o the Chief Justice of the High Court is unable to perform the

duties of his/her office.

Acting Judge

 The President can also appoint a duly qualified person as an acting

judge of a High Court when a judge of that High Court is:

o unable to perform the duties of his/her office due to absence

or any other person

o appointed to act temporarily as Chief Justice of that High

Court.

 An acting judge holds office until the permanent judge resumes his/her
office. However, he/she cannot hold office after attaining the age
of 62 years.

Additional Judge
  The President can appoint duly qualified persons as additional
judges of a High court for a temporary period not exceeding two
years when:

o there is a temporary increase in the business of the High Court,

o there are arrears of work in the High Court.

o An additional judge cannot hold office after attaining the

age of 62 years.

Retired Judges

 The Chief Justice of a High Court of a State can request a retired

judge of that High Court or any other High Court to act as a judge of
the High Court of that State for a temporary period.

 The Chief Justice of a High Court of a State can do so only with the
previous consent of the President and also of the person to be
so appointed.

 Allowances of such a judge are determined by the President of India.

 He/she enjoys all the jurisdiction, powers, and privileges of a judge of

that High Court. But, he/ she will not otherwise be deemed to be a
judge of that high court.

Jurisdiction and Powers of High Court

The Constitution does not contain detailed provisions w.r.t. the

jurisdiction and powers of a High Court. It only lays down that the jurisdiction
and powers of a High Court are to be the same as immediately before the
commencement of the Constitution, with some additions such as revenue
matters, writ jurisdiction, power of superintendence, consultative power, etc.

The present jurisdiction and powers of a High Court are governed

by multiple sources, including:

 the constitutional provisions,

 the Letters Patent,

 the Acts of Parliament,

 the Acts of State Legislature,

 the Indian Penal Code, 1860,

  the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and

 the Civil Procedure Code, 1908.

The extensive jurisdiction and powers of the High Court can be classified into
the following categories:

Original Jurisdiction

The original jurisdiction of High Court i.e. its power to hear disputes in the
first instance, not by way of appeal, includes the following:

 Disputes relating to the election of members of Parliament and State

Legislatures.

 Regarding revenue matters or an act ordered or done in revenue

collection.

 Enforcement of fundamental rights of citizens.

 Cases ordered to be transferred from a subordinate court involving the

interpretation of the Constitution to its own file.

 The four High Courts (i.e., Calcutta, Bombay, Madras and Delhi High
Courts) have original civil jurisdiction in classes of higher value.

Writ Jurisdiction

 As per Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, the High Court is

empowered to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental
Rights and any ordinary legal right.

 The writ jurisdiction of the High Court is not exclusive but

concurrent with the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.

o It means, when the fundamental rights of a citizen are violated,

the aggrieved party has the option of moving either the High
Court or the Supreme Court directly.

 However, the writ jurisdiction of the High Court is wider than that
of the Supreme Court.

o While the Supreme Court can issue writs only for the
enforcement of fundamental rights, the High Court can issue
writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well
as any ordinary legal right.

Appellate Jurisdiction
  The High Court is primarily a court of appeal and hears appeals
against the judgments of Subordinate Courts functioning
within the territorial jurisdiction of the State.

 The Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be classified

under the following two heads:

Appeals in Civil Matters

 The civil appellate jurisdiction of a High Court is as follows:

o First appeals from the orders and judgments of the district

courts, additional district courts, and other subordinate courts lie
directly to the high court, on both questions of law and fact.

o Second appeals from the orders and judgments of the district

court or other subordinate courts lie to the high court in the
cases involving questions of law only, and not questions of
fact.

o Some High Courts have provision for intra-court appeals.

 Under this, when a single judge of the High Court has

decided a case, an appeal from such a decision lies to the
division bench of the same High Court.

o Appeals from the decisions of the administrative and other

tribunals lie to the division bench of the State High Court.

Appeals in Criminal Matters

 Appeals from the judgments of Sessions Court and Additional Sessions

Court lie to the High Court if the sentence is one of imprisonment
for more than seven years.

o A death sentence or capital punishment awarded by a

Sessions Court or an Additional Sessions Court should be
confirmed by the High Court before it can be
executed, whether there is an appeal by the convicted
person or not.

Supervisory Jurisdiction

 A High Court has the power of superintendence over all courts and
tribunals functioning in its territorial jurisdiction, except military courts
or tribunals.
  This power of superintendence of a High Court extends to all courts
and tribunals whether they are subject to the appellate jurisdiction of
the High Court or not.

 The following points are to be noted w.r.t. the Supervisory Jurisdiction

of High Courts:

o It covers not only administrative superintendence but also

judicial superintendence,

o it is a revisional jurisdiction,

o it can be suo-motu (on its own) and not necessarily on the

application of a party.

Control over Subordinate Courts

A High Court has administrative control and other powers over the
Subordinate Courts, which include the following:

 It is consulted by the Governor in the matters of appointment, posting

and promotion of district judges and in the appointments of persons to
the judicial service of the state (other than district judges).

 It deals with the matters of posting, promotion, grant of leave,

transfers, and discipline of the members of the judicial service of the
state (other than district judges).

 It can withdraw a case pending in a subordinate court if it involves a

substantial question of law that requires the interpretation of the
Constitution. It can then either dispose of the case itself or determine
the question of law and return the case to the subordinate court with
its judgment.

 Its law is binding on all subordinate courts functioning within its

territorial jurisdiction in the same sense as the law declared by the
Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India.

Headquarters Jurisdiction (States/Union

High Court Name
(Principal Seat) Territories)

Allahabad High
Prayagraj Uttar Pradesh (also bench at Lucknow)
Court
 Headquarters Jurisdiction (States/Union
High Court Name
(Principal Seat) Territories)

Andhra Pradesh
Amaravati Andhra Pradesh
High Court

Maharashtra, Dadra & Nagar Haveli and

Bombay High Court Mumbai Daman and Diu, Goa (benches at
Panaji, Aurangabad, Nagpur)

West Bengal, Andaman & Nicobar

Calcutta High Court Kolkata
Islands (bench at Port Blair)

Chhattisgarh High
Bilaspur Chhattisgarh
Court

Delhi High Court New Delhi Delhi

Assam, Nagaland, Mizoram, Arunachal

Gauhati High Court Guwahati Pradesh (benches at Kohima, Aizawl,
Itanagar)

Gujarat High Court Ahmedabad Gujarat

Himachal Pradesh
Shimla Himachal Pradesh
High Court

Jammu & Kashmir

and Ladakh High Srinagar/Jammu Jammu and Kashmir, Ladakh
Court

Jharkhand High
Ranchi Jharkhand
Court

Karnataka High Karnataka (benches at Dharwad and

Bengaluru
Court Kalaburagi)

Kerala High Court Kochi Kerala and Lakshadweep

Madhya Pradesh Madhya Pradesh (benches at Gwalior

Jabalpur
High Court and Indore)

Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (bench at

Madras High Court Chennai
Madurai)
 Headquarters Jurisdiction (States/Union
High Court Name
(Principal Seat) Territories)

Manipur High Court Imphal Manipur

Meghalaya High
Shillong Meghalaya
Court

Orissa High Court Cuttack Odisha

Patna High Court Patna Bihar

Punjab and Haryana

Chandigarh Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh
High Court

Rajasthan High
Jodhpur Rajasthan (bench at Jaipur)
Court

Sikkim High Court Gangtok Sikkim

Telangana High
Hyderabad Telangana
Court

Tripura High Court Agartala Tripura

Uttarakhand High
Nainital Uttarakhand
Court

Independence of High Courts

The Constitution has made the following provisions to safeguard and ensure
the independent and impartial functioning of High Courts:

 Mode of Appointment – The judges of the High Court are appointed

by the President in consultation with the members of the judiciary
itself. This ensures that the judicial appointments are not based on any
political or practical considerations.

 Security of Tenure – The judges of the High Court have been given
security of tenure. They can be removed by the President only in the
manner and on the grounds mentioned in the Constitution.
  Fixed Service Conditions – The service conditions of the judges of
the High Court cannot be changed to their disadvantage after their
appointment, except during a Financial Emergency.

 Expenses Charged on Consolidated Fund – The salaries and

allowances of the judges of a High Court are charged on the
Consolidated Fund of the State and are non·votable by the State
Legislature.

o Note: the pension of a High Court judge is charged on the

Consolidated Fund of India, not the Consolidated Fund of State.

 Bar on Parliamentary Interference – The conduct of judges of the

High Court in the discharge of their duties cannot be discussed in
Parliament or State Legislature, except when an impeachment motion
is under consideration by the Parliament.

 Ban on Post-Retirement Practice – The retired judges of the High

Court are prohibited from pleading or acting in any court or before any
authority within the territory of India, except the Supreme
Court and the other High Courts.

o This ensures that they do not favor anyone in the hope of future
favor.

 Power to Punish for its Contempt – The High Court can punish any
person for its contempt. Thus, its actions and decisions cannot be
criticized and opposed by anybody.

 Freedom to Appoint its Staff – The Chief Justice of a High Court can
appoint officers and servants of the High Court and prescribe their
service conditions, without any interference from the Executive.

 Protection of Jurisdiction – The Parliament and State Legislature are

not authorized to curtail the jurisdiction and powers of the High Court.

o However, the Parliament can extend the same.

Table of Difference Between High court and Supreme Court

Feature Supreme Court High Courts

Jurisdiction Nationwide jurisdiction (all India) Jurisdiction limited to one or

Feature Supreme Court High Courts

more states/union territories

Chief Justice of India + up to 30 Chief Justice + varying number

Composition
other judges of judges per state

Appointed by President in
Appointment Appointed by President of India consultation with Chief Justice
of India and state Governor

Retirement
65 years 62 years
Age

Types of Original, Appellate,

Original, Appellate, Advisory
Jurisdiction Supervisory

Disputes between Centre and Certain civil and criminal cases

Original
states, or between states, at state level, writs under
Jurisdiction
Fundamental Rights enforcement Article 226

Appellate Appeals from High Courts and Appeals from lower courts
Jurisdiction lower courts within state jurisdiction

Supervisory Supervisory over courts in

Over all courts in India
Jurisdiction their respective states/UTs

Finality of Decisions are final and binding Decisions can be appealed to

Decisions across India Supreme Court

Apex court, guardian of Apex judicial authority in the

Role Constitution, final interpreter of state, interpreter of laws within
law state jurisdiction

About Supreme Court of India (SC):

History:

The Supreme Court of India is the apex judicial body under the Constitution
of India.
Article 124 of the Constitution states that “There shall be a Supreme Court of
India.”

The Supreme Court came into existence on January 26, 1950, with the
coming into force of the Constitution.

On January, 28, 1950, two days after India became a Sovereign Democratic
Republic, the Supreme Court was inaugurated.

The Supreme Court initially functioned from the old Parliament House till it
moved to the present building located on Tilak Marg, New Delhi, in 1958.

The first President of India, Dr. Rajendra Prasad, inaugurated the present
building of the Supreme Court of India on August 4, 1958.

Number of Judges:

o The original Constitution of 1950 envisaged a Supreme Court with a Chief

Justice and 7 puisne Judges, leaving it to Parliament to increase this number.

o Considering the increase in workload, Parliament increased the number of

Judges from 8 in 1950 to 11 in 1956, 14 in 1960, 18 in 1978, 26 in 1986, 31
in 2009, and 34 in 2019 (current strength).

Today, the judges sit in benches of two and three and come together in
larger benches of 5 and more (Constitution Bench)to decide any conflicting
decisions between benches of the Supreme Court or any substantial
questions concerning the interpretation of the [Link] proceedings
of the Supreme Court are conducted in English.

Powers and Functions:

o The Supreme Court has original, appellate, and advisory jurisdiction.

o It serves both as the final court of appeals and the final interpreter of the
Constitution.

o Its exclusive original jurisdiction extends to any dispute between the

Government of India and one or more States or between the Government of
India and any State or States on one side and one or more States on the
other, or between two or more States, if and insofar as the dispute involves
any question (whether of law or fact)on which the existence or extent of a
legal right depends.

o In addition, Article 32 of the Constitution gives extensive original

jurisdiction to the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights.
It is empowered to issue directions, orders, or writs, including writs in the
nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto, and
certiorari, to enforce them.

o The Supreme Court has been conferred with the power to direct the
transfer of any civil or criminal case from one High Court to another High
Court or from a Court subordinate to another High Court.

o Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, International Commercial

Arbitration can also be initiated in the Supreme Court.

o The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a

certificate granted by the High Court concerned under Article 132(1), 133(1)
or 134 of the Constitution in respect of any judgement, decree, or final order
of a High Court in both civil and criminal cases, involving substantial question
of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.

o Appeals also lie to the Supreme Court in civil matters if the High Court
concerned certifies: that the case involves a substantial question of law of
general importance, and that, in the opinion of the High Court, the said
question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.

o In criminal cases, an appeal lies to the Supreme Court if the High Courthas
on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced
him to death or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10
years, or

has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any Court subordinate to
its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused and sentenced him
to death or to imprisonment for life or for a period of not less than 10 years,
or certified that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.

o Parliament is authorised to confer on the Supreme Court any further

powers to entertain and hear appeals from any judgement, final order or
sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court.

o The Supreme Court also has a very wide appellate jurisdiction over all
Courts and Tribunals in India in as much as it may, in its discretion, grant
special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution from any
judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter
passed or made by any Court or Tribunal in the territory of India.
o The Supreme Court has special advisory jurisdiction in matters which may
specifically be referred to it by the President of India under Article 143 of the
Constitution.

o Election Petitions under Part III of the Presidential and Vice-Presidential

Elections Act, 1952, are also filed directly in the Supreme Court.

o Under Articles 129 and 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court has
been vested with power to punish for contempt of Court, including the power
to punish for contempt of itself.

o The Supreme Court can reconsider its final judgment or order by way of a
curative petition on limited grounds after the dismissal of the review petition.

o As the highest court in India, the Supreme Court’s judgments are binding
on all other courts in the country.