I

NTRODUCTI ON–I nanycountr y

,judiciaryplay sani mportantroleofi nterpretingandappl ying
l
awandadj udicatingdisputeofoneci tizenandanot her
,betweenci t
izenandt heSt at
e.In
federali
sm, judiciaryhastodecidecont roversiesbet weentheSt ates.Thesupr emecour tof
I
ndiai stheApexCour tandistheFi nal i
nterpreteroft heConst i
tuti
onandt helaws.Ar t.
141
provi
det hatl awdecl aredbySupr emeCour ti
sbi ndingonal lCourtswi thint het erri
toryofIndia.
TheSupr emeCour ti
salsoknownast heguar dianandt hepr otectoroft hef undament alrights
ofthepeopl e.Art.32vestedthepowerandj urisdicti
oninSupr emeCour ttoenf or cether i
ghts
underAr t.32.TheSupr emeCour tisthef i
nal Cour tofappeal i
nall ci
v i
l,
crimi nal andot her
mat t
erst hushel psi nmaintai
ningauni for
mi tyoft helawthroughoutt heter ri
toryofI ndia.

Consti
tut
ionofSupr emeCour t–Art.124( 1)–Itprovi
dest hatthereshal
lbeaSupr emeCourtof
I
ndiaconsist
ingofaChi efJusti
ceofI ndiaanduntilParli
amentbyl awprescr
ibesal ar
ge
number,ofnotmor et hansevenot herjudges.TheSupr emeCour tNumberofJudges
(Amendment)Act ,1986hasr aisedt hestrengt
hofot herJudgest o25Atpresenttherefor
ethe
SupremeCour tconsistofaChi efJusticeofIndiaand25ot herj
udges.

Appoi
ntmentoft
heJudges-Ar
t.
124(
2)- –

I
tprovi
des“ EveryJudgeoftheSupremeCour tshal
lbeappoint
edbythePresi
dentbywarr
ant
underhi
shandseal af
terconsul
tati
onwi t
hsuchoftheJudgeoftheSupr
emeCour tandofthe
HighCourt
si nthestatesasthePresidentmaydeem necessar
yfort
hepurposeandshal
lhold
offi
ceunt
ilheat t
ainstheageofsixtyfi
veyears.
”

S.CAdv ocatesonRecordAssov .UnionofI ndia,AIR1994, SC268SupremeCourtoverrul

edthe
deci
sionofS. P.Gupt
a.V.Uni onofIndi
a, AI
R, 1982,SC149, wher
eini
twasl ai
ddownt hatthe
matteroftheappointmentofJudgeoft heHighCour t,al
lthethr
eefuncti
onari
esi.
e.Chief
Just
iceofI ndi
a,theGovernoroftheStateandChi efJust
iceoftheStat
e,weretobegi v
enequal
i
mpor tanceintheconsult
ationprocess.Butint hi
scaseSupr emeCourtbymaj or
it
yof7* 2lai
d
downpr i
nciplesandpr escr
ibedproceduralnormstobef oll
owedi nappointi
ngtheJudgesof
HighCourts.Int hisregard,
theCour tr
uledthattheprocessofappoi nt
mentmustbei nit
iat
edby
theChiefJusticeofconcer nedHighCour t
,Inthi
smattergreatestsi
gnifi
canceshouldbe
att
achedtot hev iewofChi efJusti
ceofI ndi
a,formedaftertaki
ngintoaccountthev i
ewsofhi s
coll
eaguesint heSupr emeCour twhower efoundtobeconv ersantwit
ht heaff
airsofthe
concernedHighCour t,asalsotheviewsofoneormor eseniorJudgesoft hatHighCour twhose
opini
onaccor dingt oChiefJusti
ceofIndi awasformedt obesi gni
fi
cantintheformationofhis
opini
on.

Thisdecisi
oncreatesadoubtaboutt heinterpret
ati
onoflawhence,t
heinter
pretat
ionoflaw
hence,thethenPresi
dent,Dr
.ShankarDay al Sharmarefer
redthematt
ertotheSupr emeCourt
fortheopini
onoftheArt,143,whichwashear dbyNineJudgesoftheBenchoft heCourt.The
Bench,inRe:Presi
denti
alReference,AI
R1999, SCI,r
eferr
edtomajor
ityj
udgementofS. C.
AdvocatedonRecor dAsso.,v.UnionofIndia,AIR1994,SC268andreport
edt hefoll
owing
unanimousopinioninanswert otheref
erence-

Inthematt
erofappoi ntmentoft hej
udgestotheHighCour
t,theopi
nionofChiefJusti
ceof
Indi
ahasprimacy.Theexpr ession,“
consul
tati
onwi
ththeChiefJust
iceofI
ndia”requi
res
consul
atat
ionwit
hpl urali
tyofjudgesinthefor
mati
onofopinionoft
heChiefJusticeofI
ndi
a.

TheChi efJust
iceofIndiahastotakeintoaccounttheopinionofChi efJust
iceofHighCour
t
whofor medhisopinionafterconsul
tat
ionwithotherJudges.Allthesev i
ewsshouldbe
expr
essedi nwr i
ti
ngandconv eyedtotheGov er
nmentofI ndiaal
ongwi t
htherecommendati
on.
Judi
cial r
evi
ewi savail
ableincaseofappoint
mentofJudgest otheHi ghcourt,
ift
hispr
ocedur
e
i
snotf oll
owed.

Appoi nt mentoftheChi efJusticeofI ndia-I

ntheappoi nt
mentoft heChi efJusticeofI ndi
a,the
practiceofappoi nti
ngt heseni ormostJudgeoft heSupr emeCour thadbeenf ollowedsincethe
commencementoft heConst i
tuti
onexceptappoi ntmentofJust iceA.N.Ray ;
whowasj uniort
o
threej udges.Thisappoi ntmentwascont r
oversi
al buttheGover nmentofI ndi
adef endedthe
appoi ntmentandst atedt hatitwasmadei naccor dancewithther ecommendat i
onofLaw
Commi ssi
onofI ndi
a.Nowt hePr esidentofIndiai srequi
redtoconsul tsuchoft hej udgesof
Supr emeCour tandoft heHi ghCour ts,ashemaydeem necessar yfortheappoi ntmentofChief
Just i
ceofI ndi
a.I ft
herei snodoubtaboutt hef i
tnessoft heseniormostJudgest ohol dt
he
officet henheisappoi ntedasaChi efJust i
ceofSupr emeCour taspert helongst andi
ng
conv
ent
ions.

Qual
i
ficati
onf
orAppoi
ntmentasaJudge-Ar
t.124(
3)-
Aper
sont
obeappoi
ntedasaJudgeof
t
heSupr emeCour
t-

Hemustbeaci
ti
zenofI
ndi
a;

Hehasbeenf oratl
eastf
ivey
ear
saJudgeofaHi
ghCour
tort
woormor
eHi
ghCour
tsi
n
successi
on;
or

Hasbeenf oratl
eastt
eny
ear
sanadv
ocat
eofaHi
ghCour
toroft
woormor
eHi
ghCour
tsi
n
successi
on;or

Hei
sint
heopi
nionoft
hePr
esi
dent,
adi
sti
ngui
shedj
uri
st

Art
.124(6)pr
ovidesthateveryper
sonappoi
ntedtobeaJudgeoft heSupremeCourt,befor
ehe
enter
suponhisoffi
ce,shallmakeandsubscr
ibebef
orethePresi
dent,orsomeperson
appoint
edinthebehalfofbyhim,andoat
horaffi
rmati
onaccordi
ngt othefor
m setoutforthe
purposeint
heThirdSchedule.

Tenureoftheoffi
ce-Art
.124(
2)-AJudgeoftheSupr
emeCour
tshal
lhol
doffi
ceunt
ilheat
tai
ns
theageof65y ears.AJudgemayhowev er
,resi
gnhi
sof
fi
cebywri
ti
ngunderhi
shand
addressedtot
hePr esi
dent.

Remov
al oftheJudges-Art
.124(
4)-AJudgeoftheSupremeCour tmayberemov edbyanor
der
oft
hePresidentonthegroundofprov
edmi sbehav
iouror
incapaci
ty.Thepr
ocedureof
i
mpeachmenttobecompl
etedbythebot hHousesofPar
li
ament.Thef
oll
owingpr
ocedur
eist
o
beobser
vedf
ortheremov
alofthejudges.Thi
siscommonlyknownasimpeachment-

Amoti
onaddressedt
othePresidentsignedbyaleast100membersoft
heLokSabhaor50
membersoft
heRajyaSabhaifdeli
veredtotheSpeakerort
hechai
rman.

Themoti
onistobeinvest
igat
edbyaCommi
tt
eeoft
hree(
2Judgesoft
heSupr
emeCour
tanda
di
sti
ngui
shedJur
ist
).

I
ftheCommitteef
indstheJudgegui
lt
yofmi
sbehavi
ourort
hathesuff
ersfr
om i
ncapaci
tyt
he
moti
ontoget
herwiththerepor
toft
heCommit
teeist
akenupforconsi
derat
ioni
ntheHouse
wheret
hemot i
onispendi
ng.

I
fthemot i
onispassedineachHousebymajori
tyofthetotal
membershi
poft
hatHouseandby
amaj or
it
yofnotlesst
hantwothi
rdofthatHousepresentandvot
ingt
headdr
essi
spresent
ed
t
ot hePresi
dent
.

TheJudgewi
l
lber
emov
edaf
tert
hePr
esi
dentgi
veshi
sor
derf
orr
emov
alont
hesai
daddr
ess.

Thepr ocedureforimpeachmentisthesamef orJudgesoftheSupremeCourtandtheHigh

Courts.Aftert
heConst i
tut
ionthi
sprocedurewasstartedagai
nst
,ShriR.Ramaswamyin1991-
93.TheCommi tteefoundtheJudgeguil
ty.I
ntheLokSabhat heCongressPar
tyabstai
nedfr
om
voti
ngandsot hemot i
oncouldnotbepassedwi threqui
sit
emajori
ty.
Sal
ariesandAll
owances(Art.
125)
-I
tempower sParl
iamentt
odet er
mi nethesal
ari
estobepai
d
tot
heJudgesoft heSupremeCourt.TheHighCourtandSupremeCour tJudges(Condi
ti
onof
Ser
vices)AmendmentAct ,
1998hasr ai
sedthesal
aryofaJudgeoft heSupremeCourtto
Rs.
90,000/-p.
m.andthatoftheChiefJust
iceofI
ndiatoRs.
100,000/-p.m.no

Ever
yJudgeoft heSupremeCour tshal
lbeentit
ledt
osuchpr i
vil
egesandallowancesandto
suchri
ghtsinrespectofl
eaveofabsenceandpensionasmayf rom t
imetot i
mebedet er
mined
byorunderlawmadebyPar l
iamentand,unti
lsodeter
mi ned,tosuchpriv
il
eges,all
owancesand
ri
ghtsasarespecifi
edint
heSecondSchedul e.Thepri
vil
eges, al
lowancesorotherri
ghtsofa
JudgeoftheSupremeCour tshal
lnotbev ar
iedtohi
sdisadv antagesaft
erhisappoint
ment.
HoweverthesalaryofaJudgeoft heSupremeCourtistaxableundertheIncomeTaxAct ,1961.

ActingChi
efJusti
ce-Art
.126-Whentheof f
iceofChiefJusti
ceofIndiai
svacantorwhenthe
ChiefJust
icei
s,byreasonofabsenceorotherwi
se,uabletoperfor
mt heduti
esofhisof
fi
ce,t
he
duti
esoftheoffi
ceshallbeper
formedbysuchoneoft heotherJudgesoftheSupr
emeCourtas
thePresi
dentmayappointfort
hatpurpose.

Ad-hocJudges-Art.127-TheChiefJusticeofIndi
a,wi
ththeprevi
ousconsentofthePresi
dent
andafterconsul
tat
ionwi t
hChiefJusticeoftheHighCourtconcer
ned,r
equestinwrit
ing,a
JudgeofaHi ghCour tt
oactasAd- hocJudgei ntheSupr
emeCour twhenthereisnoquorum of
theJudgetoconductpr oceedi
ngs,forsuchperiodasmaybenecessary.

AttendanceofRet ir
edJudges-Ar t.128-TheChiefJusti
ceofIndi
a,withaprevi
ousconsentof
thePr esi
dentrequeststher eti
redJudgesoft heSupremeCour tort
heHi ghCourttosi
tandact
asJudgesofSupr emeCour t.AftersuchappointmenttheJudgeshouldbeentit
ledtosuch
all
owancesast hePresidentmaybyor derdet
ermine.Suchapersonwhileacti
ngasaJudge
shallhaveallt
hej udri
sdict
ion, powersandpr i
vil
egesofaJudgeoft hatCourt
.
JURI
SDI
CTI
ONOFTHESUPREMECOURT

Int
roduct i
on-Supr emeCour ti
sattheApexoft henat i
onal j
udici
alsyst
em.Itconst rues
Constituti
onal balancev i
ewandpl ayedanext r
emelycreat i
verol
einkeepingt heresponsi ble
andPar li
ament ar ysy stem ofGovernmentinproperwor kingorder,i
nmaintainingthef ederal
balance, i
npr otectingt heFundament al
RightsofthePeopl e.TheSupremeCour thast ri
edt o
promot eaWel fareSt ateinIndi
a.TheSupr emeCour tenjoysveryextensi
vejurisdi
ction.Itplays
av er
ysi gnif
icantr oleint headmini
strat
ionoflawandj usticeinthecountr
y.TheSupr emeCour t
ofIndiapossessesl argerpowersthantheAmer i
canSupremeCour ti
nseveralrespects.

TheConst
it
uti
onofI
ndi
aconf
ersf
oll
owi
ngj
uri
sdi
cti
onont
heSupr
emeCour
t.

AsaCour
tofRecor
d(Ar
t.129)

Wr
itJur
isdi
cti
on(
Art
.32)

Or
igi
nal
Jur
isdi
cti
on(
Art
.131)

Appel
l
ateJur
isdi
cti
on-

I
nConst
it
uti
onal
Mat
ter
s(Ar
t.
132)

I
nCi
vi
lMat
ter
s(Ar
t.133)

I
nCr
imi
nal
Mat
ter
s(Ar
t.
134)

Appeal
bySpeci
alLeav
e(Ar
t.136)

Feder
alCour
t’
sJur
isdi
cti
on(
Art
.135)

Rev
iewJur
isdi
cti
on(
Art
.137)

Adv
isor
yJur
isdi
cti
on(
Art
.143)
ASACOURTOFRECORD( ART.129)-129pr
ovide“
TheSupremeCourtandshal
lhav
eal
lthe
power
sofsuchacour
tincl
udingthepowertopuni
shforcont
emptofit
sel
f.

M.M Thomasv .Stat

eofKer el
a,AIR2000SC540.I
twasheldthatSupr
emeCour thasi
nherent
power,t
opunishforitscontempt.TheCont
emptofCourtsAct
,1971defi
nesthepowersof
Court
sforpunishi
ngcont emptofcourt
sandregul
atest
heprocedur
ether
efor
e,andwhich
prov
idessi
mplei mpri
sonmentf orater
m whi
chmayextendtosixmonthsorwit
hf i
newhich
mayextendtoRs.2000orwi thboth.

InDelhiJudici
alServ
iceAssoci
ati
onv .St
ateofGuj
arat
,AIR1991SC2176,theSupr
emeCour t
punishedfivepoli
ceoffi
cersf
orharsassi
ngandhandcuff
ingt
heChiefJudi
cial
Magist
rateoft
he
cit
yofNadi adintheStateofGuj
arat,whi
chactamountedtot
hecontemptoftheCourtoft
he
ChiefJudici
alMagistr
ate.

InRe:Vi
nayChandraMishra,AI
R1995SC2349, t
heSupremeCourtpunishedasenioradv
ocate
andPresi
dentofBarCouncil
ofIndi
aformisbehavingwit
hJusti
ceKishoteofAl
lahabadHigh
Courtasi
tamountedtocontemptofthesaidCourt.Supr
emeCourtheldthati
thaspower
suomolutotakecogni
zanceofcont
emptpr oceedi
ngsagainstt
hecontemner.

InRe:Mr.NandLalBalwani
,AIR1999SC1300, anadvocatef
rom Mumbai ,
onFebruary26,
1999,buri
edshoestowardstheJudgesinChi
efJusti
ce’sCour
t.Hewasimmediatel
ytakenint
o
custody
.ThethreeJudgeBenchheadedbyChiefJusti
ceofIndi
a,senet
encedMr.Balwanit
o
fourmonthsi
mpr i
sonmentforcommi t
ti
ng“gr
osscontemptoftheCourt”

WRI TJURISDICTION-32-Art
.32conf er
swritjur
isdi
cti
onontheSupremeCourtfort
he
enforcementoffundamentalr
ights,
Intheexcersiseofthi
sJur
isdi
cti
on,t
heCourtmayissue
di
rections,
ordersorwri
ts,i
ncl
udingwr i
tsi
nt henatur
eofhabeascorpus,mandamus,
pr
ohi
bit
ion,
quowar
rant
oandcer
ti
orar
i.

Ar
t.32provi
deaquickremedyandapersonwhosefundament alr
ight
sisvi
olat
edinvokethi
s
j
uri
sdi
cti
onandgot otheSupremeCourtwit
houtwasti
nghismoneyar i
dti
mei nlowercourt
s.
Ar
t.32isconfi
nedtoenfor
cementoff
undamentalri
ghts.Ther
eforeSupr
emeCour ti
ssaidtobe
aprot
ector
,aguardi
anoffundament
alright
s.

ORIGI
NALJURI SDICTI
ON-131-Ar t
.131(1)confersontheSupremeCourtexclusi
veorigi
nal
j
uri
sdict
ion.I
tprovi
desthattheSupremeCour tshal
lhaveori
ginal
juri
sdi
cti
on,totheexcl
usi
on
ofanyotherCourt
,inadisputepr
ovidedthefoll
owingcondi
ti
onsar ecompli
edwith

Thesear
e-

Thedi
sput
emustbe-

Bet
weent
heGov
ernmentofI
ndi
aandoneormor
eSt
ates;
or-

Bet
weentheGover
nmentofI
ndi
aandanySt
ateorSt
atesononesi
deandoneormor
eSt
ates
ontheot
her
;or

Bet
weent
woormor
est
ates.

Thedi
sput
emustinvol
veanyquest
ion,
whet
herofl
aworf
act
,onwhi
cht
heexi
stenceorext
ent
ofal
egalr
ight
sdepends.
InStateofRaj
asthanv.UnionofI ndi
a,AIR1997SC1361-Whent hegov er
nmentofI ndiaissued
dir
ecti
vestotheChiefMi
nisterofCongr ess-
rul
edStatestoadvi
cetheirGovernorstodissolve
thei
rLegisl
ati
veAssembli
es, becauseofthedefeatofCongressatthecentre.Thi
sdirecti
v ewas
chall
engedinthi
scaseandt hequestionbeforetheSupremeCourtwaswhet hert
het er
m, “Stat
e
Government”.

TheSupremeCour thel dt
hatthedisput
ewasheldwithi
nArt.131.TheCourtfur
therheldt
hat
thedi
sputerel
atedt otheexcersi
seoftheCentr
e’spowerunderArt.356i
nrespecttotheStat
e
Legi
slat
ure,
whichr aisedaquesti
onoflegalr
ight
.

D)APPELLATEJURI
SDI
CTI
ON-

Constit
uti
onalmat t
ers-Ar
t.132-Itprovi
desthat“Anappealshalll
ietotheSupremeCourtfr
om
anyjudgement,decreeorfi
nal orderofaHighCourtintheter
ri
toryofIndia,
whetheri
nacivil
,
cri
minalorotherproceedi
ng,iftheHighCourtcerti
fi
esunderArt.134-A,t
hatthecaseinv
olvesa
substanti
alquest
ionoflawast otheint
erpr
etat
ionofthisConsti
tuti
on.”

Theexpressi
on“ ot
herproceedi
ngs”incl
udesal
lproceedi
ngsothert
hancivi
lCri
minalFor
exampletheseincl
uderevenueproceedi
ngsunderthetaxlawsoradisci
pli
nar
yproceedi
ng
agai
nstachartedaccountant.

Thewords“ asubstanti
alquesti
onoflaw”denoteaquesti
onregar
dingwhichther
eisa
di
ffer
enceofopinion.Thequestionwouldbesubstant
ial
questi
onwhent her
eisadifferenceof
opini
onamongt heHi ghCourtsonthatquesti
onandtherei
snodirectdeci
sionoft
heSupr eme
Courtonthatquesti
on.Thataquestionwhichhasbeensettl
edbytheSupremeCour tinits
previ
ousdecisi
onisnotasubst anci
alquesti
on.

Civi
lmatter
s-Art.133-I
tprov
idesthatanappealshalll
i
etotheSupr
emeCourtfrom any
j
udgement, decreeoffi
nalor
derinacivi
lproceedingofaHighCour
tint
heter
rit
oryofIndi
a,i
f
theHighCourtcerti
fi
esunderArt
.134-A(a)thatthecasei
nvolv
esasubst
anti
alquesti
onoflaw
general
importance;and

b)t
hati
ntheopi
nionoft
heHi
ghCour
tthesai
dquest
ionneedst
obedeci
dedbySupr
emeCour
t.

Const
it
uti
on(
30t
hAmendment
)Act1972hasr
emov
edt
hecondi
ti
onofmonet
aryv
alueandnow
theappeal
li
estoSupremeCour
tonlyi
fHighCourtcer
tif
iest
hatthecasei
nvol
vesasubst
anci
al
questi
onoflawofgener
ali
mport
ance,
needstobedecidedbytheSupremeCourt
.

3.Cr
imi
nalmatt
ers-Art
.134-Appealf
rom t
hedeci
sionofaHi
ghCour
tinacr
imi
nal
proceedi
ng
l
iesbef
oretheSupremeCourtinthef
oll
owingway
s-

a)
Wit
houtacer
ti
fi
cat
eoft
heHi
ghCour
t’
s:and

b)
Wit
h-acer
ti
fi
cat
eofaHi
ghCour
t.

Tar
achandDanuSut
arv
.St
ateofMahar
ast
ra,
AIR1962SC130

E)APPEALBYSPECI ALLEAVE-ART136-I tprovidesthat“Not

withst
andi
ngany t
hingi
nthi
s
chapter
,theSupremeCourtmay, initsdiscr
etion,grantspeci
all
eavetoappealfr
om any
j
udgement s,decr
ee,det
erminat
ion,sentenceoror derinanycauseormatterpassedormadeby
courtortr
ibunali
ntheter
ri
toryofIndi
a.”

F)FederalCourt’
sJuri
sdicti
on–Ar t
.135-Itprovi
des“ Unt
ilParli
amentbyl awot herwi
se
provi
des,t
heSupr emeCour tshal
lalsohavejuri
sdicti
onandpower swi t
hr espectt
oanymatt
er
towhichthepr ov
isi
onsofAr t
.133orAr t
.134donotappl yifjurisdi
ctionandpower si
nrel
ati
on
tothatmatterwereexercisablebytheFederalCour ti
mmedi atel
ybef orethecommencementof
thi
sConstitut
ionunderanyexi sti
nglaw.”

G)ADVI
SORYJURI
SDI
CTI
ON-Ar
t.143-

Introducti
on-Const i
tuti
onalProvisi
on-Ar t.(1)prov ides“ I
fatanyt i
mei tappearst othePr esi
dent
thataquest i
onoflaworf acthasar isen,orislikel ytoar i
se,whi chisofsuchanat ureandof
suchpubl icimpor t
ancethatitisexpedi enttoobt aintheopi nionoft heSupr emeCour tuponi t,
hemayr eferthequest i
ontothatCour tforconsi derationandt heCour tmayaf tersuchhear i
ng
asi fitt
hinksfit
,reporttothePr esidentitsopiniont hereon.“ Art131inr espectofwhicht he
originalj
urisdi
cti
onoft heSupremeCour titexcluded, e.g.,disputesar i
singoutofanyt reaty,
agr eementorot hersimil
arinstr
umentwhi chhav ingbeenent eredintoorexecut edbeforethe
commencementoft heConstit
ution,cont i
nuedi nt heoper ationaf t
ersuchcommencement .

ScopeofAr
t.143(
1)–ThescopeofAr
t.(
1)i
squi
tebr
oad.Ther
eisnocondi
ti
ont
hatt
he
Presi
dentcanref
eronlysuchquesti
onsasper t
ainedt
ohispower s,f
uncti
onsandduti
esor
thoseoftheCent
ralGovernment
.ThePr esi
dentcanseektheopinionofSupremeCourtonany
questi
onoflaworfactwhichappearstohimtobeofsuchanat ureandofsuchpubli
c
i
mpor t
ancethati
tisexpedit
etoobtaintheopi
nionoftheSupr
emeCour tofI
ndia.