1. The Supreme Court of India and High Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction in disputes amongst two or more States.
2. Only the Supreme Court of India, High Courts and District Courts have the power to issue Writs.
3. Chief Minister of a State has absolutely no role in the entire appointment process of a High Court Judge.
4. Local customs and conventions which do not contradict a Statute or the Constitution are recognised and taken into account by Courts while administering justice in certain spheres.
How many of the above statements is/are correct?
To determine how many of the given statements are correct, let's analyze each one:
- The Supreme Court of India and High Courts have exclusive original jurisdiction in disputes amongst two or more States.
The Constitution of India, under Article 131, provides the Supreme Court exclusive original jurisdiction in any dispute involving the Union Government and one or more states or between two or more states. High Courts do not have such exclusive original jurisdiction in these inter-state disputes. Thus, this statement is incorrect.
- Only the Supreme Court of India, High Courts, and District Courts have the power to issue writs.
Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India empower the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to issue writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and other legal rights. District Courts do not have this power. Hence, this statement is incorrect.
- Chief Minister of a State has absolutely no role in the entire appointment process of a High Court Judge.
The Chief Minister of a state does have a role in the appointment process of a High Court Judge. The proposal for appointing a judge to the High Court is initiated by the Chief Justice of the High Court in consultation with the Chief Minister. Hence, this statement is incorrect.
- Local customs and conventions which do not contradict a Statute or the Constitution are recognised and taken into account by Courts while administering justice in certain spheres.
Courts in India do recognize local customs and conventions, provided they do not contradict statutory law or constitutional provisions, especially in personal law matters. Therefore, this statement is correct.
After evaluating all the statements, it is clear that only statement 4 is correct. Hence, the correct answer is that One statement is correct.
Important Questions from Judiciary-Supreme Court & High Courts
- Under Article 32 in which case ‘Wilful non-compliance' with court order was declared as contempt of the court?
Which one of the following statements is not correct?
(a) The Supreme Court of India is a Court of Record.
(b) High Courts in India are Courts of Record.
(c) Subordinate Courts in India are Courts of Record.
(d) All Courts in India are not Courts of Record.- Which one of the following subjects fall within the jurisdiction of both High Court and Supreme Court
- Given below are two statements, one is labelled as Assertion (A) and the other as Reason (R).
Assertion (A): Public Interest Litigation in India is essential for the rule of law.
Reason (R): Public Interest Litigation provides effective access of Justice to socially and economically weaker sections.
Select the correct answer from the code given below: Consider the following statements :
a) Under Article 124(4) of the Indian Constitution, a Supreme Court Judge can be impeached.
b) The ground for impeachment of a Judge pertains to 'incapacity and proven misbehavior'.
c) A minimum of 100 MPs are required to initiate the impeachment motion in the Lok Sabha.
d) The President can pardon the Judge.
Which of the following statements are IN CORRECT?
