Indian Polity • JudiciaryHard
Which of the following statements regarding the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts in India is correct?
A. The Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction under Article 32 is wider than that of the High Court under Article 226.
B. A High Court can issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights as well as for any other purpose.✓ Correct Answer
C. The Supreme Court can refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 32 if an alternative legal remedy is available.
D. High Courts cannot issue writs against bodies located outside their territorial jurisdiction under any circumstances.
💡 Solution & Explanation
Under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, High Courts possess wider writ jurisdiction than the Supreme Court because they can issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights as well as for any other ordinary legal purpose. Conversely, the Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction under Article 32 is strictly confined to the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and acts as a guarantor of Part III. This structural distinction gives litigants broader legal recourse at the state judiciary level for general administrative grievances.
More Indian Polity Judiciary questions
- Examine the constitutional mechanism for judicial appointments: How was the collegium system for appointing…
- Can a retired judge of the Supreme Court of India practice law in any court or before any authority within…
- Which Latin term means 'to be certified', and is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal to…
- Which doctrine allows the Indian judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and…
- Consider the following statements regarding the writ jurisdiction of High Courts with respect to Arunachal…