Indian Polity • JudiciaryHard
Consider the following statements regarding the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 32 and High Courts under Article 226: 1. The Supreme Court can issue writs only for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whereas High Courts can issue writs for Fundamental Rights as well as for any other purpose. 2. The territorial jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for issuing writs extends throughout India, while a High Court can issue writs only within its territorial jurisdiction or outside in certain connected matters. 3. Writ jurisdiction is an integral part of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution. Which of the statements given above are correct?
A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3✓ Correct Answer
💡 Solution & Explanation
Article 32 restricts the Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction strictly to the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, whereas Article 226 grants High Courts a wider mandate encompassing ordinary legal rights as well. The territorial reach of the Supreme Court covers the entire nation, while High Courts are bounded primarily by their state jurisdictions, subject to constitutional extensions introduced by the 15th Amendment. Judicial review and writ jurisdictions are firmly established as components of the basic structure of the Constitution.
More Indian Polity Judiciary questions
- Consider the following statements regarding the writ jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and High Courts: 1.…
- Which legal remedy/writ can be issued against both public authorities and private individuals?
- Examine the doctrine of 'Public Interest Litigation' in Indian constitutional jurisprudence: 1. It relaxed…
- Which High Court exercises legal and judicial jurisdiction over the State of Sikkim?
- Which Article of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to review its own judgment or order?