Indian Judiciary System part-3 , SC JURISDICTIONs Explained in my Youtube channel (YM Notes) Subscribe to my Youtube channel.

1. INDIAN JUDICIARY
PART – 3
SC JURISDICTION

2. JURISDICTION
JURISDICTION IS THE AUTHORITY GIVEN TO A LEGAL BODY LIKE A COURT TO
ADMINISTER JUSTICE WITHIN A DEFINED FIELD OF RESPONSIBILITY

3. TYPES
•ORIGINAL
•APPELLATE
•ADVISORY
AS PROVIDED IN ARTICLES 131, 133 – 136 AND 143 RESPECTIVELY OF THE
INDIAN CONSTITUTION

4. ORIGINAL
•ORIGINAL JURISDICTION OF A COURT REFERS TO A MATTER FOR WHICH
THE PARTICULAR COURT IS APPROACHED FIRST. IN THE CASE OF THE
SUPREME COURT IN INDIA
•ITS ORIGINAL JURISDICTION IS COVERED UNDER ARTICLE 131

5. IT INVOLVES
•ANY DISPUTE BETWEEN THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND ONE OR MORE STATES
•ANY DISPUTE BETWEEN THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT AND ONE OR MORE STATES ON
ONE SIDE AND ONE OR MORE STATES ON THE OTHER SIDE
•ANY DISPUTE BETWEEN TWO OR MORE STATES
•ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TO THE
SC FOR MATTERS REGARDING THE ENFORCEMENT OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

6. CONTINUED…
•THE SC CAN ISSUE WRITS, DIRECTIONS, OR ORDERS INCLUDING WRITS IN THE NATURE
OF MANDAMUS, HABEAS CORPUS, QUO WARRANTO, PROHIBITION AND CERTIORARI
•THE SC ALSO HAS THE POWER TO DIRECT THE TRANSFER OF A CRIMINAL OR CIVIL CASE
FROM THE HIGH COURT IN ONE STATE TO THE HIGH COURT IN ANOTHER STATE
•IT CAN ALSO TRANSFER CASES FROM ONE SUBORDINATE COURT TO ANOTHER STATE
HIGH COURT

7. CONTINUED…
•IF THE SC DEEMS THAT CASES INVOLVING THE SAME QUESTIONS OF LAW ARE
PENDING BEFORE IT AND ONE OR MORE HIGH COURTS, AND THAT THESE ARE
SIGNIFICANT QUESTIONS OF LAW, IT CAN WITHDRAW THE CASES BEFORE THE
HIGH COURT OR COURTS AND DISPOSE OFF ALL THESE CASES ITSELF.
•THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 GIVES SC THE AUTHORITY TO
INITIATE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION.

8. APPELLATE JURISDICTION
•UNDER THIS, THE SUPREME COURT CAN HEAR CASES ONLY WHEN THEY ARE
APPEALED AGAINST A HIGH COURT ORDER

9. ADVISORY JURISDICTION
•UNDER THIS, THE PRESIDENT CAN REQUEST THE SUPREME COURT TO OFFER
ITS OPINION ON ANY ISSUE OF LAW OR FACT, UNDER ARTICLE 143 OF THE
CONSTITUTION

10. HOW IT CAME
•THERE IS NO SPECIFIC PROVISION FOR SUCH AN ADVISORY JURISDICTION IN
THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OR THAT OF AUSTRALIA
•IN FACT, THE AMERICAN SUPREME COURT HAS REFUSED TO ENTERTAIN SUCH
PLEAS BY THE EXECUTIVE, IT STATED THAT IT WILL FOCUS ON MORE CONCRETE
MATTERS CONCERNING THE LAW OF THE LAND

11. CONTINUED…
• HOWEVER, ACCORDING TO SECTION 60 OF THE CANADIAN SUPREME COURT ACT, 1906, THE GOVERNOR-
GENERAL MAY REFER TO IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OF LAW TO THE SUPREME COURT FOR ITS ADVISORY
OPINION
• A SIMILAR PROVISION THAT EMPOWERED THE FEDERAL COURT TO GIVE AN ADVISORY OPINION ON
MATTERS REFERRED CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION 213(1) OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA ACT, 1935. THE
DRAFT CONSTITUTION LATER REPLACED THE WORDS “GOVERNOR-GENERAL” AND “FEDERAL COURT” WITH
“PRESIDENT” AND “SUPREME COURT” RESPECTIVELY

12. REVIEW JURISDICTION
•THIS IS COVERED UNDER ARTICLE 137 AND IT GIVES SC THE AUTHORITY TO REVIEW ITS
JUDGEMENTS. THERE ARE TWO GROUNDS ON WHICH A REVIEW IS PERMITTED
IF THERE HAS BEEN AN APPARENT ERROR ON THE FACE OF RECORD LEADING TO THE
PERVERSITY OF JUDGEMENT, OR
IF NEW EVIDENCE HAS BEEN UNCOVERED WHICH WAS NOT AVAILABLE EARLIER
DESPITE THE BEST ATTEMPT BY THE PARTY OR OUT OF NO FAULT OF THE PARTY

13. “
”
தன்நெஞ் சறிவது ந ொய்யற்க ந ொய்த்தபின்
தன்நெஞ்சச தன்னைச் சுடும்
ந ொய் என்று உள்ளம் உணர்த்துவனதச் நசொல்ல சவண்டொ. நசொன்ைொல், அனதப் ந ொய்
என்று உலகு அறிய செரும்ச ொது தன் மைசம தன்னைச் சுடும்.
LET NOT A MAN KNOWINGLY TELL A LIE; FOR AFTER HE HAS TOLD THE LIE, HIS MIND WILL
BURN HIM (WITH THE MEMORY OF HIS GUILT).