High Court, State Judiciary & Tribunals (Art 214–237, 323A–323B)
Origin, Composition & Appointment — the Collegium Saga
🎯 Exam priority: Important. The High Court largely mirrors the Supreme Court, so examiners test exactly where it differs — a wider writ jurisdiction (Article 226 covers ordinary legal rights too, not just Fundamental Rights), no minimum age for judges, and no "distinguished jurist" appointment route. Learn the collegium saga (Second, Third and Fourth Judges cases) precisely, and don't confuse Article 226 (High Court writs) with Article 32 (Supreme Court writs).
The High Court sits below the Supreme Court but above the subordinate courts in India's single, integrated judicial system, and is the top judicial authority within a state. Articles 214 to 231 in Part VI govern its organisation, independence, jurisdiction and powers.
Origin & Composition
The first High Courts were set up at Calcutta, Bombay and Madras in 1862, and Allahabad in 1866. Article 214 guarantees a High Court for every state, but the 7th Amendment (1956) lets Parliament create one common High Court for two or more states (or states plus a Union Territory) — its territorial jurisdiction then simply spans all of them together. There are 25 High Courts today, of which only three (Bombay, Punjab & Haryana, and Gauhati) sit over more than one state. Among the eight Union Territories, only Delhi has its own High Court (since 1966); Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh share one; the rest fall under a neighbouring state's High Court, and Parliament can extend or withdraw that jurisdiction at will.
Article 216 gives every High Court a Chief Justice plus "such other Judges as the President may... deem necessary" — unlike the Assembly's fixed 500/60 range, the Constitution sets no strength for a High Court at all; the President simply adjusts it to the workload from time to time.
Appointment — the Collegium Saga
Article 217: the President appoints every High Court judge. The Chief Justice of the High Court is appointed after consulting the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and the state's Governor; for other judges, the High Court's own Chief Justice is consulted too — and for a common High Court, every concerned state's Governor is consulted.
Three landmark rulings built today's collegium system (a body of senior judges, not the executive, that effectively decides judicial appointments): the Second Judges case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993) held that no High Court judge can be appointed against the CJI's opinion; the Third Judges case (In re Presidential Reference, 1998) added that the CJI must first consult a collegium of senior Supreme Court judges — the CJI's own opinion alone is not enough. The 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act (both 2014) tried to replace this collegium with a National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC); the Fourth Judges case (2015) struck down both as unconstitutional for threatening judicial independence, restoring the collegium — which is why the collegium, not the NJAC, still decides appointments today.
Qualifications, Tenure, Removal & Transfer
Who can become a judge, how long they can serve, and how — rarely — one can be removed.
Qualifications, Oath & Salary
Qualifications: a citizen of India who has either held a judicial office in India for 10 years, or been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in succession) for 10 years. Two things the Constitution deliberately leaves out: it fixes no minimum age, and — unlike for the Supreme Court — there is no "distinguished jurist" route to a High Court bench.
Oath (Article 219): taken before the Governor (or a nominee), swearing allegiance to the Constitution and to perform duties without fear, favour, affection or ill-will. Salary (Article 221) is fixed by Parliament and cannot be reduced to a sitting judge's disadvantage except during a Financial Emergency; as of 2018 the Chief Justice draws ₹2.5 lakh/month and other judges ₹2.25 lakh/month, plus a sumptuary allowance and free accommodation. A retired Chief Justice/judge draws 50% of last-drawn salary as pension.
Tenure, Removal & Transfer
No fixed term, but four rules govern it: holds office until 62 years (raised from 60 by the 15th Amendment, 1963; age disputes are decided by the President after consulting the CJI, and that decision is final); may resign to the President; may be removed by the President; and vacates office on being elevated to the Supreme Court or transferred to another High Court.
Removal follows exactly the Supreme Court's process — an order of the President, only after Parliament presents an address in the same session, backed by a special majority in each House, on one of two grounds: proved misbehaviour or incapacity. The Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 lays down the mechanics: a motion signed by 100 Lok Sabha or 50 Rajya Sabha members goes to the Speaker/Chairman, who may admit it and form a three-member inquiry committee (a sitting Supreme Court judge, a High Court Chief Justice, and a distinguished jurist); only if it finds the judge guilty does the House take up the motion. No High Court judge has ever been removed this way.
Transfer (Article 222): the President can transfer a judge between High Courts after consulting the CJI, with a compensatory allowance. The Supreme Court has held (1977) that transfer must only be an exceptional, public-interest measure — never a punishment — and (1994) that it is judicially reviewable, though only the transferred judge may challenge it. The Third Judges case (1998) added that the CJI must also consult the Chief Justices of both High Courts involved, not decide alone.
Acting/Additional Judges & Nine Independence Safeguards
Temporary appointments keep a High Court running at full strength — and nine distinct constitutional safeguards keep it free of executive or legislative pressure.
Acting, Additional & Retired Judges (Articles 223–224A)
The President may name a sitting judge as Acting Chief Justice (Article 223) whenever the Chief Justice's post is vacant, absent, or unable to function. Additional judges (Article 224) may be appointed for up to two years to clear a backlog or handle a temporary surge in work; an acting judge fills in for a judge (other than the Chief Justice) who is absent or has himself moved up to Acting Chief Justice — either way, service ends at 62 regardless. Under Article 224A, a High Court's own Chief Justice may even recall a retired judge to sit temporarily, with the President's and that judge's consent.
Independence of the High Court — Nine Safeguards
1. Appointment mode — the executive alone doesn't decide; the judiciary is consulted (see the collegium above). 2. Security of tenure — removable only by the strict process above, not at the President's pleasure; consistent with zero removals ever. 3. Fixed service conditions — salary/allowances can't be cut to a judge's disadvantage after appointment (except a Financial Emergency).
4. Expenses charged on the Consolidated Fund of the State — judges' and staff salaries are non-votable (though still discussable) by the state legislature; a judge's pension, notably, is charged on the Consolidated Fund of India instead. 5. No discussion of judicial conduct — Parliament and every state legislature are barred from discussing a High Court judge's conduct in office, except during an actual impeachment motion (the same rule Article 211 applies at the state-legislature end).
6. Ban on post-retirement practice — a retired permanent judge cannot plead or act in any court or authority in India except the Supreme Court and other High Courts, removing any incentive to rule for future favour. 7. Contempt power — a High Court can punish for contempt of itself. 8. Staff-appointment freedom — the Chief Justice appoints the High Court's own officers and staff without executive interference. 9. Jurisdiction can't be curtailed — neither Parliament nor a state legislature may cut back a High Court's constitutionally-specified powers.
Jurisdiction & Powers of the High Court
Seven distinct heads of jurisdiction make the High Court one of the most powerful courts in the world on paper — appellate authority, a wide writ power, and the final word over every subordinate court in the state.
Jurisdiction & Powers (Articles 225–230)
Jurisdiction | What it covers |
1. Original | Election disputes (MPs/MLAs), revenue matters, direct Fundamental Rights enforcement; 4 High Courts (Calcutta, Bombay, Madras, Delhi) also have original civil jurisdiction in high-value cases |
2. Writ (Art 226) | Habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, quo warranto — for Fundamental Rights AND "any other purpose" (ordinary legal rights), making it WIDER than the Supreme Court's Art 32 writ power, which covers Fundamental Rights only |
3. Appellate | Civil: first/second appeals from subordinate courts, intra-court appeals to a division bench, tribunal appeals. Criminal: sentences over 7 years' imprisonment, and EVERY death sentence needs High Court confirmation regardless of any appeal |
4. Supervisory (Art 227) | Superintendence over all courts/tribunals in the state except military ones — call for returns, issue practice rules, settle court fees; used sparingly, only for excess jurisdiction, natural-justice breaches or manifest injustice |
5. Control over subordinate courts | Consulted on district-judge appointments; posts/promotes/disciplines other judicial-service members; can withdraw a constitutional-interpretation case to itself; its rulings bind every subordinate court in the state |
6. Court of record (Art 215) | Its judgments are permanent legal precedent, and it can punish for contempt of itself or of a subordinate court (Contempt of Courts Act, 1971) — plus an inherent power to review its own decisions, though the Constitution grants that review power to the Supreme Court explicitly and not to High Courts |
7. Judicial review | Examines whether a law or executive order violates the Constitution (Articles 13 + 226) on three grounds: it breaches Fundamental Rights, exceeds the enacting authority's competence, or conflicts with the Constitution |
In the Chandra Kumar case (L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, 1997), the Supreme Court ruled that the writ jurisdiction of both the High Courts and the Supreme Court is part of the Constitution's basic structure — it cannot be excluded even by a constitutional amendment. The same case also held that a person unhappy with a tribunal's order must go to the High Court first; only from there can it reach the Supreme Court.
The 42nd Amendment (1976) briefly barred High Courts from examining the constitutional validity of central laws; the 43rd Amendment (1977) restored the original, full position.
State Judiciary — the Subordinate Courts
Below the High Court sits the "subordinate judiciary" — the district and lower courts that handle the overwhelming majority of India's actual caseload.
State Judiciary — Subordinate Courts (Articles 233–237)
District judges (Article 233) are appointed, posted and promoted by the Governor in consultation with the High Court; a candidate must not already be in government service, must have been an advocate/pleader for 7 years, and must be recommended by the High Court. Other judicial-service appointments (Article 234) go through the Governor too, but after consulting both the State Public Service Commission (SPSC) and the High Court. Article 235 vests full control (postings, promotions, leave, discipline) over everyone below district-judge rank in the High Court itself, not the state government.
The hierarchy (structure varies slightly by state): the District & Sessions Judge is the top district authority — the same person is called "District Judge" on the civil side and "Sessions Judge" on the criminal side — with power to award any sentence including death (subject to mandatory High Court confirmation). Below that: on the civil side, the Subordinate/Civil Judge (unlimited pecuniary jurisdiction) and the Munsiff/Civil Judge (Junior Division) (small-value civil suits); on the criminal side, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (cases carrying up to 7 years' imprisonment) and the Judicial Magistrate (up to 3 years'). Some cities add City Civil Courts and Metropolitan Magistrates; some states run Small Causes Courts for petty civil claims (decisions final, but revisable by the High Court) and village-level Panchayat/Nyaya courts for petty disputes.
Tribunals — Article 323A & 323B
Tribunals sit outside the ordinary court hierarchy entirely — created only in 1976, and repeatedly reshaped by the courts since.
Tribunals (Articles 323A–323B)
The original Constitution had no tribunal provisions; the 42nd Amendment (1976) inserted Part XIV-A — just two Articles. Article 323A lets only Parliament create tribunals for public-service recruitment and conditions-of-service disputes (one per government, no hierarchy possible); Article 323B lets both Parliament and state legislatures create tribunals — with a permitted hierarchy — for eight other subjects: taxation, foreign exchange/import-export, industrial and labour disputes, land reforms, urban-property ceilings, election disputes, foodstuffs, and (added by the 75th Amendment, 1993) rent and tenancy rights.
The Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (passed under Article 323A) set up the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) — original jurisdiction over recruitment/service matters for All-India Services, Central civil services and civilian defence employees (but not the armed forces themselves, or Supreme Court/Parliament secretariat staff). CAT now runs 19 regular benches (principal bench in Delhi); it dropped its Vice-Chairman post in 2006, leaving just a Chairman (sanctioned strength 1) and Members (sanctioned strength 69, per the Tribunals Reforms Act, 2021) — nobody under 50 is eligible, and members serve 4 years or until age 70 (Chairman) / 67 (Members), whichever comes first, appointed on a search-cum-selection committee's recommendation chaired by the CJI or a CJI-nominated Supreme Court judge. CAT isn't bound by the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — it follows natural justice instead, charges a nominal ₹50 filing fee, and lets an applicant appear in person or via a lawyer. The same Act lets states request their own State Administrative Tribunals (SATs), or a shared Joint Administrative Tribunal (JAT) for two or more states.
In the same Chandra Kumar case (1997) discussed above, the Supreme Court struck down the parts of both Articles 323A and 323B that had tried to exclude High Court/Supreme Court jurisdiction over tribunal orders entirely — so an aggrieved party must now approach the concerned High Court's division bench first, and only then, if needed, the Supreme Court.
Further Reading
Standard NCERT-level texts and reference books on the Indian Constitution and Polity (any UPSC reading list).
The Constitution of India (Bare Act) — Articles 214–231 (High Courts), 233–237 (Subordinate Courts) and 323A–323B (Tribunals).
Why UPSC Asks This
Article 226 vs Article 32 — the "wider writ power" contrast is one of the most repeated Prelims traps in the entire syllabus.
The Second/Third/Fourth Judges cases and the NJAC's rise-and-fall are a favourite "sequence the events" and "match the case to the holding" theme.
Chandra Kumar (1997) connects three different topics at once — High Court writs, tribunals, and the basic structure doctrine — so it resurfaces across multiple chapters.
Test Yourself: Practice Questions & PYQs
High Court, State Judiciary and Tribunals practice — composition and the collegium saga, qualifications/tenure/removal, the seven heads of jurisdiction, the subordinate-court hierarchy, and Articles 323A/323B. Then Prelims-pattern PYQs.
Practice Questions
Q1. How many High Courts currently exist in India, and how many have jurisdiction over more than one state?
(a) 25 High Courts; 1 with jurisdiction over more than one state
(b) 28 High Courts; 2 with jurisdiction over more than one state
(c) 21 High Courts; 5 with jurisdiction over more than one state
(d) 25 High Courts; 3 with jurisdiction over more than one state
Show answer
Answer: (d) — 25 High Courts today; only Bombay, Punjab & Haryana, and Gauhati sit over more than one state.
Q2. The strength (number of judges) of a High Court is:
(a) Not fixed by the Constitution — decided by the President from time to time
(b) Decided by the Chief Justice of India alone
(c) Fixed at 500 by the Constitution
(d) Fixed at exactly 25 for every High Court
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Article 216 sets no number; the President adjusts strength to workload, unlike the Assembly's fixed 500/60 range.
Q3. In the Second Judges case (1993), the Supreme Court held that:
(a) The President can appoint judges without any judicial consultation
(b) The NJAC is constitutionally valid
(c) Judges cannot be transferred between High Courts
(d) A High Court judge cannot be appointed against the opinion of the Chief Justice of India
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Second Judges case (SCAORA v. UOI, 1993) — CJI's opinion becomes binding on appointments.
Q4. The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), introduced by the 99th Amendment (2014), was:
(a) Upheld and remains in force today
(b) Struck down as unconstitutional in 2015, restoring the collegium system
(c) Never actually legislated
(d) Applicable only to Supreme Court appointments, not High Courts
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Fourth Judges case (2015) struck down the 99th Amendment and the NJAC Act as threatening judicial independence.
Q5. Which of the following is a genuine constitutional qualification for a High Court judge?
(a) 10 years as an advocate of a High Court, OR 10 years holding judicial office in India
(b) A minimum age of 35 years
(c) A law degree from a specified list of universities
(d) Prior experience as a district judge
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Either route qualifies; the Constitution fixes no minimum age and has no 'distinguished jurist' route for High Courts.
Q6. The retirement age of a High Court judge is:
(a) 65 years, same as the Supreme Court
(b) 60 years
(c) Not fixed — serves for life
(d) 62 years, raised from 60 by the 15th Amendment (1963)
Show answer
Answer: (d) — 15th Amendment (1963) raised it from 60 to 62; Supreme Court judges retire at 65.
Q7. An additional judge of a High Court can be appointed for a maximum period of:
(a) One year
(b) Two years
(c) Five years
(d) Three years
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Article 224 caps an additional judge's term at two years, to handle a backlog or temporary workload surge.
Q8. The pension of a retired High Court judge is charged on:
(a) The Public Account of India
(b) The Consolidated Fund of India
(c) The Consolidated Fund of the concerned State
(d) The Contingency Fund of the State
Show answer
Answer: (b) — An HC judge's salary is charged on the STATE's Consolidated Fund, but the pension specifically is charged on India's.
Q9. The writ jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226, compared to the Supreme Court's under Article 32, is:
(a) Available only when the Supreme Court has already refused relief
(b) Narrower, since High Courts cannot issue all five writs
(c) Identical in every respect
(d) Wider, since it also covers enforcement of ordinary legal rights, not just Fundamental Rights
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Article 226 adds 'for any other purpose' — ordinary legal rights — which Article 32 does not cover.
Q10. In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court held that:
(a) The writ jurisdiction of the High Courts and the Supreme Court is part of the basic structure of the Constitution
(b) Tribunal orders can be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, bypassing the High Court
(c) Administrative tribunals are unconstitutional
(d) High Courts cannot review their own tribunals' orders
Show answer
Answer: (a) — Chandra Kumar (1997) made writ jurisdiction basic structure, and routed tribunal appeals through the High Court first.
Q11. A death sentence awarded by a Sessions Court:
(a) Requires only the Governor's confirmation
(b) Becomes final immediately unless appealed
(c) Must be confirmed by the High Court whether or not there is an appeal
(d) Can only be confirmed by the Supreme Court
Show answer
Answer: (c) — High Court confirmation of a capital sentence is mandatory, independent of whether the convict appeals.
Q12. Appointment of a district judge is made by:
(a) The President, in consultation with the Chief Justice of India
(b) The Governor, in consultation with the High Court
(c) The High Court alone
(d) The State Public Service Commission alone
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Article 233 — Governor appoints/posts/promotes district judges, but only in consultation with the High Court.
Q13. Which Article empowers Parliament ALONE (not state legislatures) to create tribunals for public-service matters?
(a) Article 227
(b) Article 226
(c) Article 323A
(d) Article 323B
Show answer
Answer: (c) — Article 323A is Parliament-only, single-tribunal-per-government; Article 323B allows state legislatures too, with hierarchy.
UPSC Previous Year Questions (PYQs)
Pattern: qualification/age traps for HC judges; removal procedure mirroring the Supreme Court; judicial review grounds; the 42nd/43rd Amendment reversal; subordinate-court appointment consultation requirements; CAT facts; Article 323A vs 323B.
Q14. Consider the following statements: (1) The Constitution of India prescribes a minimum age for appointment as a judge of a High Court. (2) A High Court judge can be appointed only from among sitting district judges. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
(a) Both 1 and 2
(b) 2 only
(c) 1 only
(d) Neither 1 nor 2
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Neither is correct — the Constitution fixes no minimum age, and either a 10-year advocate or a 10-year judicial-office holder qualifies; district-judge experience is not a requirement.
Q15. With reference to the removal of a High Court judge, which of the following is correct?
(a) A High Court judge can be removed only by the Supreme Court
(b) Removal requires a Parliamentary address supported by a special majority, on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity
(c) There is no constitutional procedure for removal
(d) The President can remove a judge on the Chief Minister's recommendation alone
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Same process and grounds as a Supreme Court judge — special-majority Parliamentary address, then Presidential order.
Q16. Which of the following can be a ground for the constitutional validity of a law to be challenged before a High Court?
(a) It infringes a Fundamental Right
(b) All of the above
(c) It is outside the competence of the enacting authority
(d) It is repugnant to the constitutional provisions
Show answer
Answer: (b) — All three are recognised grounds for judicial review by a High Court under Articles 13 and 226.
Q17. The 42nd Amendment Act's restriction on a High Court examining the validity of a central law was:
(a) Still in force today
(b) Struck down by the Supreme Court in 1980
(c) Never actually enacted
(d) Restored to the original position by the 43rd Amendment Act, 1977
Show answer
Answer: (d) — 42nd Amendment (1976) curtailed it; 43rd Amendment (1977) restored the High Court's full judicial review power.
Q18. Appointment of persons to the judicial service of a state, other than district judges, is made by the Governor after consultation with:
(a) The High Court only
(b) Both the State Public Service Commission and the High Court
(c) The State Public Service Commission only
(d) The Union Public Service Commission
Show answer
Answer: (b) — Article 234 — Governor consults BOTH the SPSC and the High Court for non-district-judge judicial appointments.
Q19. A Chief Judicial Magistrate can try criminal cases punishable with imprisonment up to:
(a) Three years
(b) Ten years
(c) Five years
(d) Seven years
Show answer
Answer: (d) — CJM's ceiling is 7 years' imprisonment; a Judicial Magistrate's ceiling is lower, at 3 years.
Q20. Which of the following statements about the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) is correct?
(a) It has a Vice-Chairman as of 2006
(b) It is bound by the Civil Procedure Code, 1908
(c) It was set up in 1985 under the Administrative Tribunals Act
(d) Its orders can be appealed directly to the Supreme Court, without approaching a High Court
Show answer
Answer: (c) — CAT was established in 1985; it is NOT bound by the CPC, its Vice-Chairman post was abolished (not added) in 2006, and post-1997 (Chandra Kumar) its orders go to the High Court first, not directly to the Supreme Court.
Q21. Tribunals for matters like taxation, industrial disputes and land reforms, which state legislatures may also establish, fall under:
(a) Article 323A
(b) Article 227
(c) Article 226
(d) Article 323B
Show answer
Answer: (d) — Article 323B — unlike Article 323A (Parliament-only, service matters), it covers several other subjects and allows both Parliament and state legislatures to act.
Mains Practice Questions
Use these to frame full-length answers. You don't have to answer one exactly — they show the angles UPSC tests, so let them guide which points you cover.
How does the writ jurisdiction of a High Court under Article 226 differ from that of the Supreme Court under Article 32?
Trace the evolution of the judicial-appointments process through the Second, Third and Fourth Judges cases, including the NJAC episode.
Discuss the constitutional safeguards that secure the independence of the High Court from the executive and the legislature.
Distinguish tribunals under Article 323A from those under Article 323B.
"The power of judicial review of the High Court is as extensive as that of the Supreme Court, if not more." Examine.
Describe the structure of the subordinate judiciary in a state and the High Court's control over it.