High Court

    In the Indian judiciary, the High Court is positioned below the Supreme Court and above subordinate courts, playing a central role in the judicial administration of a state. The High Court is critical in ensuring that justice is delivered at the state level.

Historical Background

     The establishment of High Courts in India can be traced back to 1862, when the first High Courts were set up in Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras. In 1866, a fourth High Court was established in Allahabad. Over time, each province in British India came to have its own High Court. After the adoption of the Constitution in 1950, the High Courts that existed in provinces became the High Courts for the corresponding states.

Constitutional Provisions

         The Constitution mandates a High Court for each state, but the Seventh Amendment Act of 1956 allows Parliament to establish a common High Court for two or more states or for two or more states and a Union Territory. The territorial jurisdiction of a High Court aligns with the boundaries of the state or, in the case of a common High Court, with the regions of the involved states and Union Territory.

        As of 2019, there are 25 High Courts in India, of which only three have jurisdiction over multiple states. Among the nine Union Territories, only Delhi has its own High Court (since 1966), while the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh share a common High Court. Other Union Territories fall under the jurisdiction of different state High Courts. Parliament retains the authority to extend or restrict the jurisdiction of a High Court in relation to Union Territories.

Legislative Framework

      Articles 214 to 231 in Part VI of the Constitution provide comprehensive provisions regarding the organization, independence, jurisdiction, powers, and procedures related to High Courts.

The High Court serves as a vital institution within the Indian judicial system, ensuring the enforcement of laws and delivery of justice at the state level. Its establishment, jurisdictional authority, and structural provisions underscore its importance in upholding the rule of law and providing a check on the powers of the executive and legislative branches. The ability to adapt the jurisdiction of High Courts to fit the needs of the Union Territories further reflects the flexibility and responsiveness of the Indian legal framework.

High Court: Composition and Appointment

The High Court in each state operates as a critical part of India’s integrated judiciary, positioned below the Supreme Court and above the subordinate courts.

Composition of the High Court

• • Structure: Each High Court consists of a Chief Justice and other judges appointed by the President of India. The Constitution does not specify the number of judges, leaving this determination to the discretion of the President, who assesses the High Court’s workload when deciding its composition.

Appointment of Judges

Appointment Process:

• • The President appoints the Chief Justice of the High Court after consulting the Chief Justice of India and the Governor of the concerned state.
  • For appointing other judges, the Chief Justice of the High Court is also consulted.
  • In the case of a common High Court for multiple states, the governors of all involved states are consulted as well.

Judicial Precedent: The Supreme Court has shaped the appointment process through landmark cases such as:

• • In the Second Judges Case (1993), the Court ruled that no appointments could be made without the Chief Justice of India’s concurrence.
  • In the Third Judges Case (1998), the Court emphasized that the Chief Justice of India should consult a collegium of the two senior-most judges of the Supreme Court, indicating that a single opinion from the Chief Justice does not suffice for the “consultation” process.

99th Constitutional Amendment: In 2014, this amendment and the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act sought to replace the collegium system with the NJAC. However, both were declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in 2015 in the Fourth Judges Case, reinstating the collegium system as a means to safeguard judicial independence.

Qualifications of Judges

To be appointed as a High Court judge, an individual must meet the following qualifications:

1. Citizenship: Must be a citizen of India.

2. Experience:

(a) Must have held judicial office in India for at least ten years; or

(b) Must have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in succession) for at least ten years.

It is noteworthy that the Constitution does not specify a minimum age for High Court judges, nor does it allow for the appointment of distinguished jurists as judges, as is the case for Supreme Court appointments.

Oath or Affirmation

Before assuming office, a judge of the High Court must take an oath or affirmation before the Governor or an appointed representative. The oath includes commitments to:

1. 1. Bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of India.
   2. Uphold the sovereignty and integrity of India.
   3. Perform the duties of the office faithfully, to the best of their ability, knowledge, and judgment, without fear or favor.
   4. Uphold the Constitution and the laws.

Salaries and Allowances

      The salaries, allowances, privileges, leave, and pensions of High Court judges are determined by Parliament and cannot be reduced to their disadvantage after their appointment, except during financial emergencies.

As of 2018:

• • The salary of the Chief Justice was increased from ₹90,000 to ₹2.50 lakh per month.
  • The salary of other judges was raised from ₹80,000 to ₹2.25 lakh per month.

Judges are also entitled to a sumptuary allowance and enjoy free accommodation and other benefits, such as medical care and transportation.

Retirement Benefits:  Retired Chief Justices and judges receive a monthly pension equal to 50% of their last drawn salary.

     The structure and operation of the High Court are fundamental to India’s judicial system, providing essential oversight and adjudication in legal matters. The provisions regarding the appointment, qualifications, and responsibilities of High Court judges ensure a balance between independence and accountability, facilitating effective governance and justice in the country. The independence and integrity of the judiciary are vital for maintaining the rule of law and constitutional supremacy.

The independence of a high court is vital for maintaining the rule of law and ensuring justice. The provisions outlined in the Constitution aim to protect this independence through various mechanisms. Here’s a summary of these provisions:

1. 1. Mode of Appointment: Judges are appointed by the President in consultation with the judiciary, ensuring reduced political influence.
   2. Security of Tenure: Judges can only be removed through a defined impeachment process, providing them with job security and insulation from arbitrary dismissal.
   3. Fixed Service Conditions: Judges’ salaries and perks cannot be adversely altered during their tenure, except during a financial emergency, ensuring stable working conditions.
   4. Expenses Charged on Consolidated Fund: Judges’ remuneration is charged to the Consolidated Fund of the state, protecting it from legislative vote.
   5. Conduct of Judges cannot be Discussed: Parliamentary discussions on judges’ conduct are restricted, preserving their dignity, except during impeachment proceedings.
   6. Ban on Practice after Retirement: Retired judges are barred from practicing in any court except the Supreme Court and high courts, preventing potential conflicts of interest.
   7. Power to Punish for its Contempt: High courts hold the authority to address contempt, safeguarding their decisions and authority.
   8. Freedom to Appoint its Staff: The Chief Justice can autonomously appoint high court staff, reinforcing the court’s operational autonomy.
   9. Jurisdiction cannot be Curtailed: The Constitution protects the original jurisdiction of high courts from alteration by Parliament or state legislatures.
   10. Separation from Executive: The Constitution mandates the separation of the judiciary from the executive, establishing clear lines between judicial and executive powers.

These provisions collectively aim to ensure that high courts operate impartially and effectively in upholding justice without undue influence or interference.

The jurisdiction and powers of a high court are extensive and play a crucial role in the administration of justice in a state. Below are the key aspects of the jurisdiction and powers of high courts, as defined in the Constitution and other relevant legislation:

Types of Jurisdiction and Powers:

1. Original Jurisdiction:

• • High courts have the authority to hear cases directly without the need for appeal. This includes:
    • • Matters of admiralty and contempt of court.
      • Disputes related to the election of Parliament and state legislatures.
      • Revenue-related matters.
      • Enforcement of citizens’ fundamental rights.
      • Cases involving constitutional interpretation transferred from subordinate courts.
      • Original civil jurisdiction for cases above a certain value (specific to certain high courts).

2. Writ Jurisdiction:

• • Under Article 226, high courts can issue writs such as habeas corpus, mandamus, certiorari, prohibition, and quo warranto. It allows enforcement of fundamental rights and other legal rights.
  • High courts’ writ powers can extend beyond territorial limits if the cause of action arises within their jurisdiction.
  • The writ jurisdiction is concurrent with that of the Supreme Court but is broader, covering not just fundamental rights but ordinary legal rights as well.

3. Appellate Jurisdiction:

• • High courts primarily function as appellate courts, hearing appeals from subordinate courts in civil and criminal matters:
    • • Civil appeals can include first appeals from district courts and second appeals on legal questions.
      • Criminal appeals may include cases with sentences over seven years and the mandatory confirmation of death sentences.

4. Supervisory Jurisdiction:

• • High courts have supervisory powers over all courts and tribunals in their territory, allowing them to regulate procedures and review their practices:
    • • They can call for returns, issue general rules, and supervise the administration of justice.

5. Control over Subordinate Courts:

• • High courts exert administrative control over subordinate courts, influencing the appointment, promotion, and management of judicial officers.
  • They can withdraw cases involving substantial questions of law for better handling.

6. A Court of Record:

• • High courts maintain records of their proceedings and decisions, which hold evidentiary value and are binding on subordinate courts.
  • They possess the power to punish for contempt of court under the Contempt of Court Act of 1971.

7. Power of Judicial Review:

• • High courts can review legislation and administrative actions to ensure they comply with constitutional mandates, safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens.

Governance of Jurisdiction and Powers:

The jurisdiction and powers of high courts are governed by:

• • Constitutional provisions
  • Letters Patent
  • Acts of Parliament
  • Acts of State Legislature
  • Indian Penal Code (1860)
  • Criminal Procedure Code (1973)
  • Civil Procedure Code (1908)

The high court functions as a vital institution for ensuring justice and protecting citizens’ rights. Its extensive jurisdiction and powers empower it to handle a diverse array of legal matters effectively, serving as a crucial check on the legislative and executive branches of government.

Power of Judicial Review

      Judicial review is a vital function of high courts, allowing them to assess the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders from both Central and state governments. When these laws or orders are found to violate the Constitution (termed ultra-vires), they can be declared null and void, rendering them unenforceable.

Constitutional Basis

        Although the term “judicial review” does not explicitly appear in the Constitution, Articles 13 and 226 grant high courts this power. The constitutionality of a legislative enactment or executive order can be challenged for the following reasons:

1. 1. Infringement of Fundamental Rights: If it violates any rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution.
   2. Lack of Competence: If the authority that framed the enactment or order exceeded its jurisdiction.
   3. Repugnancy to Constitutional Provisions: If it conflicts with the provisions laid down in the Constitution.

Amendments Affecting Judicial Review

• • 42nd Amendment (1976): Initially curtailed the power of high courts by preventing them from questioning the constitutional validity of Central laws.
  • 43rd Amendment (1977): Restored the original position, allowing high courts to review Central laws once again.

High Courts Overview

Name and Jurisdiction of High Courts

      High courts can be found across various states and territories in India, each with defined territorial jurisdiction. Below is a summary of some high courts and their relevant details:

Articles Related to High Courts

Below is a summary of the relevant articles relating to high courts in the Constitution: