The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court falls into four classes: original, appellate, advisory, and a group of special powers conferred by Arts.129, 137, 141 and 142. Its reach is wider than that of the highest court in most constitutional systems, because Art.136 gives it a discretionary appellate power over every court and tribunal in the country.
Legal Framework
| Provision | Subject | Key Rule |
|---|---|---|
| Art.124 | Constitution of the Court | Chief Justice and other Judges |
| Art.129 | Court of record | The Court is a court of record with all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself |
| Art.131 | Original jurisdiction | Exclusive jurisdiction over disputes between the Union and States, and between States, involving a legal right |
| Art.32 | Writ jurisdiction | Original jurisdiction to enforce fundamental rights, concurrent with the High Courts under Art.226 |
| Art.132 | Constitutional appeals | Appeal from a High Court where it certifies a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution |
| Art.133 | Civil appeals | Appeal where the High Court certifies a substantial question of law of general importance which in its opinion needs to be decided by the Supreme Court |
| Art.134 | Criminal appeals | Appeal as of right in two situations, and otherwise on the High Court's certificate |
| Art.134A | Certificate for appeal | The High Court may grant a certificate under Art.132, 133 or 134 on its own motion or on oral application |
| Art.136 | Special leave to appeal | Discretionary appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order of any court or tribunal, except armed forces tribunals |
| Art.137 | Review | Power to review its own judgments and orders |
| Art.139A | Transfer of cases | Transfer and withdrawal of cases involving the same questions of law from High Courts |
| Art.141 | Binding precedent | The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India |
| Art.142 | Complete justice | Power to pass such decree or order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter |
| Art.143 | Advisory jurisdiction | Reference by the President of a question of law or fact of public importance |
| Art.144 | Aid to the Court | All authorities, civil and judicial, to act in aid of the Supreme Court |
| Art.145(3) | Minimum Bench | At least five Judges for a case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, or a reference under Art.143 |
Original Jurisdiction under Art.131
The jurisdiction is exclusive and covers three classes of dispute: between the Government of India and one or more States; between the Government of India and any State or States on one side and one or more other States on the other; and between two or more States.
Two conditions must be satisfied. First, the dispute must be between the parties named; a private person cannot be a party, and a dispute between a State and a private individual is outside Art.131. Second, the dispute must involve a question of law or fact on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. A political grievance, however serious, is not enough.
Facts: The Union, acting under the Coal Bearing Areas (Acquisition and Development) Act, 1957, proposed to acquire coal bearing land belonging to the State of West Bengal. The State sued under Art.131, contending that Parliament had no competence to acquire the property of a State and that such a power was inconsistent with the federal character of the Constitution.
Issue: Whether the Union may acquire property belonging to a State, and whether the Indian Constitution is federal in the traditional sense.
Held: The suit failed. The Court held that the Indian Constitution is not federal in the classical sense. It is not the result of a compact between sovereign units; the States have no independent sovereign existence, the Union can alter State boundaries under Art.3 without their consent, and there is a single citizenship, a single judiciary and an integrated all India civil service. Parliament was competent to legislate for acquisition of State property. The Court also affirmed that Art.131 requires a dispute involving a legal right, and not a mere political or policy disagreement.
Relevance: Serves two purposes. It is the leading case on the ingredients of Art.131, and it is the classical statement of the view that Indian federalism has a strong unitary bias.
Appellate Jurisdiction
| Head | Provision | Requirement |
|---|---|---|
| Constitutional | Art.132 | High Court's certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution |
| Civil | Art.133 | High Court's certificate that the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance which needs to be decided by the Supreme Court |
| Criminal, as of right | Art.134(1)(a) | High Court has reversed an acquittal and sentenced the accused to death |
| Criminal, as of right | Art.134(1)(b) | High Court has withdrawn a case from a subordinate court, convicted the accused and sentenced him to death |
| Criminal, on certificate | Art.134(1)(c) | High Court certifies the case as a fit one for appeal |
| Criminal, by statute | Art.134(2) | Parliament may confer further powers, as it did by the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, covering reversal of an acquittal with a sentence of life imprisonment or of ten years or more |
Special leave under Art.136. This is the widest and most used head. It is not confined to constitutional, civil or criminal matters, requires no certificate, and extends to any court or tribunal in India. It is, however, discretionary: no litigant has a right to be heard under it, and the Court has repeatedly said that it will be exercised sparingly and in exceptional cases where there has been a grave miscarriage of justice or a question of general public importance arises. The only express exclusion is a judgment of a court or tribunal constituted under a law relating to the Armed Forces.
Special Powers
Art.141, binding precedent. The law declared by the Supreme Court binds all courts within the territory of India. The Court is not bound by its own previous decisions, though it will depart from them only for compelling reasons and, by convention, only through a Bench of larger strength.
Facts: The Court was asked to reconsider its earlier decision on the taxation of inter-State sales, which had been widely criticised as producing multiple taxation of the same transaction.
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court is bound by its own earlier decisions.
Held: The Court is not bound by its own previous decisions. Art.141 makes its law binding on all other courts but says nothing of the Court itself. It is free to reconsider and depart from an earlier view, particularly in constitutional matters, where the alternative would be to perpetuate error that only a constitutional amendment could otherwise correct.
Relevance: The foundation of the Court's power to overrule itself, on which Kesavananda Bharati, the Second Judges case and Sita Soren all rest.
Art.142, complete justice. The Court may pass such decree or order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it. The power has been used to devise remedies not found in any statute, for example in matters of custody, environmental protection and the resolution of mass disasters.
Facts: In earlier contempt proceedings the Court had, purporting to act under Art.142, suspended an advocate from practice. That course was questioned, since the power to suspend or remove an advocate from the rolls is conferred by the Advocates Act, 1961 on the Bar Council.
Issue: Whether Art.142 enables the Court to exercise a power which a statute vests exclusively in another authority.
Held: It does not. Art.142 is a power to do complete justice between the parties and is of wide amplitude, but it cannot be used to supplant substantive law or to build a new edifice ignoring express statutory provisions dealing with a subject. Punishment for contempt is one thing; debarring an advocate from practice, which the Advocates Act entrusts to the Bar Council, is another. The Court could not assume that disciplinary jurisdiction.
Relevance: The standard authority on the limits of Art.142. Pair it with Union Carbide Corporation v Union of India (1991), which had emphasised the width of the power, to show the two sides of the doctrine.
Advisory Jurisdiction under Art.143
| Clause | Subject matter | Duty of the Court |
|---|---|---|
| Art.143(1) | Any question of law or fact of public importance which has arisen or is likely to arise | The Court may report its opinion, and may decline to answer |
| Art.143(2) | Disputes arising out of certain pre-Constitution treaties, agreements and similar instruments | The Court shall report its opinion |
The opinion is advisory and not binding, and it is not a judicial pronouncement that operates as res judicata. It is nevertheless entitled to great weight and is in practice followed. A reference must be heard by a Bench of at least five Judges (Art.145(3)).
Facts: The Governor of Kerala reserved the Kerala Education Bill for the President's consideration, and the President referred questions as to its constitutionality, particularly in relation to the rights of minority educational institutions, to the Supreme Court under Art.143(1).
Issue: The constitutionality of the Bill's provisions, and the nature of the Court's obligation on a reference under Art.143(1).
Held: The Court answered the reference, holding several provisions to be inconsistent with the rights of minorities under Art.30. On the nature of the jurisdiction, it made clear that Art.143(1) uses the word "may", so the Court has a discretion and is not obliged to answer, and that it would decline where the questions were purely socio-economic or political, or too vague, or where an answer would serve no useful purpose.
Relevance: The leading authority on the discretionary character of Art.143(1). Contrast Art.143(2), where the word is "shall".
Illustrations
-
Art.131 requires a legal right: A State sues the Union under Art.131 complaining that it has been treated unfairly in the allocation of central funds, without identifying any legal right. The suit is not maintainable, applying State of West Bengal v Union of India (1963).
-
Private party cannot invoke Art.131: A company aggrieved by a State law sues the State under Art.131. The suit fails, since the article is confined to disputes between the Union and States, or between States.
-
Appeal as of right in a capital case: A High Court reverses an acquittal and sentences the accused to death. An appeal lies to the Supreme Court as of right under Art.134(1)(a), without any certificate.
-
Acquittal reversed with life imprisonment: A High Court reverses an acquittal and imposes life imprisonment. There is no appeal as of right under Art.134(1)(a), which requires a death sentence, but an appeal lies under the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970 enacted under Art.134(2).
-
Special leave from a tribunal: A party aggrieved by an order of a statutory tribunal seeks leave under Art.136. It is competent, since Art.136 extends to tribunals, but the grant is discretionary.
-
Armed forces tribunal excluded: A party seeks leave under Art.136 against a court-martial. Art.136(2) excludes a court or tribunal constituted under a law relating to the Armed Forces.
-
Art.141 does not bind the Court itself: The Supreme Court reconsiders and overrules one of its own earlier decisions. This is permissible, applying Bengal Immunity Co Ltd v State of Bihar (1955).
-
Art.142 cannot override a statute: The Court proposes to remove an advocate from the rolls in contempt proceedings. Applying Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India (1998), it cannot, that power being vested by statute in the Bar Council.
-
Reference declined: The President refers a question that is essentially one of political judgment. Applying In Re: The Kerala Education Bill (1958), the Court may decline to answer, Art.143(1) being discretionary.
-
Five Judge Bench required: A case turns on a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution. Under Art.145(3) it must be heard by a Bench of at least five Judges.
Recall Check
- State the two conditions that must be satisfied for a suit under Art.131.
- In which two situations does a criminal appeal lie to the Supreme Court as of right?
- What is the difference between Art.143(1) and Art.143(2) as to the Court's obligation?
Key Cases
State of West Bengal v Union of India (1963) State of West Bengal v Union of India 1963
Issue: Whether the Union may acquire the property of a State, and whether the Constitution is federal in the classical sense.
Rule: The Constitution is not federal in the traditional sense; the States are not sovereign, and Art.131 requires a dispute involving a legal right.
Held: Parliament was competent to legislate for the acquisition of State property, and the State's suit failed.
Bengal Immunity Co Ltd v State of Bihar (1955) Bengal Immunity Co v State of Bihar 1955
Issue: Whether the Supreme Court is bound by its own earlier decisions.
Rule: Art.141 binds all other courts but not the Supreme Court itself, which may reconsider its own view.
Held: The earlier decision was reconsidered and departed from.
Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India (1998) Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India 1998
Issue: Whether Art.142 permits the Court to exercise a power that a statute vests in another authority.
Rule: Art.142 does not authorise the Court to supplant substantive law or to ignore express statutory provisions on the subject.
Held: The Court could not suspend an advocate from practice, that jurisdiction belonging to the Bar Council under the Advocates Act, 1961.
In Re: The Kerala Education Bill, 1957 (1958) In Re Kerala Education Bill 1958
Issue: The constitutionality of the Bill, and whether the Court must answer a reference under Art.143(1).
Rule: Art.143(1) is discretionary, the Court being empowered but not obliged to report its opinion.
Held: Several provisions were held inconsistent with Art.30, and the discretionary nature of the advisory jurisdiction was affirmed.
Distinctions
| Basis | Art.132, 133 and 134 appeals | Art.136 special leave |
|---|---|---|
| Certificate | Required from the High Court | Not required |
| Nature | A right, once the conditions are met | Purely discretionary |
| Source of the order appealed | High Courts | Any court or tribunal in India |
| Subject matter | Constitutional, civil, criminal respectively | Any cause or matter |
| Exclusion | None specific | Armed forces courts and tribunals |
| Basis | Art.143(1) | Art.143(2) |
|---|---|---|
| Subject | Any question of law or fact of public importance | Disputes arising out of specified pre-Constitution instruments |
| Language | The Court may report | The Court shall report |
| Discretion to decline | Yes | No |
| Authority | In Re: The Kerala Education Bill (1958) | Text of the article |
| Basis | Art.32 | Art.226 |
|---|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court | High Courts |
| Purpose | Enforcement of fundamental rights only | Fundamental rights and any other legal right |
| Discretion | A guaranteed right, itself a fundamental right | Discretionary |
| Territorial reach | All India | Within the High Court's territorial jurisdiction, subject to the cause of action test |
Flashcards
What does Art.129 declare?
That the Supreme Court is a court of record with all the powers of such a court, including the power to punish for contempt of itself.
What kinds of dispute fall within Art.131?
Disputes between the Union and one or more States, between the Union and States on one side and other States on the other, and between two or more States.
What two conditions must an Art.131 suit satisfy?
The parties must be those named in the article, and the dispute must involve a question of law or fact on which a legal right depends.
What is required for an appeal under Art.132?
A certificate from the High Court that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
When does a criminal appeal lie as of right?
Where the High Court has reversed an acquittal and sentenced to death, or has withdrawn a case from a subordinate court, convicted and sentenced to death.
How wide is Art.136?
It extends to any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order of any court or tribunal in India, except armed forces courts and tribunals, and its exercise is discretionary.
On whom is the law declared by the Supreme Court binding?
On all courts within the territory of India (Art.141). The Supreme Court is not bound by its own decisions.
What is the limit on Art.142?
It cannot be used to supplant substantive law or to ignore express statutory provisions (Supreme Court Bar Association, 1998).
Is an opinion under Art.143 binding?
No. It is advisory, though entitled to great weight and followed in practice.
Can the Court decline to answer a reference?
Under Art.143(1) yes, the word being "may"; under Art.143(2) no, the word being "shall".
What is the minimum size of a Bench for a substantial question of constitutional interpretation?
Five Judges (Art.145(3)).
Which article empowers the Court to transfer cases raising the same questions of law from High Courts?
Art.139A, inserted by the 42nd Amendment.
Exam Scenario
Problem: State A sues the Union under Art.131, complaining that the Union has acquired State owned mineral land under a central statute and, separately, that the Union has been unfair in releasing disaster relief funds. In an unrelated matter, a High Court reverses an acquittal and sentences the accused to life imprisonment; the accused wishes to appeal. In a third matter, the Supreme Court, hearing a contempt case against an advocate, proposes to cancel his licence to practise and, in a fourth, the President refers to the Court the question whether a particular political party ought to be permitted to contest elections. Advise on each.
Step 1: Test both Art.131 claims against both conditions
The parties are the Union and a State in each claim, so the first condition of Art.131 is satisfied throughout. The question in both is whether a legal right is involved.
| Claim | Legal right involved? | Result under Art.131 |
|---|---|---|
| Acquisition of State owned mineral land | Yes. A dispute about title to land plainly involves a legal right | Maintainable |
| Unfairness in releasing disaster relief funds | No. A complaint of unfairness in a discretionary power of distribution, unsupported by any statutory or constitutional entitlement, is a political grievance | Not maintainable |
On the merits of the acquisition claim, apply State of West Bengal v Union of India (1963). Parliament is competent to legislate for the acquisition of State property, and the argument from federal principle fails because the Constitution is not federal in the classical sense.
On the funds claim, if a statutory formula or a binding scheme exists, the claim could be reframed as one of legal right.
Step 2: Locate the criminal appeal in the right provision
- Art.134(1)(a) confers an appeal as of right only where the reversal of an acquittal is accompanied by a sentence of death. The sentence here is life imprisonment, so the clause does not apply.
- An appeal lies under the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, enacted under Art.134(2), which covers reversal of an acquittal with a sentence of life imprisonment or of ten years or more.
- Special leave under Art.136 could be sought in any event.
Step 3: Keep the contempt power and Art.142 apart
Apply Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India (1998). The Court may punish for contempt under Art.129, but it cannot use Art.142 to cancel a licence to practise, since the Advocates Act, 1961 vests that disciplinary power in the Bar Council.
Art.142 does not permit the Court to supplant substantive law. The proper course is to punish for contempt and refer the professional misconduct to the Bar Council.
Step 4: Advise that the reference may be declined
Apply In Re: The Kerala Education Bill (1958). Whether a party should be permitted to contest elections is governed by the Representation of the People Act and the Election Commission's jurisdiction, and as framed it is essentially political.
Since Art.143(1) says the Court "may" report, it has a discretion and may properly decline to answer.
Maintainability is not merit. The acquisition claim clears Art.131 and then fails on State of West Bengal v Union of India. Answer both limbs, not just the first.
No legal right, no Art.131. A grievance of unfairness in distributing funds is political, and only a statutory formula or binding scheme would convert it into a legal right.
The trigger in Art.134(1)(a) is a sentence of death. Life imprisonment does not attract it, and it is the 1970 Act under Art.134(2) that supplies the appeal.
Art.142 cannot displace the Advocates Act. The contempt power under Art.129 and the Bar Council's disciplinary power are separate, and Art.142 does not merge them.
"May" in Art.143(1) is permissive. The Court has a discretion to decline a reference, so do not treat the opinion as compulsory.
Conclusion. The acquisition claim is maintainable but must fail, the funds claim is not maintainable, the criminal appeal lies under the 1970 Act, the licence cannot be cancelled under Art.142, and the reference should be declined.
See Also
- Supreme Court: Composition and Appointment of Judges : the constitution of the Court that exercises these powers.
- High Courts: Appointment, Transfer, Powers and Jurisdiction : the writ jurisdiction under Art.226 with which Art.32 is compared.
- Federalism under the Indian Constitution : the federalism holding in State of West Bengal v Union of India.