question_answer

The Supreme Court has three jurisdictions: original, appellate and advisory. Original jurisdiction allows the case to be heard by the Supreme Court in the first instance itself. Thus, if the matter falls in the original jurisdiction, one can approach the Supreme Court without first approaching any other court. Appellate jurisdiction allows the case to go to the Supreme Court in an appeal against the judgment/order of the High Court. In its advisory jurisdiction, the Supreme Court may advice the President of India m matters which are specifically referred to it by the President of India under Article 143 of the Constitution.

In its original jurisdiction the Supreme Court may hear any dispute in which there is Government of India on the one side and one or more States on the other side. Or, where there is Government of India and one or more State/s on one side and one or more States on the other side. Or, where the matter is between two or more States.

Such disputes should, however, involve a question (whether of law or of fact) on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. Article 32 also gives an original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court. Under Article 32 a person may approach the Supreme Court directly if his/her fundamental right is violated. In its original jurisdiction the Supreme Court can issue directions, orders or writs. The Supreme Court may issue the writs of Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Quo warranto and Certiorari. The Supreme Court also has the jurisdiction to transfer any civil or criminal case from one State High Court to another State High Court or from a court subordinate to another State High Court. The Supreme Court also has the jurisdiction to withdraw a case pending before the High Court and dispose of such case itself. International commercial arbitration can also be initiated in the Supreme Court.

While deciding the constitutionality of the legislations that are challenged before it, the Supreme Court uses various doctrines. It uses the doctrine of "“pith and substance”", doctrine of "“severability"”, doctrine of “"colourable legislation”", and doctrine of “"basic structure"”, etc. Law-making power is with the State under Article 246 of the Constitution, and the areas in which the laws can be made by Parliament and the State Legislature are mentioned in Seventh Schedule of the Constitution. The Seventh Schedule has three Lists. List I mentions the area in which Parliament can make laws. List II mentions the areas in which the State Legislature can make laws. List III is the Concurrent List which mentions the areas in which both Parliament as well as the State Legislature can make laws. Parliament and State Legislature have different subject-matters assigned to them in those Lists and they are expected not to transgress their powers by making laws in the areas not assigned to them. When a law is challenged as not falling in the law-making powers of the Legislature, the Supreme Court uses the doctrine of "“pith and substance"” to find out whether the Legislature was really empowered to make law in that area. For this purpose it looks at the entirety of the legislation to find out the “"true nature and character"” of the law.

Under which article and under which jurisdiction can the President refer a matter to the Supreme Court?

A) 140 and Advisory

B) 143 and Original

C) 140 and Appellate

D) 143 and Advisory