UPSC CSE Prelims
Jurisdiction and Powers Previous Year Questions (PYQs)

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 3 — the lower court prohibiting continuation of proceedings in a case.

A Writ of Prohibition is issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to a lower court or tribunal to prevent it from continuing proceedings in a case where it lacks jurisdiction or is acting contrary to law. It is a preventive remedy, stopping the lower court from exceeding its authority before a final decision is made.

📝 Short Notes: Writ of Prohibition

• Definition: A judicial order issued by higher courts (Supreme Court or High Courts) to lower courts or tribunals to stop proceedings in a case where the lower court is exceeding its jurisdiction.
• Nature: It is a preventive writ, meaning it stops the proceedings before the lower court makes a decision, unlike Certiorari which is issued after a decision.
• Constitutional Basis: Under Article 32 (Supreme Court) and Article 226 (High Courts), writs including Prohibition can be issued for enforcement of Fundamental Rights and other purposes.
• Scope: Applies only to judicial and quasi-judicial bodies, not to administrative authorities or legislative bodies.
• Purpose: To ensure that courts and tribunals operate within their legal jurisdiction and do not violate principles of natural justice.
• Comparison with other Writs: While Prohibition prevents future action, Certiorari quashes past decisions. Mandamus compels performance of duty, while Habeas Corpus relates to personal liberty.
• Example: If a civil court begins hearing a matter that legally falls under criminal jurisdiction, a Writ of Prohibition can halt the proceedings.

Detailed Explanation:

Answer: Option 2 — 1, 2 and 4

The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted following the H.N. Sanyal Committee's recommendations. The Constitution empowers the Supreme Court (Article 129) and High Courts (Article 215) to punish for contempt of themselves, and Parliament has legislative competence to make laws on contempt of court under Entry 77 of Union List.

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed pursuant to the H.N. Sanyal Committee report which examined the law relating to contempt of courts.

✅ Statement 2 – Correct: Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution expressly empower the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to punish for contempt of themselves.

❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: The Constitution does not define civil contempt and criminal contempt; these definitions are provided in Section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Parliament has the power to legislate on contempt of court under Entry 77 of the Union List (Seventh Schedule), which enabled the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

📝 Short Notes: Contempt of Court

Detailed Explanation:

The Supreme Court of India is the Custodian of the Constitution, safeguarding Fundamental Rights under Article 32, exercising Judicial Review under Article 13, and ensuring all laws conform to constitutional provisions.

The Court settles Centre-State disputes (Article 131), declares binding law (Article 141), enforces decrees (Article 142), and advises the President (Article 143), making it the ultimate guardian of constitutional supremacy.

Detailed Explanation:

Article 131 confers original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court to decide disputes between the Centre and States or between States inter se.

Original jurisdiction means cases can be directly filed in the Supreme Court without going through lower courts, making it the court of first instance for such federal disputes.

Detailed Explanation:

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 131 grants original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court over disputes between the Government of India and one or more States.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: Election disputes regarding Parliament or State Legislature are handled by High Courts and Election Tribunals, not under Supreme Court's original jurisdiction.

❌ Statement 3 – Incorrect: Union Territories are not included in Article 131; original jurisdiction covers only disputes involving States.

✅ Statement 4 – Correct: Article 131 provides original jurisdiction for disputes between two or more States.

Detailed Explanation:

✅ Statement 1 – Correct: Article 124(2) mandates that the President must consult the Chief Justice of India (CJI) while appointing Supreme Court Judges, ensuring judicial say in appointments.

❌ Statement 2 – Incorrect: Supreme Court Judges can only be removed by the President through impeachment after an address by Parliament with special majority (majority of total membership + two-thirds of present and voting), not by the CJI.

✅ Statement 3 – Correct: Article 146(3) provides that salaries and allowances of Judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India, requiring no legislative vote, ensuring financial independence from Parliament.

❌ Statement 4 – Incorrect: Article 146(2) states that appointments of officers and staff are made by the CJI or officers appointed by the CJI, not by the Government.