Answer the following questions in about 150 words each:

(a) Examine the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in regard to criminal matters. (10 marks)

(b) The Parliament or any State Legislature should keep within

Question

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each:

(a) Examine the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in regard to criminal matters. (10 marks)

(b) The Parliament or any State Legislature should keep within the domain assigned to it and not encroach upon the other's subject. Critically examine. (10 marks)

(c) "Every person who is a member of civil service of the Union holds office during the pleasure of the President." Is there any exception to this rule? Describe. (10 marks)

(d) The Indian Constitution permits delegation but imposes specific restrictions to ensure alignment with the Parent Act and protect legislative intent. Examine with illustrations. (10 marks)

(e) "A law is void only to the extent of inconsistency or contravention with the relevant Fundamental Right." Explain with the help of decided cases. (10 marks)

UPSC Answer Check · Accepted Answer

(a) The Supreme Court’s criminal appellate jurisdiction over High Courts is limited. Article 134 gives statutory appeal where a High Court imposes death, takes a case out of a Session Court under Article 223(1) and acquits, or certifies that the case is a fit one for appeal. The first two are appeals as of right; the third is certificate-based. Article 134A permits a High Court, in a criminal appeal, to certify a question of law of public importance and send the case up. Article 136 supplies residual special leave, which is discretionary, not a right. Article 132, which permits appeal on a certified substantial question of constitutional interpretation, illustrates the certification principle; in criminal matters the certificate routes are Articles 134(1)(c) and 134A. Thus regular appeals under Article 134 arise by constitutional mandate in specified cases, while SLP under Article 136 is an exception to correct grave injustice or decide important law.

(b) The claim is broadly correct but qualified. The Seventh Schedule demarcates legislative competence: Union, State and Concurrent Lists. A legislature must stay within its assigned entry, and colourable legislation—where a law is really outside competence but dressed as within it—is invalid. However, the Constitution does not require absolute subject-matter purity. The doctrine of pith and substance, applied in State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara, asks for the true nature and character of the law, its dominant ingredient, and whether encroachment is merely incidental. In Balsara, the Bombay bidis prohibition was upheld because its pith and substance was public health, not trade. Judicial review thus tests substance, not title or incidental effect. Critically, the doctrine protects federalism by preventing encroachment, but it can also validate wide state laws if the dominant purpose is within competence. The balance requires that the dominant ingredient be genuinely within the legislature’s entry and that incidental encroachment be real, not a device.

(c) Article 310 provides that every member of a civil service of the Union holds office during the pleasure of the President. This pleasure doctrine is not absolute. Article 311(1) requires that no member be dismissed, removed, or reduced in rank without an opportunity of showing cause against the proposed action. Article 311(2) adds safeguards: no such person may be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority; and no such person may be dismissed, removed, or reduced in rank on a criminal charge unless found guilty in an inquiry. Article 311(2) also permits exceptions where inquiry is not expedient in public interest, not practicable, or where conduct is established by a service-rule inquiry, provided satisfaction is recorded in writing. These exceptions protect procedural fairness without destroying executive control. The rule therefore means pleasure is subject to constitutional due process, not arbitrary removal.

(d) Delegated legislation is constitutionally permissible because the legislature cannot frame every technical detail. However, delegation must preserve the Parent Act’s legislative intent. Essential legislative functions—making policy and laying down standards—cannot be delegated. Conditional legislation is valid where the legislature fixes policy and conditions, and the executive merely fills in details when those conditions arise. Subordinate legislation is valid where the statute supplies the framework, limits, and standards. In Re Delhi Laws Act, the Supreme Court upheld executive law-making because the parent statute provided sufficient standards and the delegation was not unbounded. In Gwalior Rayon Mills, delegation under the Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act was valid because the Act laid down policy and the executive’s rules were confined to its framework. Critically, delegation is a practical necessity, but judicial review controls it: if the executive exceeds the parent Act’s standards or substitutes its own policy, the instrument is invalid.

(e) Article 13(1) makes pre-constitutional laws void to the extent of inconsistency with Fundamental Rights, and Article 13(2) prohibits State laws from taking away or abridging those Rights. The consequence is not automatic total invalidity. The doctrine of severability, applied in R.M.D.C. v. State of Bombay, holds that if the offending part can be separated from the rest without destroying the statute’s purpose, only that part is void. If the invalid part is inseparable, the whole law fails. The doctrine of eclipse, from A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, treats pre-constitutional laws as eclipsed rather than dead: they remain inoperative against Fundamental Rights but may revive if the relevant Right is amended. Thus a post-constitutional law that contravenes a Fundamental Right is void ab initio to the extent of inconsistency, while a pre-constitutional law is voidable in the sense of being suspended by the eclipse. The principle protects both legislative purpose and constitutional supremacy.

Answer the following questions in about 150 words each: (a) Examine the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in appeals…

Model answer

What "Critically examine" is asking you to do

Structure that answers it

Where marks are lost

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Key points expected

Evaluation rubric

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Must cover

Loses marks

Earns more

Extra mark

Practice this exact question

More from Law 2024 Paper I