Introduction / Context:
This question examines basic constitutional knowledge about the Supreme Court of India, especially the kinds of jurisdiction it exercises. Understanding the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is essential for exams on Indian polity because it shows how the court functions as both a court of first instance in certain matters and the final court of appeal in many others. While the Supreme Court also has advisory jurisdiction, exam questions often highlight the original and appellate types as its primary roles.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- The institution in question is the Supreme Court of India.
- The focus is on the types of jurisdiction (powers over cases) rather than on its composition or procedure.
- We assume that the standard categorisation of jurisdiction into original, appellate and advisory is known.
Concept / Approach:
Jurisdiction means the legal authority of a court to hear and decide cases. The Supreme Court of India has three main kinds of jurisdiction: original, appellate and advisory. Original jurisdiction means certain cases can be filed directly in the Supreme Court, such as disputes between the Union and states. Appellate jurisdiction means the court hears appeals from High Courts and some tribunals. Advisory jurisdiction allows the President of India to seek the court's opinion on important constitutional questions. In many objective questions, the emphasis is on original and appellate jurisdiction as the core operational roles of the court.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Recall that the Supreme Court has original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction.
Step 2: Look at the options and identify which one correctly mentions two recognised kinds of judicial jurisdiction.
Step 3: Option A refers to original and appellate, both of which are genuine types of court jurisdiction.
Step 4: Options B, C and D incorrectly mix judicial terms with executive or legislative functions, which courts do not possess as jurisdiction types.
Step 5: Therefore, select original and appellate as the best answer.
Verification / Alternative check:
You can verify this by remembering Article 131 of the Constitution (original jurisdiction in certain disputes) and Articles 132 to 136 (various forms of appellate jurisdiction). Advisory jurisdiction is mentioned in Article 143. These constitutional references confirm that the recognised jurisdiction types are original, appellate and advisory, and that executive or legislative jurisdiction is not a meaningful category for courts.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option B combines original and executive. Courts do not have executive jurisdiction; they do not carry out administration or policy implementation in the sense that the executive branch does.
Option C combines legislative and original. Courts interpret and apply law; they do not normally exercise legislative power, which belongs to Parliament and state legislatures.
Option D combines executive and appellate, again mixing judicial powers with executive functions, which is incorrect in the separation of powers framework.
Common Pitfalls:
A frequent misunderstanding is to assume that since courts sometimes issue directions that affect policy, they are exercising executive or legislative functions. In reality, they are still operating within judicial jurisdiction by interpreting the Constitution and laws. Students must clearly distinguish between judicial decisions and the constitutional roles of the executive and legislature to avoid confusion in similar questions.
Final Answer:
In terms of jurisdiction, the Supreme Court of India primarily exercises
original and appellate powers over cases brought before it.
Discussion & Comments