High Courts in India: Composition, Powers and Functions

Introduction

The High Court is the highest court within a State's judicial system and plays an important role in protecting fundamental rights and interpreting the law. Articles 214 to 231 of the Indian Constitution deal with the establishment, composition, powers and functioning of High Courts. High Courts exercise writ, original, appellate and supervisory jurisdiction over matters within their authority.

Meaning and Definition of a High Court

A High Court is the highest judicial authority at the State level. It hears appeals from subordinate courts, decides certain cases at the first instance, protects legal and fundamental rights, and supervises the functioning of courts and tribunals within its jurisdiction.

Article 214 provides that there shall be a High Court for each State. However, Article 231 allows Parliament to establish a common High Court for two or more States or for two or more States and a Union Territory.

High Courts form part of India's integrated judicial system. They function under the Constitution and the laws enacted by Parliament and the State Legislatures within their respective powers.

Constitutional Provisions Relating to High Courts

The important constitutional provisions concerning High Courts include the following:

Establishment and Composition of High Courts

Establishment of High Courts

Article 214 provides for a High Court for each State. However, the Constitution does not require every State to have a separate High Court. Under Article 231, Parliament may establish a common High Court for two or more States or for two or more States and a Union Territory.

A High Court exercises jurisdiction over the State or territories assigned to it by the Constitution and applicable laws.

Composition of a High Court

Article 216 provides that every High Court shall consist of:

• A Chief Justice.
• Such other judges as the President considers necessary to appoint.

The Constitution does not prescribe a fixed number of judges for every High Court. The number may vary according to factors such as the number of pending cases and the workload of the court.

Appointment of High Court Judges

Under Article 217, High Court judges are formally appointed by the President of India.

The constitutional process requires consultation with the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State and, in the case of appointing a judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned.

In practice, appointments are governed by the collegium system, developed through Supreme Court judgments. The collegium plays the leading role in recommending appointments to the higher judiciary.

For appointments to a High Court, the process generally begins with the Chief Justice of that High Court, who consults senior colleagues. The recommendation is considered by the Supreme Court collegium and processed through the Union Government before formal appointment by the President.

Qualifications of High Court Judges

Article 217(2) provides that a person may be appointed as a High Court judge if they:

• Are a citizen of India.
• Have held a judicial office in India for at least ten years; or
• Have been an advocate of a High Court, or of two or more such courts in succession, for at least ten years.

The Constitution does not prescribe a separate minimum age for appointment as a High Court judge.

Tenure and Retirement

A High Court judge holds office until attaining the age of 62 years.

A judge may leave office before retirement by resigning in writing to the President or through removal under the constitutional procedure.

A High Court judge may also be transferred to another High Court under Article 222, following consultation with the Chief Justice of India.

Removal of High Court Judges

Article 218 applies the removal procedure under Article 124(4) and Article 124(5) to High Court judges.

A High Court judge may be removed only on the grounds of:

• Proved misbehaviour: Serious misconduct established through the prescribed procedure.
• Incapacity: Inability to perform the duties of the judicial office.

The removal procedure is as follows:

• A motion must be initiated in Parliament in accordance with the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
• An inquiry committee investigates the charges and gives the judge an opportunity to defend themselves.
• Each House of Parliament must pass the removal motion separately with a majority of its total membership and a majority of at least two-thirds of the members present and voting.
• The President issues the removal order after the required parliamentary process is completed.

A judge cannot be removed merely because the government disagrees with a judicial decision or because allegations have been made without proof.

Oath, Salaries and Conditions of Service

Oath or affirmation

Article 219 requires every High Court judge to take an oath or affirmation before the Governor of the State, or a person appointed by the Governor.

The judge promises to uphold the Constitution, perform judicial duties faithfully and act without fear or favour, affection or ill-will.

Salaries and allowances

Article 221 deals with the salaries and allowances of High Court judges. These are determined according to law made by Parliament.

The Constitution protects judges against certain changes to their service conditions after appointment. In particular, their allowances and rights concerning leave and pension cannot be varied to their disadvantage after appointment, subject to the constitutional provisions.

Restrictions after retirement

Article 220 restricts a person who has held office as a permanent High Court judge from pleading or acting in any court or before any authority in India, except the Supreme Court and other High Courts.

This restriction helps protect judicial independence and public confidence in the judiciary.

Powers and Functions of High Courts

High Courts exercise several important powers under the Constitution and applicable laws.

Writ jurisdiction under Article 226

Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue directions, orders and writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights and for any other purpose.

This power is broader in subject matter than the Supreme Court's writ jurisdiction under Article 32, which is specifically concerned with enforcing fundamental rights.

The five principal writs are:

Habeas Corpus

This means "produce the person." It is used to challenge unlawful detention and seek the release of a person who is being held illegally.

Mandamus

This means "we command." It directs a public authority to perform a legal duty that it has failed or refused to perform.

Prohibition

This writ prevents a lower court or tribunal from continuing proceedings beyond its legal authority.

Certiorari

This writ allows a higher court to quash an order made by a lower court or tribunal when legal grounds exist, such as a jurisdictional error or a serious error of law.

Quo Warranto

This means "by what authority." It challenges a person's legal authority to hold a public office.

The power under Article 226 is discretionary, meaning that the High Court considers the circumstances and applicable legal principles before granting relief.

Power of superintendence under Article 227

Article 227 gives every High Court the power of superintendence over courts and tribunals within its territorial jurisdiction, subject to constitutional exceptions.

This power allows the High Court to ensure that subordinate courts and tribunals act within their legal authority and follow the law.

The High Court may call for records, issue appropriate directions and take other lawful steps to maintain proper judicial functioning.

However, this power does not mean that the High Court can routinely replace every decision of a subordinate court with its own view. It is exercised according to established legal principles.

Transfer of cases involving constitutional interpretation under Article 228

Article 228 applies when a case pending before a court subordinate to a High Court involves a substantial question of law concerning the interpretation of the Constitution, and deciding that question is necessary to dispose of the case.

In such circumstances, the High Court shall withdraw the case and may:

• Decide the entire case itself; or
• Decide the constitutional question and return the case to the subordinate court with its judgment on that question.

The subordinate court must then dispose of the case in accordance with the High Court's ruling.

Original jurisdiction

Original jurisdiction means the power to hear and decide a case at the first instance rather than as an appeal from another court.

High Courts may exercise original jurisdiction in matters provided for by the Constitution, statutes and applicable legal instruments. The scope differs between High Courts.

For example, some High Courts have ordinary original civil jurisdiction over certain cases arising within specified territorial limits. High Courts also hear writ petitions under Article 226.

Appellate jurisdiction

Appellate jurisdiction is the power to hear appeals against decisions of lower courts or tribunals.

High Courts hear civil and criminal appeals under the applicable procedural laws and other legislation.

In civil matters, an appeal may concern issues such as property disputes, contracts or other civil rights. In criminal matters, appeals may challenge convictions, acquittals or sentences where the law permits.

The right to appeal and the conditions for filing an appeal depend on the relevant statute and procedural rules.

Control over subordinate judiciary

High Courts have an important role in supervising and managing the subordinate judiciary.

Article 235 vests control over district courts and courts subordinate to them in the High Court. This includes matters such as posting, promotion and granting leave to judicial officers belonging to the State judicial service and holding posts below that of a district judge.

Under Article 233, appointments, postings and promotions of district judges are made by the Governor in consultation with the High Court.

Article 234 provides for the appointment of persons other than district judges to the State judicial service according to rules made by the Governor after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court.

These provisions help protect the subordinate judiciary from improper executive influence.

High Courts as Courts of Record

Article 215 declares every High Court to be a court of record.

A court of record maintains official judicial records that have legal and evidentiary value. Its records can be relied upon in legal proceedings according to law.

Article 215 also gives High Courts the power to punish for contempt of themselves.

Contempt of court means conduct that unlawfully interferes with the administration of justice or undermines the authority of the court in a manner recognised by law.

This power helps protect the proper administration of justice and ensures that court proceedings are not obstructed. It must, however, be exercised within legal limits.

High Courts may also review their own judgments and orders where the applicable law permits.

Transfer of High Court Judges

Article 222 empowers the President to transfer a judge from one High Court to another after consultation with the Chief Justice of India.

Transfers must follow the constitutional process and relevant principles developed by the Supreme Court.

The power is important for the administration of justice, but it must not be used arbitrarily or as a means of punishing a judge for independent decisions.

Important Case Law: Union of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth (1977)

The Supreme Court considered the constitutional power to transfer High Court judges under Article 222.

The judgment emphasised that consultation with the Chief Justice of India must be meaningful and that judicial transfers must be consistent with constitutional requirements and the independence of the judiciary.

Jurisdiction of Existing High Courts under Article 225

Article 225 preserves the jurisdiction, powers and procedures of existing High Courts, subject to the Constitution and laws made by the competent legislature.

It addresses matters such as:

• The jurisdiction exercised by the High Court.
• The law administered by the court.
• The powers of judges in administering justice.
• Rules governing court proceedings and sittings.

This provision preserves existing jurisdiction while allowing changes through valid constitutional and legislative measures.

The jurisdiction of a High Court is therefore not unlimited. It operates within the Constitution and applicable laws.

Important Case Law

S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981)

This decision, known as the First Judges Case, considered judicial appointments and the meaning of consultation under the Constitution. The Court gave the executive a leading role in appointments at that time. The approach was later changed by subsequent Supreme Court decisions that established the collegium system.

Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (1993)

This decision, known as the Second Judges Case, established the modern collegium system by giving primacy to the collective opinion of the Chief Justice of India and senior Supreme Court judges in judicial appointments.

The system also applies to appointments to High Courts.

Union of India v. Sankalchand Himatlal Sheth (1977)

The Supreme Court examined the transfer of High Court judges under Article 222 and highlighted the importance of meaningful consultation and judicial independence.

L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997)

The Supreme Court held that the power of judicial review exercised by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 is part of the Constitution's basic structure (its essential features that cannot be destroyed by constitutional amendment).

The decision also established that the jurisdiction of High Courts to review decisions of tribunals cannot be completely excluded by ordinary legislation.

T.C. Basappa v. T. Nagappa (1954)

The Supreme Court explained principles governing the issue of writs, including certiorari. The decision is important for understanding how constitutional courts supervise decisions of lower judicial and quasi-judicial authorities.

Distinction Between Articles 32 and 226

Practical Example

Suppose a State government authority unlawfully refuses to issue a licence despite the applicant satisfying all legal requirements.

The applicant may approach the High Court under Article 226 and seek a writ of mandamus directing the authority to perform its legal duty.

If the authority has acted beyond its legal powers, the High Court may grant appropriate relief depending on the facts and the law.

This example shows that High Courts can protect not only fundamental rights but also other legal rights.

Summary

• High Courts are the highest courts within the judicial systems of their respective States.
• Articles 214 to 231 deal with the establishment, composition, powers and functioning of High Courts.
• Article 217 governs the appointment and conditions of office of High Court judges, while Article 218 applies the constitutional removal procedure used for Supreme Court judges.
• High Court judges ordinarily retire at the age of 62 years.
• Article 226 empowers High Courts to issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights and for other legal purposes.
• Article 227 gives High Courts supervisory authority over subordinate courts and tribunals within their jurisdiction, subject to constitutional exceptions.
• Article 228 allows a High Court to withdraw certain cases involving substantial questions of constitutional interpretation.
• Article 215 makes every High Court a court of record and gives it the power to punish for contempt of itself.
• Article 235 gives High Courts control over the subordinate judiciary.
• Articles 233 and 234 provide for the appointment of district judges and other members of the State judicial service.
• High Courts exercise original and appellate jurisdiction according to the Constitution and applicable laws.
• Judicial review by High Courts under Articles 226 and 227 is an essential feature of the Indian Constitution.