Indian Polity Quiz: Subordinate Courts, Tribunals and Lok Adalats

The correct answer is A, three. India has a single integrated judiciary arranged in three levels: the Supreme Court at the apex, the High Courts at the level of the States, and the subordinate or district courts below them. A case decided by a district court can travel up to the High Court and from there to the Supreme Court, which is why the system is called integrated rather than federal. B is wrong because two levels would leave out either the High Courts or the district judiciary, both of which the Constitution expressly provides for, the latter in Articles 233 to 237. C is wrong because the various grades inside the district judiciary, such as the civil judge junior division and the senior division, are grades within one level and not separate levels of the judiciary. D is wrong for the same reason; tribunals and Lok Adalats are supplemental forums created by statute and are not counted as a fourth constitutional level of courts.

The correct answer is C, Article 233. It provides that appointments of persons to be, and the posting and promotion of, district judges in any State shall be made by the Governor of the State in consultation with the High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to that State. The same article allows an advocate or pleader of at least seven years standing to be appointed a district judge directly if the High Court recommends him. A is wrong because Article 124 deals with the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court and the appointment of its judges by the President. B is wrong because Article 217 governs the appointment of judges of a High Court, again by the President. D is wrong because Article 243 is the definition clause of Part IX, which deals with panchayats, and has nothing to do with the judiciary. The trap in this question is to confuse the authority: for district judges the Governor appoints, not the President.

The correct answer is B, the High Court of the State. Article 235 says that the control over district courts and courts subordinate to them, including the posting and promotion of, and the grant of leave to, persons belonging to the judicial service of a State, shall vest in the High Court. This provision is the foundation of the independence of the district judiciary from the executive. A is wrong because the Governor's role is confined to making appointments under Articles 233 and 234 and to framing rules; day to day control is not with him. C is wrong because the State Public Service Commission is only consulted when rules for the recruitment of judicial officers other than district judges are framed under Article 234. D is wrong because placing control in a government department would make judicial officers answerable to the executive, exactly what Article 235 prevents.

The correct answer is A, the 42nd Amendment Act of 1976. Acting on the recommendation of the Swaran Singh Committee, this amendment added a new Part XIV-A titled Tribunals, with Article 323A for administrative tribunals and Article 323B for tribunals on other matters. The same amendment also inserted Article 39A on equal justice and free legal aid, which is why it is relevant to Lok Adalats as well. B is wrong because the 44th Amendment of 1978 undid several changes of the 42nd, restored the Lok Sabha's term to five years and made the right to property an ordinary legal right. C is wrong because the 52nd Amendment of 1985 added the Tenth Schedule on defection. D is wrong because the 73rd Amendment of 1992 added Part IX and the Eleventh Schedule on panchayati raj. Remember 42nd for tribunals and Article 39A together.

The correct answer is B. Article 323A empowers only Parliament to provide for the adjudication of disputes relating to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services, and the tribunals it allows are limited to such service matters, with one tribunal for the Union and one for each State or for two or more States and no hierarchy below them. A is wrong because the power to legislate under Article 323A belongs to Parliament alone; it is Article 323B that is available to State legislatures as well. C is wrong for the same reason: taxation, land reforms, elections, rent and tenancy and the other listed subjects fall under Article 323B, which alone permits a hierarchy of tribunals. D is wrong because the appellate and special leave jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under Article 136 was never taken away, and after L. Chandra Kumar the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts is also available.

The correct answer is B, 1985. Parliament enacted the Administrative Tribunals Act in 1985 under the authority of Article 323A, and the Central Administrative Tribunal came into being on 1 November 1985 with its principal bench at New Delhi. It decides service disputes of central government employees, but members of the defence forces, officers and servants of the Supreme Court and the secretarial staff of Parliament are outside its jurisdiction. A is wrong because 1976 is the year of the 42nd Amendment, which only created the enabling article; the tribunal itself needed a law. C is wrong because 1991 is not connected with the tribunal; it is remembered in the economy for liberalisation. D is wrong because 1997 is the year of the L. Chandra Kumar judgment, which decided how far the tribunal's decisions could be reviewed by the High Courts, twelve years after the tribunal began work.

The correct answer is B, L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997). A seven-judge bench struck down Article 323A(2)(d) and Article 323B(3)(d) to the extent that they excluded the jurisdiction of the High Courts under Articles 226 and 227, held that judicial review by the High Courts and the Supreme Court is part of the basic structure, and ruled that tribunals are supplemental to the High Courts and not substitutes for them. A is wrong because S. P. Sampath Kumar (1987) had upheld the Administrative Tribunals Act and accepted the exclusion of High Court jurisdiction, the position later corrected. C is wrong because Kesavananda Bharati (1973) laid down the basic structure doctrine in the context of constitutional amendments, not tribunals. D is wrong because S. R. Bommai (1994) dealt with the imposition of President's rule under Article 356.

The correct answer is C, Gujarat. The first Lok Adalat was held in 1982 at Una in Junagadh district of Gujarat, as a camp for the settlement of disputes by conciliation long before any statute recognised it. The experiment spread, and Parliament gave Lok Adalats statutory status through the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, which came into force on 9 November 1995. A is wrong because Maharashtra, though an early adopter of legal aid camps, did not hold the first Lok Adalat. B is wrong because Kerala's contribution is remembered in other fields such as the first fully literate State and the first State to adopt the people's planning campaign. D is wrong because West Bengal is not associated with this first; the question tests one fixed pair, first Lok Adalat and Gujarat, 1982.

The correct answer is B, the Chief Justice of India. Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 the National Legal Services Authority has the Chief Justice of India as its Patron-in-Chief, while a serving or retired judge of the Supreme Court, nominated by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice, is its Executive Chairman. The pattern repeats in the States, where the Chief Justice of the High Court is the Patron-in-Chief of the State Legal Services Authority. A is wrong because the President only nominates the Executive Chairman and is not the patron. C is wrong because the Act keeps the legal services machinery under judicial and not ministerial leadership, although the Ministry of Law and Justice provides the budget. D is wrong because the Attorney General is the government's chief law officer under Article 76 and has no role in NALSA.

The correct answer is B. Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 every award of a Lok Adalat is deemed to be a decree of a civil court, is final and binding on all the parties to the dispute, and no appeal lies against it in any court, because the award rests on the consent of the parties themselves. A is wrong because an award is not a mere recommendation; it is executable like a civil decree, and this executability is the main attraction of the forum. C is wrong because the bar on appeals is absolute; a dissatisfied party cannot appeal, although where no settlement is reached the matter simply returns to the regular court. D is wrong because no confirmation by any judge is needed. Remember also that the court fee already paid is refunded when a pending suit is settled in a Lok Adalat.

The correct answer is B, Nyayadhikari. The Gram Nyayalayas Act, 2008, in force from 2 October 2009, provides for mobile village courts at the intermediate panchayat level presided over by a Nyayadhikari appointed by the State Government in consultation with the High Court, who holds the rank and draws the salary of a judicial magistrate of the first class. The court exercises both civil and criminal jurisdiction, follows a summary procedure and is expected to hold sittings in the villages. A is wrong because Nyaya Panch was the member of the older nyaya panchayats set up under State panchayat laws, which were not courts of record in this sense. C is wrong because no such office exists; the sarpanch is an elected panchayat head with no judicial powers of this kind. D is wrong because a Lok Adalat is a conciliation forum under the 1987 Act, quite separate from a Gram Nyayalaya.