In which case did the Supreme Court hold that the decisions of tribunals are subject to the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts?

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.