With reference to Indian judiciary, consider the following statements:
- 1.Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with prior permission of the President of India.
- 2.A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Answer & explanation
Answer: (a) 1 only
Why not the tempting option · UPSC's key is (a). Statement 2 tempts because High Courts do review their own orders — under the Civil Procedure Code and, as courts of record, under an inherent power the Supreme Court recognised in Shivdeo Singh v. State of Punjab (1963). But that power is not 'as the Supreme Court does': the Supreme Court's review is an express, general constitutional power (Article 137), while a High Court's is statutory or inherent and narrower, and the criminal procedure code bars it from altering or reviewing a signed criminal judgment except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error. In the exam, 'as the Supreme Court does' invites a comparison of constitutional provisions, and the High Court has none.
Statement 1 is correct: under Article 128 the Chief Justice of India, with the President's previous consent, may request a retired Supreme Court judge to sit and act as a judge of the Court. Statement 2 is not: the Constitution confers an express, general power of review only on the Supreme Court (Article 137). A High Court reviews its own judgments only under statute (the Civil Procedure Code on the civil side) or its inherent powers as a court of record, and the criminal procedure code bars a court from altering or reviewing a signed judgment except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error — so its power is not 'as the Supreme Court does'.
- ✓ 1. Article 128 lets the Chief Justice of India, with the President's previous consent, request a person who has held office as a Supreme Court judge (or a qualified former High Court judge) to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge. The person cannot be forced to sit unless he consents.
- ✗ 2. Article 137 expressly gives the Supreme Court power to review any judgment or order it has made, in any kind of proceeding. No article gives a High Court such a power; Article 215 only makes it a court of record. A High Court's review is narrower and comes from elsewhere — Section 114 and Order 47 of the CPC in civil cases and its inherent power to correct grave errors — and in criminal cases the procedure code bars altering or reviewing a signed judgment except for clerical or arithmetical errors. So the High Court does not have the power 'as the Supreme Court does'.
Remember · Article 128: the CJI, with the President's previous consent, may request retired Supreme Court judges to sit as judges. Article 137 expressly gives review power to the Supreme Court; High Courts have no equivalent article — their review is statutory or inherent, and barred in criminal cases.
Sources
- Constitution of India, Article 128 (Attendance of retired Judges at sittings of the Supreme Court) ↗ “may at any time, with the previous consent of the President, request any person who has held the office of a Judge of the Supreme Court or of the Federal Court … Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament or any rules made under article 145, the Supreme Court shall have power to review any judgment pronounced or order made by it. … Every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.”
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper I (2021, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 1 Oct 2026 (how we verify). ·