Skip to content

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, PIL, Judicial Review Class 11

questionbuddy.in/cbse/class-11/political-science/judiciary/jurisdiction-of-the-supreme-court-pil-judicial-review-and-the-basic-structure

Political ScienceCBSE Class 11 · Judiciary

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, PIL, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure (Class 11 Political Science, Chapter 6)

Updated 17 October 2026 · Fact-checked

The Supreme Court has original (Union-State and inter-State disputes, Article 131), writ (Article 32), appellate and advisory (Article 143) jurisdiction, plus special leave (Article 136). Public Interest Litigation widened access to justice from 1979; judicial review (Articles 13, 32, 226) lets courts declare laws unconstitutional, and Kesavananda Bharati (1973) held that Parliament cannot violate the basic structure.

Understand Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure

Why this topic matters. The four jurisdictions with articles, both sides of PIL and the basic structure doctrine are repeated 3-6 mark questions and case-based items.

1. Jurisdiction. (i) Original: disputes between the Union and States and among States go directly to the Supreme Court, which acts as umpire in federal disputes (Article 131). (ii) Writ: a person whose Fundamental Right is violated can go directly to the Supreme Court for habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, certiorari and quo warranto (Article 32); High Courts can also issue writs (Article 226). (iii) Appellate: the highest court of appeal in civil, criminal and constitutional cases; an appeal from a High Court generally needs its certificate; a death sentence can be appealed. (iv) Advisory: the President may refer matters of public importance for advice (Article 143); the Court need not give advice and the President need not accept it. (v) Special leave to appeal against any judgement of any court (Article 136). Article 137: the Court may review its own judgements; Article 144: all authorities must act in aid of the Court.

2. PIL. Also called Social Action Litigation; the main instrument of judicial activism. Earlier only a person personally aggrieved could approach a court; from about 1979 the Court heard cases filed on behalf of others and acted on newspaper reports and postal complaints. Early PILs: Hussainara Khatoon vs. Bihar (1979), about undertrials held longer than any sentence they could receive; Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration (1980), turning a prisoner's note into a petition. In Bandhua Mukti Morcha (1984) Justice Bhagwati said the problems of the poor need a non-adversarial approach. Effects: democratised access to courts, forced executive accountability and freer elections (affidavits on assets and education). Criticisms: overburdened courts, a blurred line between the judiciary and the executive and legislature.

3. Judicial review. The power of the Supreme Court or High Courts to examine whether a law is consistent with the Constitution and, if not, declare it unconstitutional and inapplicable (Article 13). The term is not in the Constitution; the power is implied by a written constitution. Grounds: violation of Fundamental Rights and violation of the federal distribution of powers. Rights are protected by writs (Article 32, and Article 226 for High Courts) and by striking down laws.

4. Judiciary and Parliament. Soon after 1950 laws on land reform restricted the right to property; the Court said Fundamental Rights could not be restricted even by amendment. The most serious phase was 1967-1973. In Kesavananda Bharati (1973) the Court held that there is a basic structure which no one, not even Parliament through amendment, can violate; that the right to property is not part of it; and that the Court decides what the basic structure includes. The right to property was removed from the Fundamental Rights in 1979. Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar warned that independence must not turn the judiciary into a super-legislature or super-executive.

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure: key facts

Jurisdictions
OriginalArticle 131
WritArticle 32
Appellate
AdvisoryArticle 143
Special leaveArticle 136
Supreme Court powers.
Other articles
Article 13laws against rights void
Article 226High Court writs
Article 137review
Article 144authorities act in aid
Constitutional basis.
PIL
  • Hussainara Khatoon 1979
  • Sunil Batra 1980
  • Bandhua Mukti Morcha 1984
  • Also Social Action Litigation
Judicial activism.
Basic structure
  • Kesavananda Bharati 1973
  • Parliament cannot violate
  • Right to property not part
  • Court decides content
Limits on amendment.

How to answer Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure questions

Case-based jurisdiction questions need the nature of the dispute first.

  1. 1Identify the parties (Union-State, citizen-state, lower court).
  2. 2Match with original, writ, appellate or advisory.
  3. 3Quote the article.
  4. 4State whether the Court is bound to give the result (advisory is not binding).

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure in real life

The idea, met in an everyday situation. Answer the question in your own words, then compare with the model answer. The one-line hook is what to remember.

Dispute between two States

Suppose two States quarrel over where their common boundary lies, or over the extent of their legal powers, and one of them wants a ruling.

Which jurisdiction applies?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. It is a dispute among States, and it is not a river-water dispute, which Parliament can send to a tribunal under Article 262.
  2. Original jurisdiction under Article 131.

Answer: Original jurisdiction.

Memory hook: State versus State goes straight up.

Letter on a jail issue

Suppose a lawyer files a petition on behalf of poor prisoners held for years without trial, based on a newspaper report.

Which type of litigation is this?

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. A case on behalf of others in the public interest.
  2. Public Interest Litigation.

Answer: Public Interest Litigation.

Memory hook: Someone fights for others.

Tricks to remember Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure

Short memory aids. Say each one aloud once, then use it on a question the same day.

  • O-W-A-A

    Original, Writ, Appellate, Advisory

    Use it when: Four jurisdictions.

  • 131, 32, 143, 136

    Articles of original, writ, advisory, special leave

    Use it when: Numbers.

  • Basic structure 1973

    Kesavananda Bharati sets the limit

    Use it when: Case.

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure: solved examples

Ordered from board level to HOTS. Try each one before you open the solution.

Example 1: Advisory jurisdiction · 1 mark · MCQBoard level

Under Article 143 the Supreme Court:
(A) must always give advice to the President
(B) may give advice which the President need not accept
(C) can overrule the President
(D) decides disputes between States

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. The Court need not give advice and the President need not accept it (1 mark).

Answer: (B)

Example 2: Original jurisdiction · 2 marks · Very short answerBoard level

Explain the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court with an example. (2 marks)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. Cases that go directly to the Supreme Court: disputes between the Union and States and among States (1 mark).
  2. Example: a dispute between two States over a federal power (1 mark).

Answer: Original jurisdiction covers cases that go directly to the Supreme Court, namely disputes between the Union and States and among States. For example, a quarrel between two States about their respective powers must be heard only by the Supreme Court.

Example 3: PIL meaning · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level

What is Public Interest Litigation? State three effects. (3 marks)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. PIL allows a person or group to approach the court on behalf of others in the public interest (1 mark).
  2. It democratised access to courts and forced executive accountability (1 mark).
  3. It helped make elections fairer, e.g. affidavits on assets and education (1 mark).

Answer: PIL, also called Social Action Litigation, lets citizens, organisations and lawyers approach the court on behalf of the poor and deprived in matters of public interest, even though they are not personally aggrieved. It democratised access to the courts, made the executive more accountable and helped make elections freer and fairer by requiring candidates to file affidavits on assets, income and education.

Example 4: Assertion and reason: judicial review · 1 mark · Assertion-reasonHarder board level

Assertion (A): Judicial review is not mentioned in the Constitution, yet the Supreme Court can strike down laws.
Reason (R): A written constitution implies the power to test laws against it, and Article 13 makes laws against Fundamental Rights void.
(A) Both true, R explains A
(B) Both true, R does not explain A
(C) A true, R false
(D) A false, R true

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. The power is implied by a written constitution and supported by Article 13 (1 mark).

Answer: (A)

Example 5: HOTS: Parliament versus the Court · 5 marks · Long answerHOTS / competency

Parliament passed laws to implement land reform which restricted the right to property. Explain how the dispute escalated, what Kesavananda Bharati (1973) decided about Parliament's amending power and the right to property, and give one argument for and one against giving the Court the final say on the basic structure. (5 marks)

Try it first, then show the solutionSolution
  1. Parliament restricted the right to property for land reform and the Court said Fundamental Rights could not be restricted even by amendment (1 mark).
  2. Conflict was most serious in 1967-1973 (1 mark).
  3. Kesavananda Bharati: there is a basic structure that Parliament cannot violate by amendment (1 mark).
  4. The right to property was held not to be part of it, and the Court reserved the right to decide what the basic structure is (1 mark).
  5. For: protects the Constitution; against: risk of a super-legislature (Ayyar's warning) (1 mark).

Answer: Parliament restricted the right to property for land reform and the Court held that Fundamental Rights could not be restricted even by amendment; the conflict was sharpest in 1967-73. In Kesavananda Bharati (1973) the Court held that there is a basic structure of the Constitution which Parliament cannot violate by amendment, that the right to property is not part of it, and that the Court decides what the basic structure includes. For giving the Court the final say: it protects the Constitution against hasty change. Against: it risks the judiciary becoming a super-legislature, as Alladi Krishnaswami Ayyar warned.

Where students lose marks in Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure

The slips examiners see most often, and what to write instead.

  • Mistake: Saying the Court must give advice under Article 143

    Advisory seen as mandatory.

    Wrong working

    The Supreme Court is bound to advise.

    Right working

    It need not give advice and the President need not accept it.

    Do this: Use "may".

    Usually costs: 1 mark.

  • Mistake: Confusing Article 32 and 226

    Both are writ powers.

    Wrong working

    Article 226 is for the Supreme Court.

    Right working

    Article 32: Supreme Court; Article 226: High Courts.

    Do this: Link 226 with High Courts.

    Usually costs: 1 mark.

  • Mistake: Writing that Kesavananda Bharati upheld the right to property

    Case outcome confused.

    Wrong working

    The Court held the right to property is part of the basic structure.

    Right working

    It held the right to property is not part of the basic structure.

    Do this: Remember not part.

    Usually costs: 1 mark.

Exam tips

  • Make a four-row table of jurisdictions with article and example.
  • Present PIL with both benefits and criticisms.
  • Date the Kesavananda Bharati case and state its two findings.

Practice questions on Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure

Write each answer on paper first. Open the hint only if you are stuck, and the answer only when you have finished.

  1. Q1 · 1 mark · MCQBoard level

    Article 32 of the Constitution gives the right to:
    (A) advisory opinion
    (B) approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of Fundamental Rights
    (C) appeal to the Privy Council
    (D) judicial review of the President's election only

    Hint

    Writs.

    Answer

    (B)

  2. Q2 · 2 marks · Very short answerBoard level

    Name two early Public Interest Litigation cases. (2 marks)

    Hint

    1979, 1980.

    Answer

    Hussainara Khatoon vs. Bihar (1979) and Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration (1980).

  3. Q3 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level

    State the grounds on which the Supreme Court can exercise judicial review. (3 marks)

    Hint

    Rights, federalism.

    Answer

    The Court can examine whether a law violates Fundamental Rights, or violates the federal distribution of powers (for example a Union law on a State List subject). Judicial review also extends to State laws, and a law found inconsistent with the Constitution is declared unconstitutional and inapplicable.

  4. Q4 · 3 marks · Short answerHarder board level

    Give two criticisms of judicial activism through PIL. (3 marks)

    Hint

    Overburden, blurring.

    Answer

    PIL has overburdened the courts, and it has blurred the line between the judiciary and the legislature or executive, since matters such as pollution control, corruption investigation and electoral reform are really administrative tasks. This strains the principle that each organ respects the others' powers.

  5. Q5 · 4 marks · Short answerHOTS / competency

    Under Article 143 the President refers a constitutional question to the Supreme Court. Explain the nature of this jurisdiction, why it is useful, and how it differs from original jurisdiction. (4 marks)

    Hint

    Not binding.

    Answer

    Advisory jurisdiction lets the President refer a matter of public importance or constitutional interpretation for advice; the Court need not give advice and the President need not accept it. It is useful because legal opinion before acting avoids unnecessary litigation and lets the government adjust its plans. It differs from original jurisdiction, which involves actual disputes between the Union and States or among States that only the Supreme Court can decide.

Test your recall

Answer in your head or on paper first, then open the card. Pulling an answer out of memory makes it stick far better than re-reading.

  1. 1.Which Article covers inter-State disputes?Show answer

    Article 131.

  2. 2.Which Article allows special leave?Show answer

    Article 136.

  3. 3.What was PIL called as well?Show answer

    Social Action Litigation.

  4. 4.Which year Kesavananda Bharati?Show answer

    1973.

Supreme Court Jurisdiction, Public Interest Litigation, Judicial Review and the Basic Structure: frequently asked questions

Can High Courts issue writs?

Yes, under Article 226.

Is judicial review in the text of the Constitution?

The term is not mentioned; the power is implied.

What is Article 137?

The power of the Court to review its own judgements.