Original jurisdiction

Also called: Article 131 · Topic: Judiciary: Independence, Structure, Judicial Review and Activism · NCERT: Class 11, Ch 6 "Judiciary"

Meaning

Original jurisdiction (Article 131) is the Supreme Court's power to hear certain disputes first, as the case starts in the Supreme Court itself and no other court can hear it. These are legal disputes between the Union government and one or more states, or between two or more states, where a legal right is at stake [2].

It makes the Supreme Court the umpire of federalism. In India, power is divided between the Union and the states (federalism). When the two levels clash over a legal right, Article 131 gives them a neutral court to settle it.

Explanation

How it works

• "Original" means the case begins in the Supreme Court. It does not come up on appeal from a lower court.
• "Exclusive" means the Supreme Court hears these disputes "to the exclusion of any other court". No High Court can hear them [2].
• Only governments can be parties. Article 131 allows only three kinds of disputes [2]:
• (a) the Government of India against one or more states;
• (b) the Government of India and any state(s) on one side, against one or more other states on the other side;

• (c) two or more states against each other.

• Why it matters: the Court settles fights over how power is divided. It also interprets the lists of subjects given to the Union and the states.

The "legal right" test

• The dispute must involve a question of law or fact. On that question, "the existence or extent of a legal right" must depend [2].
• A purely political quarrel does not qualify. Article 131 applies only when a legal issue touches a legal right [3].
• Example: a state that dislikes a Union policy cannot sue just for that reason.
• It must show that a legal right it holds is being denied or cut down.

What is kept out (exclusions)

Excluded	Why
Private persons or companies as parties	The text of Article 131 names only governments as parties
Disputes arising from a treaty, agreement, covenant, engagement, sanad (a grant or charter from the old rulers) or similar document signed before the Constitution began and still in force	Proviso to Article 131 [2]
Inter-state river water disputes	Article 262 lets Parliament bar all courts. The Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 does this.

• Cauvery example:
• The Cauvery water dispute went to a tribunal under the 1956 Act. It did not come as an Article 131 suit.
• The tribunal's award reached the Supreme Court by appeal under Article 136 (special leave to appeal).
• The Court decided it in 2018 (State of Karnataka v. State of Tamil Nadu).

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it sits: Article 131, in Part V (The Union), in the chapter on the Union Judiciary. Its proviso keeps out pre-Constitution treaties and similar documents [2].
• Linked provision: Article 262 and the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956 take water disputes out of Article 131.
• Who uses it: the Union government and state governments, never private citizens.
• Landmark cases:
• State of Karnataka v. Union of India (1977):
  • Karnataka challenged a commission of inquiry that the Union had set up against its Chief Minister.
  • It is a leading case on how far Article 131 reaches.
• State of Kerala v. Union of India (2024):
  • Kerala sued over the Union's limits on how much the state can borrow.
  • In 2024 the questions were sent to a Constitution Bench (a bench of at least five judges, needed for major questions about interpreting the Constitution).

• State of West Bengal v. Union of India (10 July 2024, 2024 INSC 502) [3]:

  • West Bengal withdrew its general consent under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DSPE) Act, 1946, the law that governs the CBI.
  • The CBI still kept registering cases in the state.
  • The state argued that once consent is withdrawn, the Union cannot allow the CBI to register cases there [3].
  • The Court held the suit maintainable (fit to be heard) under Article 131. The case then went on to a hearing on merits [3].

• Other "first-instance" powers of the Supreme Court (outside Article 131):

• Article 71: only the Supreme Court decides disputes over the election of the President and Vice-President.
• Article 139A (42nd Amendment, 1976): the Supreme Court can withdraw to itself cases from High Courts that raise the same substantial question of law of general importance. It can also transfer cases from one High Court to another "for the ends of justice" [4].

Don't confuse with

• Writ jurisdiction (Article 32): any person can go directly to the Supreme Court when a fundamental right is violated. Under Article 131, only governments can be parties, and the issue is a federal legal right, not a citizen's fundamental right.
• Appellate jurisdiction (Articles 132–134, 136): the case comes up from a lower court or tribunal. The Cauvery case reached the Supreme Court this way (by appeal, 2018), not under Article 131.
• Article 139A (transfer of cases): the Court pulls in cases already pending in High Courts [4]. Under Article 131, the case is filed in the Supreme Court from the start, and no High Court ever had the power to hear it.
• Inter-state water tribunal (Article 262): water disputes go to a tribunal under the 1956 Act. Article 131 cannot be used for them.

Prelims Hooks

• Article 131: the Supreme Court's exclusive original jurisdiction over Union–state and state–state disputes. No High Court can hear these [2].
• Trap: "A private company can file a suit against a state under Article 131." Wrong. Only the Union and states can be parties.
• Proviso to Article 131: keeps out disputes from pre-Constitution treaties, agreements, covenants, engagements and sanads [2].
• Water disputes: barred by Article 262 and the Inter-State River Water Disputes Act, 1956. Cauvery reached the Supreme Court by appeal (decided 2018), not under Article 131.
• West Bengal v. Union of India (2024): a state's suit over the CBI working in the state after it withdrew consent under Section 6, DSPE Act, 1946 was held maintainable under Article 131 [3].
• Article 71: disputes over the election of the President and Vice-President go only to the Supreme Court. This is a separate power, not part of Article 131.

Mains Points

• Umpire of federalism: Article 131 gives states a neutral forum against the Union.
• West Bengal v. Union of India (2024) shows its use in disputes over CBI consent and federal policing [3].

• Kerala v. Union of India (2024) shows its use in disputes over state borrowing limits.

• Limits on its reach:

• The strict "legal right" test keeps out purely political quarrels [3].
• Water disputes are kept out by Article 262, and pre-Constitution treaties by the proviso [2].

• Long delays, such as a case waiting for a Constitution Bench, can leave a political dispute unsettled. Centre–state tension can then build up outside the courtroom.

• Courts or politics? Article 131 turns some Centre–state clashes into legal questions. It should not replace political tools such as inter-governmental talks. Those tools are still needed for disputes the Court cannot decide because no legal right is involved.

Related concepts

• Writ jurisdiction
• Appellate jurisdiction
• Special leave petition

Read more

• Supreme Court jurisdiction I: original, writ and appellate