UPSC Prelims Practice Questions — Judicial integrity — a case the Court cannot ignore
Q1. In the law laid down by the Supreme Court on judicial appointments, the expression "consultation with the Chief Justice of India" occurring in Articles 124(2) and 217(1) of the Constitution has been authoritatively construed to mean which one of the following?
- A. A mandatory exchange of views that is not binding, the President retaining the final choice among the names placed before him
- B. Concurrence, the Chief Justice's opinion being formed collectively with his seniormost colleagues and having primacy over the executive
- C. Consultation with the Union Council of Ministers, whose aid and advice on such appointments binds the President
- D. A recommendation that takes effect only on ratification by a special majority of both Houses of Parliament
Q2. Consider the following statements contrasting the "in-house procedure" of the higher judiciary with the constitutional process for removal of a judge:
1. The in-house procedure traces its origin to resolutions adopted at a full court meeting of the Supreme Court, whereas the removal process rests on the Constitution read with the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
2. Under the in-house procedure the inquiry is conducted only by sitting judges, whereas the statutory inquiry committee in a removal proceeding includes a distinguished jurist who need not be a judge.
3. Unlike a removal proceeding, the in-house procedure can culminate in an order of the President divesting the judge of office.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- The in-house procedure traces its origin to resolutions adopted at a full court meeting of the Supreme Court, whereas the removal process rests on the Constitution read with the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.
- Under the in-house procedure the inquiry is conducted only by sitting judges, whereas the statutory inquiry committee in a removal proceeding includes a distinguished jurist who need not be a judge.
- Unlike a removal proceeding, the in-house procedure can culminate in an order of the President divesting the judge of office.
- A. 1 only
- B. 1 and 2 only
- C. 2 and 3 only
- D. 1, 2 and 3
Q3. Under the Constitution of India, the transfer of a judge from one High Court to any other High Court is effected under which one of the following provisions, and after consultation with whom?
- A. Article 217(1), after consultation with the Governor of the State in which the High Court is situated
- B. Article 222(1), after consultation with the Chief Justice of India
- C. Article 224A, after consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court concerned
- D. Article 221(2), after consultation with the Union Minister in charge of Law and Justice
Q4. A notice of motion for the removal of a judge of the Supreme Court is proposed to be given in the Rajya Sabha. What is the minimum number of members of that House whose signatures the notice must carry before it can be admitted?
Q5. Consider the following statements regarding the 2026 controversy concerning the Rajasthan High Court and the route through which it was pursued:
1. The grievance was raised by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court through written communications to the Chief Justice of India seeking the transfer of the Acting Chief Justice of that High Court.
2. The allegations included the shifting of cases to the Acting Chief Justice's own Bench in exercise of his authority as master of the roster, and nepotism in appointments to the Permanent Lok Adalat.
3. Unlike earlier such grievances, this one was pursued through a motion admitted in Parliament under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, rather than through the collegium.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- The grievance was raised by a sitting judge of the Supreme Court through written communications to the Chief Justice of India seeking the transfer of the Acting Chief Justice of that High Court.
- The allegations included the shifting of cases to the Acting Chief Justice's own Bench in exercise of his authority as master of the roster, and nepotism in appointments to the Permanent Lok Adalat.
- Unlike earlier such grievances, this one was pursued through a motion admitted in Parliament under the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968, rather than through the collegium.
- A. 1 only
- B. 1 and 2 only
- C. 2 and 3 only
- D. 1, 2 and 3
Q6. A Permanent Lok Adalat constituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 for public utility services is headed by a Chairman who must possess which one of the following qualifications?
- A. He is or has been a judge of the High Court of the State in which it is established
- B. He has judicial experience of a post not below the rank of an Additional District Judge
- C. He is or has been a judicial officer not below the rank of a Civil Judge (Senior Division)
- D. He is the District Magistrate of the district for which it exercises jurisdiction
Q7. The Supreme Court struck down the Constitution (Ninety-ninth Amendment) Act, 2014 principally on the ground that it failed to secure which one of the following?
- A. The primacy of the judiciary in the making of appointments to the higher judiciary
- B. Ratification of the amendment by the legislatures of not less than one-half of the States
- C. Adequate representation for the Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and women among the eminent persons
- D. A definite outer time limit within which the executive must act upon recommendations made to it