Model answer & approach
- Examine the constitutional provisions and nature of advisory jurisdiction of Supreme Court of India. Evaluate your answer with relevant examples. (Answer in 250 words)
Introduction
Article 143 gives the Supreme Court a consultative function unknown to its American counterpart: it may advise the President on questions of law or fact of public importance, without a dispute, a plaintiff or a binding outcome.
Body
1. The provision: Under Article 143(1) the President may refer any such question and the Court may report its opinion; under Article 143(2), on disputes arising from pre-Constitution treaties, the Court shall report. Article 145(3) requires a bench of at least five judges.
2. Its nature is opinion, not adjudication: No decree issues and no res judicata attaches, and the opinion is not strictly law declared under Article 141. In practice it is followed with the weight of precedent.
3. The discretion to decline is real: The Court refused to answer whether a temple pre-existed at the disputed site in the 1993 Ayodhya reference, holding the question superfluous and favourable to one religion.
4. Where it has served well: Berubari in 1960 established that ceding territory needs a constitutional amendment; the Kerala Education Bill reference clarified Article 30; the Cauvery reference of 1991 voided Karnataka's ordinance and averted an inter-State crisis; the 2012 reference settled that auction is not constitutionally mandatory for every resource.
5. Where it strains: The Special Courts Bill reference of 1978 and the 2025 reference on gubernatorial assent show the device being used to revisit contested political questions without adversarial contest or appeal.
Conclusion
Advisory jurisdiction is valuable as pre-emptive constitutional clarification and dangerous as a route around litigation. The Court's own discretion to decline is the safeguard, and it deserves more frequent exercise.
Open this in the study app →