✎ Article 124(3) allows Supreme Court judge appointments via three routes, including 'distinguished jurist' clause, unused for 76+ years.
Relevance for Banking, SSC & RBI Grade B exams: Polity
The Constitution of India, under Article 124(3), allows for the appointment of a “distinguished jurist” as a Supreme Court Judge, a provision rarely utilised since independence. This clause was introduced to diversify the judiciary by including eminent legal scholars and academics, reflecting the framers’ intent to broaden professional backgrounds beyond traditional judicial or advocacy routes. The Constituent Assembly debates highlighted the example of Felix Frankfurter, a Harvard law professor appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, to justify this provision. However, the lack of a clear definition for “distinguished jurist” and concerns over practical judicial experience have limited its application, with appointments predominantly drawn from High Court judges or senior advocates.
For banking and SSC aspirants, this provision underscores the importance of constitutional provisions governing judicial appointments, a recurring theme in exams like IBPS, SBI, and RBI Grade B. Understanding such constitutional nuances can aid in answering polity-based questions in mains exams, where awareness of judicial processes and constitutional amendments is often tested. Similarly, SSC aspirants may encounter questions on the judiciary’s structure or constitutional articles, making this topic relevant for general awareness sections. The provision’s historical context and its underutilisation also reflect broader debates on judicial diversity and reform, which are pertinent for analytical questions in competitive exams.
Source: The Hindu
Generated by AanyaAi for educational purpose.
1 comment on “Can Jurists Be Appointed as Supreme Court Judges? Explained for Exam Aspirants”