Consider the following statements: I. > A person who has held office as a permanent Judge of a High Court cannot pleaded or act in any court or before any authority in India except the Supreme Court. II. > A person is not qualified for appointment as a Ju

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 127 (IAS/2006)
Consider the following statements:
I. A person who has held office as a permanent Judge of a High Court cannot pleaded or act in any court or before any authority in India except the Supreme Court.
II. A person is not qualified for appointment as a Judge of a High Court in India unless he has for at least five years held a judicial office in the territory of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

question_subject: 

Polity

question_exam: 

IAS

stats: 

0,70,169,73,48,48,70

keywords: 

{'permanent judge': [0, 0, 2, 0], 'judge': [6, 1, 14, 17], 'supreme court': [12, 1, 4, 14], 'judicial office': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'court': [11, 1, 18, 32], 'appointment': [7, 1, 5, 11], 'high court': [1, 0, 2, 0], 'authority': [1, 0, 0, 0], 'india': [8, 1, 7, 13]}

The explanation for each statement is as follows:

I: The statement is incorrect. According to Article 220 of the Indian Constitution, a permanent judge of the High Court, after retirement, is prohibited from pleading or acting in any court or before any authority within the jurisdiction of the same High Court where they served. However, they can plead or act in any other court or before any other authority in India, including the Supreme Court.

II: The statement is also incorrect. According to Article 217 of the Indian constitution, to be appointed as a judge of a High Court, a person must have either held a judicial office in India for at least ten years, or he must have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Courts in succession) for at least ten years.

Therefore, option 4 is correct, as neither of the given statements is accurate as per the Indian Constitution.