Signing you in

With reference to the ‘distinguished jurist’, consider the following statements:

1. It is mentioned in Article 124 of the Constitution of India, which allows the appointment of a “distinguished jurist” as a Supreme Court judge.

2. In India, a jurist has been appointed to the Supreme Court only three times so far.

Relevance: This topic is relevant for UPSC Prelims because it connects to judicial appointments, constitutional interpretation, and judicial independence. Such specific constitutional provisions can be useful for statement-based questions in Prelims.

— Decades after the Constitution came into force, one route to becoming a Supreme Court judge has never been taken. Delivering the 13th convocation address for the LL.M programmes at National Law University Delhi on August 30, Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan pointed to Article 124(3), which allows the appointment of a “distinguished jurist” as a Supreme Court judge, and called it an “unused mandate” of the Constitution that “needs our serious attention.” Hence, statement 1 is correct.

— He said, “While our Constitution has a provision for appointment of a jurist as a judge of the Supreme Court, no jurist has been appointed so far to the Supreme Court though the Constitution has completed more than 76 years.” Hence, statement 2 is not correct.

— Article 124 sets out how the Supreme Court is constituted. Article 124(3) lists who can be appointed as a judge, ie., a citizen of India who has either served as a High Court judge for five years, practised as an advocate for ten years, or “is, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist.”

— The first two routes are how the court has always been staffed. Most judges have been elevated from the High Courts, while a smaller number of lawyers have been appointed directly from the Bar. The most recent was Justice V Mohana, recommended by the collegium in May 2026 and sworn in the following month. The third category, the appointment of distinguished jurists, has simply never been used.

With reference to the Sardar Patel National Unity Award, consider the following statements:

1. The award was instituted in 2019, and no award winners have been announced until now.

3. The award committee would be constituted by the President of India.

Relevance: This topic is relevant for UPSC Prelims as it covers the Sardar Patel National Unity Award, its institutional framework and key provisions. Such current-affairs-linked factual questions are important for eliminating options in the Prelims examination.

— Seven years after it was instituted by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the first Sardar Patel National Unity Award is set to be announced on October 31 this year. While the award was instituted in September 2019, and over one hundred nominations are learnt to have been received each year, sources said none of them were considered “deserving” so far. With no “befitting” selection, no award winners were announced until now. Hence, statement 1 is correct.

— According to those aware of the developments, it will be considered equivalent to the Padma Vibhushan, and there may be two or three recipients this time. Hence, statement 2 is not correct.

— While nominations were invited from June 1 to July 31 this year, over 150 names are learnt to have been received so far. Ahead of opening up the portal for public entries, the MHA had also sent letters to all state chief secretaries and Union secretaries, asking them to send nominations.

— According to the 2019 notification announcing the award, the candidate “should have made outstanding efforts and notable contribution to promote and further the cause of national unity and integrity in a manner that may serve as an inspiration to others, and reinforce the value of a strong and united India”.

— The notification said that “the award committee would be constituted by the Prime Minister, and would include the Cabinet Secretary, Principal Secretary to the Prime Minister, Secretary to the President, Home Secretary, as members, and three-four eminent persons selected by the Prime Minister”. Hence, statement 3 is not correct.

— The award is set to comprise a medal and a citation, but no monetary grant or cash award would be attached to it. According to sources, it would not be conferred posthumously, except in very rare and highly deserving cases. The medal will be in the form of a lotus leaf, made of gold and silver, with Patel’s portrait embossed on one side and the national emblem on the other. Hence, statement 4 is correct.

Which of the following expenditures shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund of India?

1. the salary, allowances, and pension due to or on behalf of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India

2. any sums necessary to settle any judgement, decree, or award of any court or arbitral tribunal

3. the Supreme Court Judges’ salaries, allowances, and pensions

4. the salaries and allowances of the Prime Minister and Union Ministers

Relevance: This topic is relevant for UPSC Prelims as it tests the constitutional provisions relating to the Consolidated Fund of India and charged expenditure. Such statement-based questions can test precise understanding of Parliamentary financial control and constitutional provisions.

— The following expenditure shall be expenditure charged on the Consolidated Fund of India —

(a) the President’s emoluments and allowances, as well as other office-related expenditures;

(b) the salary and allowances of the Chairman and Deputy Chairman of the Council of States, as well as the Speaker and Deputy Speaker of the House of People.

(d) (i) the Supreme Court Judges’ salaries, allowances, and pensions; Hence, statement 3 is correct.

(ii) pensions payable to or in respect of Federal Court judges.

(iii) the pensions payable to or in respect of Judges of any High Court which exercises jurisdiction in relation to any area included in the territory of India or which at any time before the commencement of this Constitution exercised jurisdiction in relation to any area included in a Governor’s Province of the Dominion of India.

(e) the salary, allowances, and pension due to or on behalf of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India; Hence, statement 1 is correct.

(f) any sums necessary to settle any judgement, decree, or award of any court or arbitral tribunal; Hence, statement 2 is correct.

(g) any other expense designated by this Constitution or by Parliament by law to be taxed.

Note: The salaries and allowances of the Prime Minister and Union Ministers and the salaries, and allowances of High Court judges are not covered under the expenditures of the Consolidated Fund of India. The pensions of High Court judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India.

With reference to the Collegium system, consider the following statements:

1. The government cannot raise objections and seek clarifications regarding the collegium’s choices.

2. The collegium system finds its root in the Constitution of India.

Relevance: This topic is relevant for UPSC Prelims as it tests the evolution and functioning of the Collegium system for judicial appointments. The topic is important for understanding judicial independence, separation of powers and constitutional governance.

— The Supreme Court Collegium has recommended Chhattisgarh High Court Judge Sanjay K Agarwal as the Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court. This comes amid allegations by a Supreme Court judge and protests by lawyers against Acting Chief Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma.

— The collegium system is the way by which judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed and transferred. The collegium system is not rooted in the Constitution or a specific law promulgated by Parliament; it has evolved through judgments of the Supreme Court. Hence, statement 2 is not correct.

— The Supreme Court Collegium is a five-member group headed by the current Chief Justice of India and made up of the court’s four other seniormost judges at the time. A High Court collegium is led by the current Chief Justice and two additional senior judges from that court. By definition, the collegium’s makeup changes throughout time.

— The government can also complain and request clarification on the collegium’s selections, but if the collegium repeats the same names, the government must appoint them. Hence, statement 1 is not correct.

Consider the following statements about the Special Officer for linguistic minorities:

1. It shall be the duty of the Special Officer to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for linguistic minorities.

2. The appointment of the Special Officer for linguistic minorities is made by the President of India.

Relevance: The question tests factual knowledge about the appointment, functions and reporting mechanism of the Special Officer. It also helps in understanding the constitutional framework for minority rights and language-related provisions.

— Article 350(B) says there shall be a Special Officer for linguistic minorities to be appointed by the President. Hence, statement 2 is correct.

— “It shall be the duty of the Special Officer to investigate all matters relating to the safeguards provided for linguistic minorities under this Constitution and report to the President upon those matters at such intervals as the President may direct, and the President shall cause all such reports to be laid before each House of Parliament, and sent to the Governments of the States concerned”. Hence, statement 1 is correct.

Daily Subject-wise quiz — History, Culture, and Social Issues (Week 162)

Daily subject-wise quiz — Environment and Geography (Week 177)