High Courts and Subordinate Courts

Every State in India is guaranteed its own High Court. Below it sits a structured ladder of subordinate courts, down to the district level. Lok Adalats offer a faster, informal path for disputes that suit a compromise. These are the courts most citizens actually meet, far more often than the Supreme Court.

1Chapter 1: Every State Gets a High Court

Must Know

The basics

• The Constitution guarantees every State its own High Court.
• In practice, one “common” High Court can serve two or more States or Union Territories.
• Such a court shares one bench and one Chief Justice across a wider area.
• The President appoints the Chief Justice after consulting relevant judicial and executive figures.
• This mirrors, on a smaller scale, how Supreme Court judges are chosen.
• High Court judges hold office until 62. Supreme Court judges retire at 65.
• That five-year gap shows up often in exams.
• Read more: The Supreme Court and The Judiciary: Structure and Judicial Appointments.

Article 226 is broader than Article 32

• Article 32 lets a citizen move the Supreme Court only to enforce a Fundamental Right.
• Article 226 lets a citizen move a High Court for Fundamental Rights and also for “any other purpose”.
• That covers ordinary legal wrongs unrelated to Fundamental Rights.
• This is a deliberate design. It gives citizens a remedy close to home, in their own State’s High Court.
• Without it, people would have to travel to Delhi even for grievances that have nothing to do with Fundamental Rights. That would be costly and impractical.

2Chapter 2: Articles 214–231, Building the High Courts

Good to Know

Chapter V of Part VI, article by article

• 214: guarantees a High Court for every State.
• 215: makes every High Court a court of record, able to punish contempt of itself. Article 129 gives the Supreme Court the same status.
• 216: fixes composition. A Chief Justice plus as many judges as the President decides the workload needs.
• 217: covers appointment and conditions of a judge’s office.
• 218: applies the Supreme Court’s rules on judge qualifications and removal to High Courts too.
• 219: each new judge takes the oath before the State’s Governor, not the President.
• 220: a retired permanent judge may not practise in the courts where they presided.
• 221: fixes judges’ salaries.
• 222: the President can transfer a judge from one High Court to another.
• 223: covers appointing an acting Chief Justice when the post is empty.
• 224 and 224A: allow additional, acting or even retired judges temporarily to clear a backlog.
• 225: preserves jurisdiction a High Court held before the Constitution began.
• 226: the broad writ power, covered above.
• 227: gives every High Court sweeping superintendence over all courts and tribunals in its territory. This goes beyond hearing their appeals.
• 228: a High Court can pull up a case from a subordinate court that raises a substantial constitutional question.
• 229: covers High Court staff and expenses.
• 230: lets a High Court’s jurisdiction extend to a Union Territory.
• 231: lets Parliament set up one common High Court for two or more States or Union Territories.

3Chapter 3: Subordinate Courts, Articles 233–237

Good to Know

The five short articles

• 233: the Governor appoints District Judges, but only in consultation with the State’s High Court.
• An outside candidate needs at least seven years as a practising advocate or pleader, plus the High Court’s recommendation.
• 233A: a legal safety net. It retroactively validates certain past district-judge appointments and their judgments, where a technical defect might have thrown rulings into doubt.
• 234: covers judicial officers below district-judge level. Recruitment involves both the State Public Service Commission and the High Court.
• 235: gives the High Court real day-to-day control over subordinate courts. This covers postings, promotions and leave.
• 236: defines “district judge” for this chapter. It includes city civil court judges and sessions judges.
• 237: lets the Governor extend these rules to certain classes of magistrates.

One judiciary, not two

• India has a single, integrated judicial hierarchy from the Supreme Court down to subordinate courts.
• The United States keeps separate federal and state court systems side by side. India does not.
• So both Union laws and State laws are interpreted by the same court structure.
• The Governor is the formal appointing authority for District Judges. Yet the High Court’s consultation gives the judiciary real input.

4Chapter 4: Lok Adalats

Good to Know

A faster, informal path

• Lok Adalats are an alternative dispute resolution mechanism.
• Their legal base is the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. It is a statute, not a constitutional provision.
• They work on compromise. Both sides agree a settlement, instead of a judge picking a winner after a full trial.
• So they are faster and far less adversarial than formal litigation.
• Small money claims and family matters fit. Criminal cases and complex constitutional questions do not.
• An award is not just advice. It is treated as a civil court decree, final and binding, with no ordinary appeal.

Who can organise one?

• State Legal Services Authorities.
• District Legal Services Authorities.
• Taluk Legal Services Committees.
• High Court Legal Services Committees.
• The Supreme Court Legal Services Committee.
• Panchayat Committees are not on the list. This is a common exam trap.
• Panchayats resolve local disputes informally, but have no statutory power to organise a formal Lok Adalat.

5Chapter 5: Past Papers

Exam Point of View

CAPF (ACs) 2025: courts of record

• The question asked which statement about Courts of Record is not correct.
• The wrong one claimed subordinate courts are Courts of Record.
• Only the Supreme Court (Article 129) and High Courts (Article 215) are.
• (Source: CAPF (ACs) 2025, Q34.)

NDA-NA-1 2026: High Court territories

• The question asked how many of four pairs were correctly matched: Calcutta/Lakshadweep, Madras/Puducherry, Gauhati/Manipur, Kerala/Andaman and Nicobar.
• Only Madras/Puducherry is correct.
• Lakshadweep falls under Kerala High Court.
• Andaman and Nicobar falls under Calcutta High Court.
• Manipur got its own High Court in 2013, ending Gauhati’s old jurisdiction there.
• (Source: NDA-NA-1 2026, Q139.)

CDS (II) 2016: Article 32 vs Article 226

• The question asked which statement about writ jurisdiction is not correct.
• The trap: Article 32 covers Fundamental Rights only. It does not extend to unrelated legal matters.
• That wider ground is what Article 226 covers, through High Courts.
• (Source: UPSC CDS (II) 2016, Q93.)

CAPF (ACs) 2019: who cannot organise a Lok Adalat

• The options were Panchayat Committees, Taluk Legal Services Committee, a District Authority and a High Court Legal Services Committee.
• The answer: Panchayat Committees.
• (Source: CAPF (ACs) 2019, Q87.)

6Chapter 6: In the News, 2026

Current Affairs

Seven High Courts without a permanent Chief Justice

• As of 20 July 2026, seven of India’s 25 High Courts had Acting Chief Justices.
• They were Bombay, Calcutta, Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, Madhya Pradesh, Patna, Punjab & Haryana, and Rajasthan.
• Five more Chief Justices were due to retire before the end of 2026.
• So the vacancy problem was expected to last.
• It shows how appointment delays can affect judicial administration.
• (Sources: Bar and Bench and LiveLaw.)

The Supreme Court grew too

• An Ordinance issued in May 2026 raised the Supreme Court’s sanctioned strength from 33 to 37 judges, excluding the Chief Justice.
• That makes 38 seats in all.
• The stated aim was to speed up justice and cut the backlog.
• Parliament later passed the Bill replacing the Ordinance in August 2026.
• (Source: PRS Legislative Research.)

Quick Q&A

• HC for each State? Article 214.
• HC judge retirement? 62.
• Courts of record? SC and HCs only.
• Lok Adalat law? Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
• SC strength 2026? 37 plus CJI.