Articles 230 and 231 of the Constitution of India: High Court Jurisdiction and Common High Courts
Articles 230 and 231 form part of Chapter V of Part VI of the Constitution of India. They deal with Parliament's power regarding the territorial jurisdiction of High Courts over Union territories and the establishment of a common High Court for two or more States, or for States together with a Union territory.
In brief: Article 230 enables Parliament by law to extend or exclude a High Court's jurisdiction in relation to a Union territory. Article 231 enables Parliament by law to establish a common High Court for two or more States or for two or more States and a Union territory.
Article 230 - Extension of jurisdiction of High Courts to Union territories
Article 230 allocates to Parliament the legislative power to alter the relationship between a High Court and a Union territory. A State Legislature does not obtain power merely because that State's High Court exercises jurisdiction over a Union territory.
Article 230(1): Parliament may by law extend the jurisdiction of a High Court to, or exclude the jurisdiction of a High Court from, any Union territory.
Article 230(2): Where the High Court of a State exercises jurisdiction in relation to a Union territory:
- the Constitution is not to be read as empowering the Legislature of that State to increase, restrict or abolish that jurisdiction; and
- for rules, forms or tables relating to subordinate courts in that Union territory, the reference to the Governor in Article 227 is read as a reference to the President.
Meaning and effect of Article 230
The provision separates the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court from the legislative authority of the State whose High Court is exercising jurisdiction. Any extension or exclusion of such High Court jurisdiction in relation to a Union territory must be made by Parliament through law. Clause (2)(b) also adapts the constitutional reference in Article 227 so that the President takes the place of the Governor for the specified subordinate-court rules, forms and tables relating to that Union territory.
Article 231 - Establishment of a common High Court for two or more States
Article 231 begins with a non-obstante clause. This means that, notwithstanding the preceding provisions of Chapter V, Parliament may create a common High Court for the territorial units specified in the Article.
Article 231(1): Parliament may by law establish a common High Court for two or more States, or for two or more States and a Union territory.
Article 231(2)(b): For rules, forms or tables concerning subordinate courts, the reference to the Governor in Article 227 is read as the Governor of the State in which those subordinate courts are situated.
Article 231(2)(c): References to the State in Articles 219 and 229 are read as references to the State in which the common High Court has its principal seat. If the principal seat is in a Union territory, the specified references are correspondingly read as references to the President, Union Public Service Commission, Parliament and Consolidated Fund of India.
Important constitutional note on Article 231(2)(a): The current official Legislative Department text displays sub-clause (a) as omitted by the Constitution (Ninety-ninth Amendment) Act, 2014, while its footnote records that the Ninety-ninth Amendment was struck down by the Supreme Court on 16 October 2015 in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, reported in (2016) 5 SCC 1. The earlier text of clause (2)(a) dealt with the reference in Article 217 to the Governor where a common High Court exercises jurisdiction over more than one State.
Meaning of a common High Court
A common High Court is one High Court exercising constitutional jurisdiction for more than one State, or for two or more States together with a Union territory, pursuant to a law made by Parliament. Article 231 also supplies interpretative rules so that constitutional references concerning the Governor, subordinate courts, the State and the principal seat can operate correctly in a multi-State High Court arrangement.
Difference between Articles 230 and 231
Article 230 concerns the extension or exclusion of the jurisdiction of a High Court in relation to a Union territory. Article 231, by contrast, concerns Parliament's power to establish a single common High Court for multiple States, or for multiple States together with a Union territory. Both provisions therefore deal with the territorial organisation of High Court jurisdiction, but they operate in different ways.
Official constitutional sources
For the authoritative text, amendments and constitutional footnotes, refer to the official Government of India sources below.
Related provisions: Article 227 deals with the High Court's power of superintendence over courts and tribunals within its territory; Article 229 concerns officers, servants and expenses of High Courts; and Article 241 contains provisions concerning High Courts for Union territories.
