The power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court of India is vested in
Contents7
- AThe President of India
- Bthe Parliament
- CThe Chief Justice of India
- Dthe Law Commission
Show answer
Answer: (B) the Parliament
Article 124
(1) says the Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such number of other judges as Parliament may by law prescribe.
So it is PARLIAMENT that decides the strength of the SC through legislation (like the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act).
The President appoints judges but cannot increase the number.
The CJI recommends names for appointment but doesn't decide strength.
The Law Commission advises on legal reforms but has no such power.
Current strength: Originally 8 judges (1950), increased multiple times by Parliament — now 34 (including CJI).
(Ref: Laxmikanth)
Parliament controls the size of the Supreme Court through legislation, currently set at 34 judges including the Chief Justice.
The Constitution separates appointment power (President) from strength-setting power (Parliament) to maintain checks and balances in judicial structure.
Supreme Court Composition Under Article 124
Indian Polity Supreme Court Article 124 number of judges
Article 124: Parliamentary Control Over SC Strength
Parliament has exclusive power to fix Supreme Court strength through legislation
Article 124(1) gives this power explicitly to Parliament
Current strength is 34 judges including Chief Justice
Originally started with 8 judges in 1950
Constitutional Framework
Article 124(1) states the Supreme Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and 'such number of other judges as Parliament may by law prescribe'. This makes Parliament the sole authority to determine judicial strength through ordinary legislation.
Key Historical Changes
Year | Strength | Act/Amendment |
|---|---|---|
1950 | 8 judges | Original Constitution |
1956 | 11 judges | Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act |
1960 | 14 judges | Amendment Act |
1978 | 18 judges | Amendment Act |
2019 | 34 judges | Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Act |
Why Parliament Controls This
Separation of powers: Legislature controls institutional structure, executive appoints within that structure
Democratic accountability: Parliament represents people's will on judicial resources and case load management
Flexibility: Strength can be adjusted based on pendency and workload without constitutional amendment
President appoints judges but cannot increase the total number — that needs Parliament's law
Chief Justice recommends names for appointment but has no power over strength
Law Commission advises on reforms but cannot legislatively change court composition
Roles in Judicial System Management
Indian Polity President Chief Justice Law Commission
Who Does What in Supreme Court Management
President: Appoints judges based on collegium recommendation
Parliament: Fixes court strength and judges' salaries/conditions
Chief Justice: Leads collegium for appointments and transfers
Law Commission: Advisory body for legal reforms, no executive power
Powers Distribution
Authority | Role in SC Management | Constitutional Basis |
|---|---|---|
President | Appoints & removes judges | Article 124(2) |
Parliament | Fixes strength, salaries, conditions | Article 124(1), 125 |
Chief Justice | Recommends appointments, administrative head | Collegium System |
Law Commission | Advises on legal reforms only | Executive body |
Question Context
This question tests understanding of legislative vs executive powers in judicial administration. While the President appoints judges, only Parliament can create the positions to be filled through the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act.
Don't confuse appointment with creation — President fills positions, Parliament creates them
Chief Justice recommends but doesn't decide — collegium suggests, President formally appoints
Law Commission has advisory role only — cannot make binding decisions on court structure