{"id":86486,"date":"2025-06-01T03:48:46","date_gmt":"2025-06-01T03:48:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?p=86486"},"modified":"2025-06-01T03:48:46","modified_gmt":"2025-06-01T03:48:46","slug":"the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/","title":{"rendered":"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio"},"content":{"rendered":"

The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) refers to which one of the following basic features of the Constitution of India ?<\/p>\n

[amp_mcq option1=”Judicial Review” option2=”Rule of Law” option3=”Free and fair elections” option4=”Fundamental Rights” correct=”option1″]<\/p>\n

\n
\n
This question was previously asked in<\/div>\n
UPSC CDS-2 – 2023<\/div>\n<\/div>\n
Download PDF<\/a>Attempt Online<\/a><\/div>\n<\/div>\n
\nThe judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President’s obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice’s opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary.
\n<\/section>\n
\n– The case focused on the interpretation of the ‘consultation’ process for appointing judges.
\n– It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice’s recommendation.
\n– The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.
\n<\/section>\n
\nWhile the case touches upon the principles underlying the Rule of Law (non-arbitrariness) and indirectly supports the framework protecting Fundamental Rights, its primary impact and subject matter were directly related to the functioning and independence of the judiciary itself, which is best encapsulated by the concept of Judicial Review within the given options, as Judicial Review is the mechanism through which judicial independence and the constitutional scheme are enforced.
\n<\/section>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) refers to which one of the following basic features of the Constitution of India ? [amp_mcq option1=”Judicial Review” option2=”Rule of Law” option3=”Free and fair elections” option4=”Fundamental Rights” correct=”option1″] This question was previously asked in UPSC CDS-2 – 2023 Download PDFAttempt … <\/p>\n

Detailed SolutionThe landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1088],"tags":[1105,1099,1180],"class_list":["post-86486","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-upsc-cds-2","tag-1105","tag-indian-polity-and-governance","tag-the-supreme-court","no-featured-image-padding"],"yoast_head":"\nThe landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President's obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice's opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. - The case focused on the interpretation of the 'consultation' process for appointing judges. - It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice's recommendation. - The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President's obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice's opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. - The case focused on the interpretation of the 'consultation' process for appointing judges. - It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice's recommendation. - The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"MCQ and Quiz for Exams\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-01T03:48:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"rawan239\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio","description":"The judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President's obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice's opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. - The case focused on the interpretation of the 'consultation' process for appointing judges. - It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice's recommendation. - The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio","og_description":"The judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President's obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice's opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. - The case focused on the interpretation of the 'consultation' process for appointing judges. - It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice's recommendation. - The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.","og_url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/","og_site_name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","article_published_time":"2025-06-01T03:48:46+00:00","author":"rawan239","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"rawan239","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/","name":"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website"},"datePublished":"2025-06-01T03:48:46+00:00","dateModified":"2025-06-01T03:48:46+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209"},"description":"The judgment in Subhash Sharma v. Union of India (1991) dealt with the appointment of judges and the interpretation of Article 124(2) of the Constitution concerning the President's obligation to consult the Chief Justice of India. The court held that the Chief Justice's opinion was entitled to great weight and the executive could not arbitrarily disregard it. This case, while not fully establishing the collegium system (which came later in the Second Judges Case, 1993), significantly impacted the process of judicial appointments and reinforced the concept of judicial independence, which is intrinsically linked to the basic feature of Judicial Review. Judicial Review is the power of the judiciary to review actions of the legislature and executive to ensure they are in accordance with the Constitution, a power essential for maintaining the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary. - The case focused on the interpretation of the 'consultation' process for appointing judges. - It emphasized the need for the executive to give due regard to the Chief Justice's recommendation. - The ruling contributed to the evolution of the judicial appointments process, leading towards greater judicial autonomy in this matter.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/the-landmark-supreme-court-judgment-in-the-case-subhash-sharma-v-unio\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"UPSC CDS-2","item":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/category\/upsc-cds-2\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"The landmark Supreme Court judgment in the case Subhash Sharma v. Unio"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#website","url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/","name":"MCQ and Quiz for Exams","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":"required name=search_term_string"}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/5807dafeb27d2ec82344d6cbd6c3d209","name":"rawan239","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/761a7274f9cce048fa5b921221e7934820d74514df93ef195a9d22af0c1c9001?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"rawan239"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com"],"url":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/author\/rawan239\/"}]}},"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86486","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=86486"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/86486\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=86486"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=86486"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/exam.pscnotes.com\/mcq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=86486"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}