Revision summary
Both systems are common-law, precedent-based, and now fronted by a public Supreme Court. The UK’s 2009 Supreme Court and Human Rights Act moved it toward India’s rights-review look. India can strike down statutes and even test amendments against basic structure; the UK cannot. Appointments diverge: JAC in Britain, collegium in India after NJAC fell in 2015. PIL and a written Constitution keep Indian judicial practice more managerial of the executive.
Model answer
Introduction
India inherited the common-law court, the adversarial trial, and a professional Bar from Britain. In recent decades the two systems have moved closer on a Supreme Court as a public institution and on rights review, and further apart on who appoints judges and whether Parliament is supreme. Convergence and divergence are both real.
Body
Convergence
- The UK Constitutional Reform Act, 2005, and the UK Supreme Court (2009) separated the highest appeal from the House of Lords, which looks more like India’s distinct Supreme Court under Articles 124–147.
- An independent Judicial Appointments Commission in the UK and India’s declared commitment to judicial independence are the same family of concern, even if the machinery differs.
- Human Rights Act, 1998, in the UK and India’s long Article 21 expansion both made rights a daily judicial practice, not only a political gift.
- Both systems use common-law reasoning, precedent, and a strong culture of judicial review of executive action.
- Open judgments, live streaming experiments, and a public-facing apex court are a shared twenty-first-century style.
Divergence
- Parliamentary sovereignty remains the UK’s first principle: courts may issue a declaration of incompatibility under the HRA; they do not strike down a primary Act as India does under Articles 13 and 32.
- India has a written Constitution, basic structure (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973), and PIL; the UK has no equivalent constituent document or social-action docket of the Bandhua Mukti / MC Mehta type.
- Appointments: UK JAC and Lord Chancellor process versus India’s collegium after the Three Judges Cases and the striking down of NJAC in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (2015).
- India combines a Union Supreme Court with High Courts as constitutional courts; the UK’s devolution jurisdictions (Scotland, Northern Ireland) are a different map.
- Contempt, court-pack size, and the political heat of the collegium have no full UK twin.
Key point
- They converge as professional common-law apex courts that check the executive. They diverge because India is a constitutional state with judicial supremacy over amendments’ basic structure, while the UK remains a parliamentary state with a new but still bounded Supreme Court.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD CL[Common law Bar review] --> CV[Convergence] UK[UK SC 2009 HRA] --> CV IN[Art 13 PIL basic structure] --> DV[Divergence] AP[Collegium versus JAC] --> DV
Conclusion
Recent times pulled India and the UK together in having a visible Supreme Court and a rights-based review of government. They pulled apart on appointments, PIL, and the power to invalidate primary legislation. The shared common-law skin now covers two different constitutional bodies.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
"Once a speaker, Always a speaker'! Do you think the practice should be adopted to impart objectivity to the office of the Speaker of Lok Sabha? What could be its implications for the robust functioning of parliamentary business in India.
Next question in the 2020 paper (Q5). View answer →
-
Is the UK Supreme Court a copy of the Indian Supreme Court?
No. It is a final appellate court in a parliamentary system. India’s Court is also a constitutional court with striking-down power.
-
Did India copy the UK JAC?
India tried a commission through NJAC. The Court held it hurt judicial independence. The UK JAC still sits inside parliamentary sovereignty.
PYQ trend
When UPSC asked this
Related PYQs from other years, newest first. Open a question to read it.
-
2020 · Q1 · GS II · 10 marks
"There is a need for simplification of procedure for disqualification of persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of peoples Act" Comment. -
2020 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks
How far do you think cooperation, competition and confrontation have shaped the nature of federation in India? Cite some recent examples to validate your answer. -
2020 · Q13 · GS II · 15 marks
The strength sustenance of local institutions in India has shifted from their formative phase of 'Functions, Functionaries and Funs' to the contemporary stage of 'Functionality'. Highlight the critical challenges faced by local institutions in terms of their functionality in recent times. -
2020 · Q14 · GS II · 15 marks
Rajya Sabha has been transformed from a 'useless stepney tyre' to the most useful supporting organ in past few decades. Highlight the factors as well as the areas in which this transformation could be visible. -
2019 · Q2 · GS II · 10 marks
"The Central Administration Tribunal which was established for redressal of grievances and complaints by or against central government employees, nowadays is exercising its powers as an independent judicial authority." Explain. -
2019 · Q3 · GS II · 10 marks
What are the methods used by the Farmers organizations to influence the policy- makers in India and how effective are these methods? -
2019 · Q6 · GS II · 10 marks
Despite Consistent experience of High growth, India still goes with the lowest indicators of human development. Examine the issues that make balanced and inclusive development elusive. -
2019 · Q8 · GS II · 10 marks
Implementation of information and Communication Technology (ICT) based Projects / Programmes usually suffers in terms of certain vital factors. Identify these factors, and suggest measures for their effective implementation.
More from this paper
Q1 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks
"There is a need for simplification of procedure for disqualification of persons found guilty of corrupt practices under the Representation of peoples Act" Comment.
Governance and Policy
Corrupt practices are listed in Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. Election petitions in the High Court and Section 8A disqualification by the President after the Election Commission’s opinion are separate, slow tracks. A member can sit through much of a term while the petition and the 8A file move. Lily Thomas made conviction-based disqualification immediate; the corrupt-practice route was not similarly tightened. Time-bound petitions and a single visible disqualification consequence would match the Act’s purpose.
Q2 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks
"Recent amendments to the Right to information Act will have profound impact on the autonomy and independence of the Information Commission". Discuss.
Indian Constitution
The 2005 Act gave CIC and ICs a five-year term and CEC-equivalent salary as a tenure-and-status guarantee. The RTI (Amendment) Act, 2019, left term and pay to Central Government rules and dropped the no-disadvantage clause. State Commissioners’ conditions also sit with the Centre, which federalises control over a State appellate. Appointment collegium was not the main target; security of tenure after appointment was. Autonomy suffers when the executive that is a frequent respondent also writes the Commissioner’s service rules.
Q3 · UPSC Mains 2020 · GS II · 10 marks
How far do you think cooperation, competition and confrontation have shaped the nature of federation in India? Cite some recent examples to validate your answer.
Governance and Policy
Cooperation runs through the GST Council, All-India Services and disaster law. Competition appears in investment races and NITI-style indices after higher tax devolution. Confrontation shows in CBI consent withdrawals, GST compensation fights and 2020 farm-law resistance. Delhi’s LG–government dispute is executive confrontation inside a Union Territory with a legislature. Indian federalism is all three at once; no single word captures 2014–20 practice.
Toppers' copies
Toppers' copies for this question will be uploaded soon.