CONUDRUM OF UNUSED PROVISON OF THE CONSTITUTION- DISTINGUISHED JURIST”

DISTINGUISHED JURIST, DEBATES IN THE CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY ,CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND ‘DISTINGUISHED JURISTS’ – IN THE HIGH COUURT ,WHY ‘DISTINGUISHED JURISTS’ SHOULD BE APPOINTED AS JUDGES?,CONCLUSION ,SUGGESTIONS

Abstract

Despite the fact that it has almost been 72 years since the Constitution of India has been adopted and the Supreme Court of India was established. No Jurist has been assigned as a judge of a supreme Court or High Court. Article 124 (3) (c) of the Indian Constitution says that “An individual who is in the interpretation of the President a distinguished jurist be assigned as a Judge of a Supreme Court”. The practicality of appointing eminent jurists and intellectuals to the Supreme Court of India is examined in this article. The framers of the constitution of the country projected eminent jurists as adjudicators on the bench of the highest court, taking inspiration from foreign states such as the USA, UK and Canada. In spite of possessing such a mission, legal lecturers, the backbone of the legal industry, have no role in the Indian court system. The research from which this article was generated goes into greater detail on countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States of America. This article investigates the same notion, first in its theoretical structure, and then in view of various legal and intellectual events in the country, a study of its acceptability and viability.