The question tests knowledge of the Indian Constitution, specifically the powers of the High Courts and the Supreme Court regarding judicial review and constitutional amendments. We need to evaluate each statement based on established constitutional principles and landmark judgments.
D) Neither 1 nor 2
Both statements are incorrect. High Courts can declare central laws unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court can review constitutional amendments based on the Basic Structure Doctrine.
The question asks to identify which types of disputes fall under the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India. The original jurisdiction refers to cases that can be directly heard by the Supreme Court without going through lower courts.
Correct Option: C) 1 and 4
The question asks to identify the provisions that safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court of India. We need to evaluate each given statement based on the constitutional provisions related to the Supreme Court's independence.
A) 1 and 3 only. Statements 1 and 3 correctly describe provisions that safeguard the autonomy of the Supreme Court.
The question asks about the appointing authority for the Chief Justice of India. This falls under the constitutional provisions related to the judiciary in India. Understanding the roles of various constitutional bodies and offices is key to answering this question.
D) President — As per Article 124(2) of the Indian Constitution, the President of India appoints the Chief Justice of India. The President issues the warrant of appointment under his hand and seal.
The question asks about the specific Supreme Court case that interpreted the term 'consultation' (regarding judicial appointments) as 'concurrence'. This refers to the evolution of the collegium system in India.
Correct Option: B) Second Judges Case
The question asks to identify the correct statements regarding the impeachment process of Supreme Court Judges in India. This requires knowledge of the constitutional provisions and the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968.