The Constitution of India
Article 225
Jurisdiction of existing High Courts
Subject to the provisions of this Constitution and to the provisions of any law of the appropriate Legislature made by virtue of powers conferred on that Legislature by this Constitution, the jurisdiction of, and the law administered in, any existing High Court, and the respective powers of the Judges thereof in relation to the administration of justice in the Court, including any power to make rules of Court and to regulate the sittings of the Court and of members thereof sitting alone or in Division Courts, shall be the same as immediately before the commencement of this Constitution:
Provided that any restriction to which the exercise of original jurisdiction by any of the High Courts with respect to any matter concerning the revenue or concerning any act ordered or done in the collection thereof was subject immediately before the commencement of this Constitution shall no longer apply to the exercise of such jurisdiction.
Why this exists
India's High Courts existed long before the Constitution, created by British-era instruments like Letters Patent and the Government of India Acts, each with its own quirks in jurisdiction and procedure. Rather than rewrite each court's powers from scratch, the Constitution-makers chose continuity: keep what existed, subject to future constitutional and legislative change. But one colonial hangover — barring courts from interfering in revenue collection disputes, a protection the East India Company and later British administration wanted for smooth tax collection — was seen as incompatible with a citizen's right to judicial review in a democratic republic, so the proviso specifically struck it down.
How courts read it
In Shah Babulal Khimji v. Jayaben D. Kania (1981), the Supreme Court relied on Article 225 to hold that Letters Patent Appeals (intra-High-Court appeals from a single judge to a division bench), a pre-1950 feature of some High Courts, survive the Constitution because Article 225 continues such pre-existing powers unless validly altered by law. Courts have similarly used this Article to trace and justify inherent powers, review jurisdiction, and original side procedures that predate the Constitution but were never explicitly re-enacted afterward.
Common misconceptions
- Myth: Article 225 gives High Courts brand-new powers.
Fact: It does the opposite — it simply continues the powers, jurisdiction, and procedures each High Court already had before the Constitution, subject to change by valid law. - Myth: High Courts can never be stopped from hearing revenue matters, thanks to this Article.
Fact: The Article only removes the specific pre-1950 restriction on original jurisdiction in revenue cases; Parliament or state legislatures can still validly regulate such jurisdiction through new laws.