* Mandamus- This writ is a command issued by court to a public official, public body, corporation, inferior court, tribunal or government asking them to perform their duties which they have refused to perform.

* Prohibition- It is issued by a higher court to the lower courts such as special tribunals, magistrates, commissions, and other judiciary officers to prevent the latter from exceeding its jurisdiction that it does not possess.

* Certiorari- It is a writ that orders to move a suit from an inferior court to superior court. It is issued by a higher court to a lower court or tribunal either to transfer a case pending with that to itself or squash its order of the latter in a case.

Statement 1 is correct: The judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts are appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister and in consultation with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Statement 2 is correct: A judge can be removed only by an impeachment motion passed separately by two-thirds present members of the both Houses of the Parliament. It has never happened in the history of Indian democracy.

Statement 3 is not correct: The judiciary in India is also one of the most powerful in the world. The Supreme Court and the High Courts have the power to interpret the Constitution of the country. They can declare invalid any law of the legislature or the actions of the executive, whether at the Union level or at the state level, if they find such a law or action is against the Constitution. Thus they can determine the Constitutional validity of any legislation or action of the executive in the country, when it is challenged before them. This is known as the judicial review.

In the Minerva Mills case (1980), the Supreme Court held that ‘the Indian Constitution is founded on the bedrock of the balance between the Fundamental Rights and the Directive Principles. They together constitute the core of the commitment to social revolution. They are like two wheels of a chariot, one no less than the other'.

To become a judge of the supreme court the following qualifications are necessary:-

- He should be a citizen of India

- He should have been a judge of a High Court ( or High Court in succession) for 5 years; or (statement 2 is not correct)

- He should have been an advocate of a High Court (or High Court in succession) for 10 years; or

- He should be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the president.

- The constitution has not prescribed a minimum age for appointment as a judge of the supreme court. ( statement 1 is not correct)

High court can issue writs against a person residing or against a government or authority located within its territorial jurisdiction only or outside its territorial jurisdiction only if the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction.

Earlier, appeals against the decision of the Tribunal could be made only in the Supreme Court and not in the high courts. However, in the Chandra Kumar case (1997), the Supreme Court declared this restriction on the jurisdiction of the high courts as unconstitutional, holding that judicial review is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Since then, the appeals against the orders of the Tribunal now go to the concerned high court. An aggrieved person cannot approach the Supreme Court directly against an order of the tribunal, without first going to the concerned high court.

High Court can issue writ for the enforcement of fundamental rights and also for other purpose. Under Article 226, remedy is discretionary, therefore a High Court may refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction.

Organised by Legal Services Authorities, Lok Adalats (State as well as National) are an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mode. It is free of cost. So statement 1 is correct.

In Lok Adalats, pre-litigation and pending cases in the courts are disposed on the basis of amicable settlement without any expense on the part of litigants. So statement 2 is correct.

Therefore answer is option C.

* District judges are appointed by Governor in consultation with High Courts. Hence, 1 is incorrect.

* Offences which are non-compoundable under any law fall outside the purview of Lok Adalats as they deal with only cases of compoundable nature. Hence, 2 is correct.

* No appeal shall lie to any court against the award of the Lok Adalats. Hence, 3 is incorrect.

* The Gram Nyayalayas shall not be bound by the rules of evidence, and shall be guided by principle of natural justice. Hence, 4 is correct.

A person who is, or has been, a district judge or additional district judge or has held judicial office higher in rank than that of a District Judge, shall be entitled to be a Chairman of the Permanent Lok Adalat. Hence statement 1 is not correct.

Permanent Lok Adalats were given the statutory status under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987. Hence statement 2 is correct.

As the remedy under Article 226 is discretionary, hence, the high court can refuse to exercise its writ jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court can issue writs against a person or government throughout the territory of India whereas a high court can issue writs against a person residing or against a government or authority located within its territorial jurisdiction only or outside its territorial jurisdiction only if the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction. Thus, the territorial jurisdiction of the Supreme Court for the purpose of issuing writs is wider than that of a high court.