Free Essay

Moot Memo

In:

Submitted By Shantanu7928
Words 12182
Pages 49
CODE:

B

IN THE
HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT OF SINDYA

IN THE MATTER OF:

NORTH EASTERN DRY ZONE TALUKAS ANTI CLOUD SEEDING
ASSOCIATION……………………………………………………..….......... PETITIONER

VERSUS

STATE

OF

NUDI………………………………………………………………....RESPONDENT

ON SUBMISSION TO THE HONOURABLE SUPREME COURT JUDGES

MOST RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………………………………3
INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS.………...…………………………………………………………9
SYNOPSIS……………………………………………………………………………………..10
STATEMENT OF FACTS……………………………………………………………………….11
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………………………………………12
STATEMENT OF ISSUES………………………………………………………………………13
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS………………………………………………………………….14
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED…………………………………………………………………….15
I.

THE PRESENT WRIT PETITION IS MAINTAINABLE……………………………………15

A. Petitioner has the Locus Standi to file the writ petition……………………………...15
B. There is a violation of fundamental rights……………………………………………17
a) There is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 14 of the
Constitution………………………………………………………………………...17
b) There is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 19(1) (g) of the
Constitution…………………………………………………………………………18
c) There is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 of the
Constitution………………………………………………………………………...18
II.

THE STATE LEGISLATION IS NOT COMPETENT TO PASS THE “NUDI CLOUD SEEDING
ACT,

20XY”…………………………………………………………………...……………19
III.

THE FARMERS OF THE TALUKAS FALLING UNDER THE NORTH

– EASTERN DRY ZONE

HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AGAINST TAMPERING WITH BIODIVERSITY AND
CLIMATE MODIFICATION…………………………………………………………….23

A. The state of Nudi has failed to fulfill its constitutional obligation to safeguard the fundamental rights against tampering with Biodiversity and Climate Modification of the farmers of the north eastern dry zone…………………………………………….23

1
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

a) The farmers have a fundamental right against tampering with biodiversity and climate modification…...…………………………………………………………23
b) There is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 and Article 19(1)
(g).........................................................................................................................23
c) There is a violation of international obligations with respect to right to environment..........................................................................................................24 B. The NCSA has infringed the farmer’s rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of
Sindya………………………………………………………………………………...25
a) The State has violated the right to a decent environment of the people of
Nudi......................................................................................................................25
i. There is a violation of against Sustainable Development........................27 ii. There is a violation of the Precautionary Principle…………...…...……27 iii. There is a violation of the Public Trust Doctrine………………......……28
C. The state of Nudi has violated the right to livelihood……..……..…………………..28
D. The state of Nudi has infringed the farmers’ freedom under Article 19(1) (g) of the
Constitutionof Sindya………………………………………………..………………29

IV. THE NUDI CLOUD SEEDING ACT OF
THE

RULE

OF

‘EQUALITY

20XY

BEFORE

MANDATING CLOUD SEEDING IS OPPOSED
LAW’

UNDER

ARTICLE

14

OF

THE

CONSTITUTION………….……………………………………………………………32

PRAYER………………………………………………………...…………………………….35

2
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTES
1. Constitution of India, 1950.
2. The Biodiversity Act 2002.
3. The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (the Environment Act).

TREATIES, CONVENTIONS AND ACTS
1. Convention on Biological Diversity.
2. Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
3. Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment.
4. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity.
5. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.
6. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification.
U.N. DOCUMENTS
1. A study by the World Bank- Human rights and Climate Change, (2010).
2. Brundtland Report, (1992).
3. CBD Notification, December (2011).
4. UNCAR Winter Quarterly NCAR Scientists make it rain in Mexico.
5. UNEP, Sourcebook of alternative technologies for freshman augmentation in Africa
1.1.14 Cloud seeding, United Nations Environmental Program (Feb. 3, 2012, 10:30
AM), http://www.unep.or.jp/ietc/publications/techpublications/techpub-8a/cloud.asp.
6. United Nations Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development,
(1987).

JUDICIAL DECISIONS
1. A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M.V. Nayudu (Retd.) and Ors, 2000 (3)
S.C.A.L.E. 354.
2. A.S. Krishna v. State of Madras, AIR 1957 SC 297.
3. Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 298.

3
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

4. All India Council for Technical Education v. Surinder Kumar Dhawan, AIR 2009
SC2322.
5. Amar Singhji v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1955 SC 504.
6. A.Samatha v. State of A.P, 1997 (8) S.C.C. 191.
7. BALCO Employees Union v. Union of India, 2002 (2) S.C.C. 333.
8. BALCO Employees v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 350.
9. Bandua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India AIR 1984 SC 802.
10. Bharat Hydro Power Corpn. Ltd. v. State of Assam, 2004 (2) S.C.C. 553.
11. Board of Trustees of Port of Bomabay v. Dilip Kumar R. Nandkarni, AIR 1983 SC
109.
12. Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group AIR 2006
SC 1489.
13. Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti Sangharsh Samiti v. State of UP, 1990 AIR 2060.
14. D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab, 1971 (2) S.C.C. 261.
15. D.C.Wadhwa v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 579.
16. D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries, 1993 (3) S.C.C. 259.
17. Dalmia Cement (Bhora) Ltd. v. Union of India, 1996 (10) S.C.C. 104.
18. Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, 1983 (4) S.C.C. 166.
19. Directorate of Film Festivals v. Gaurav Ashwin Jain, 2007 (4) S.C.C. 737.
20. Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v Bar Council of Maharastra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708.
21. E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1974 (4) S.C.C. 3, 38.
22. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, 1996 (2) S.C.C. 281.
23. Indian Council of Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, 1998 AIR SC 3861.
24. Janata Dal v. H.S. Choudhary, AIR 1993 SC 892.
25. Jayal N.D. v. Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 867.
26. Karak Singh v. Union of India, AIR 1963 SC 1295.
27. Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board v. Sri. C. Kenchappa and Ors, AIR
2006 SC 2038.
28. Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1994 (3) S.C.C. 569.
29. Kharak Singh v. State of U.P, AIR 1963 SC 1295.
30. Kinkri Devi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1988 HP 4, 9.
31. M. C. Mehta (Badkhal and Surajkund Lakes Matter) v. Union of India, 1997 (3)
S.C.C. 715.
32. M. C. Mehta (Calcutta, Tanneries' Matter) v. Union of India, 1997 (2) S.C.C. 411.
4
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

33. M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1997 (11) S.C.C. 327.
34. M. Nagaraj v. Union of India, 2006 (8) S.C.C. 212.
35. M.C Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1997 (1) S.C.C. 388.
36. Mahila Jagran Manch v. The State Of Karnataka and Ors, ILR 1997 KAR 2110.
37. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr, 1978 (1) S.C.C. 248.
38. N.D. Jayal v. Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 867.
39. Narmada Bachoa Andolan v. Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3751.
40. Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, 1993 (2) S.C.C. 746.
41. Olga Tellis v. Bomay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
42. P. Unnikhrishnan v. State of A.P., 1993 (1) S.C.C. 645.
43. People's Union for Democratic Rights & Others v. Union of India & Others, 1982 (3)
S.C.C. 235.
44. Pleasant stay hotel v. Palani hills conservation council 1995 (6) SCC 127, 136, 139,
140.
45. Prafulla Kumar Mukherjea v. Bank of Commerce Ltd., Khulna, AIR 1947 PC 60.
46. Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1999 SC
2187.
47. S. Jagannath v. Union of India, 1997 (2) S.C.C. 87.
48. S.K. Mastan Bee v. G.M. South Central Railway, 2003 (1) S.C.C. 184.
49. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.
50. Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305.
51. Sand Carrier’s Owener’s Union and others v. Board of trusties for the port of
Calcutta and others, 1995 (1) S.C.C. 85.
52. Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame, 1990 (1) S.C.C 520.
53. Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Shri Justice S.R. Tendolkar and Ors, 1959 (1) S.C.R.
279.
54. Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation, AIR 1989 SC 1988.
55. Southern Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals v. State of Kerala, 1981 (4) S.C.C. 391.
56. State of Bihar v. Subhash Singh, 1997 (4) S.C.C. 430.
57. State of Gujurat v. Shantilal Mangaldas, AIR 1969 SC 634.
58. State of Himachal Pradesh v. A. Parent, AIR 1985 SC 910.
59. State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products, AIR 1996 SC 149, 159, 163.
60. State of Karnataka v. Ranganatha Reddy, 1977 (4) S.C.C. 471.
61. State of Orissa v. Gopinath Dash, 2005 (13) S.C.C. 495.
5
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

62. State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla, AIR 1959 SC 544.
63. State of Uttaranchal v.Balwant Singh Chaufal, 2010 (3) S.C.C. 402.
64. State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, 1952 S.C.R. 284.
65. Sube Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. 2001 (7) S.C.C. 545.
66. Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420.
67. Suneel Jatley Etc v. State of Haryana, AIR 1984 SC 1534.
68. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1978 SC 1675.
69. Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of U.P., 1990 (1) S.C.C 109.
70. T. Damodhar Rao v. S.O. Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad,AIR 1987 AP 171.
71. T. N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, 1997 (10) JT 697.
72. Union of India v. Shah Gobardhan L. Kabra Teachers’ College, 2002 (8) S.C.C. 228.
73. Vajravelu Mudaliar P. v. Special Dy. Collector, AIR 1965 SC 1017.
74. Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715.
75. Vijay Kumar Sharma v. State of Karnataka, 1990 (2) S.C.C. 562.
76. Vikram v. State of Bihar, AIR 1988 SC 1782.
77. Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam v. Union of India, 2009 (7) S.C.C. 561
78. Vincent v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 990.
79. Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana, 1995 (2) S.C.C. 577.
80. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.
81. Unnikrishnan v. State of A.P,1993 AIR 2178.
INTERNATIONAL JUDICIAL DECISIONS
1. Missourie, Kansas and Tennesee Railroad v. May, 194 U.S. 267(1904).
2. Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1877).

BOOKS
1. Arnon &Yoch, a comparative study of the biological activities of two molecular species of chloroplast-type ferredoxins (1975).
2. Arvind P Datar, commentary on the constitution of India, Ed.2 2007, Wadwa Nagpur,
Vol. 1.
3. B P Banerjee, Writ remedies, Ed. 4 Rep. 2008, Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa
4. Garner, B.A., Black's dictionary (Ed. 9 2004) west publishing co.

6
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

5. D D Basu, commentary on the constitution of India, 8th edition 2007, Wadhwa
Nagpur, vol 2.
6. D D Basu, commentary on the constitution of India, 8th edition 2007, Wadhwa
Nagpur, vol 3.
7. Jain, M.P., Indian Constitutional law (ed. 5, vol. 1, 2003) Wadwa Nagpur.
8. Divan, S & Rosencranz, A, Environmental law and policy in India, Ed.2.
9. Environmental Law Case Book, Ed. 2 Lexis Nexis
10. Environmental law in India- issues and responses, publisher concept publishing company, 1996.
11. Kiss, A & Shelton, D, International environment law.
12. Kolay, A K Water and crop growth, by.
13. Langerud, D, The
atmospheric reservoir examining the atmosphere and atmospheric resource management.
14. Leelakrishnan, P, Environmental law in India Ed.3
15. MP Jain Indian Constitutional Law Ed.6, 2010.
16. Padia, R G, Global concern for environment hazards and remedial measures.
17. Standler, Ronald B Weather modification law in the U.S.A.
18. Taubenfield, Howard J Weather modification and the law.
19. Taylor, P, An ecological approach to international law: responding to challenges of climate change.

ESSAYS, ARTICLES AND JOURNALS
1. Desai, B., Enforcement of the right to Environmental Protection through PIL in India,
Indian Indian Journal of International Law.
2. Bishnoi, B. L., Constitution and Environmental Governance.
3. Brown, K. J., Elliott R.D. & Thompson J.R., The Seeding of Convection Bands, AMS
Fourth Conference on Weather Modification Report.
4. Bryan A. Garner, In Good Faith, A Dictionary of Basic Law Terms, Thomson West
(2004 Ed. 6), p. 24.
5. Dennis, A.S, Weather Modification by Cloud Seeding, Cloud seeding Debated,
Academic Press, New York.

7
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

6. Bangsund, D.A., Leistritz, L.F., Economic Impacts of Cloud Seeding on Agricultural
Crops in North Dakota, North Dakota. Atmospheric Resource Board, North Dakota
State University. Dept. of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
7. Judith. S., How To Protect A Coral Reef: The Public Trust Doctrine and the Law of the Sea, Sustainable Development and Policy, 2006.
8. Krishna, M.D., Constitutional Response to Environment SCJ 2002.
9. Long, A. B., Review of Persistence Effects of Silver Iodide Cloud Seeding, Journal of
Weather Modification, Vol. 33,2001.
10. Gadgil, M., Saving Sub-Continent’s Wealth, The Hindu Survey of the environment,
1991.
11. Mangalam, S.K.M., Personal Liberty, AIR 1955 Journal 40.
12. Nathaniel, M. & Katerere, J.M, Africa Environment Outlook 2, Genetically Modified
Crops.
13. Oppenheimer, The Legal situation in FINAL REPORT OF THE ADVISORY
COMMITTEE ON WEATHER CONTROL, 1957.
14. Schabas, W., Report of the UN Conference on the Human Environment.
15. Shastri, S., Environmental ethics and the Constitution of India.
16. Security of a person, United Nations Declaration of Human rights, 1948.
17. Tiwary, S.K., Due process’ versus ‘Procedure Established by law, Mainstream, 2000.

8
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

INDEX OF ABBREVIATIONS



AIR……………………………………………………………...ALL INDIA REPORTERS



A. P…………………………………………………………………. ANDHRA PRADESH



CAL…………………………………………………………………………..CALCUTTA



CalLT…………………………………………………………...CALCUTTA LAW TIMES



CBD……………………………………………………CONVENTION ON BIODIVERSITY



C. E……………………………………………………………COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS



CriLJ………………………………………………………….CRIMINAL LAW JOURNAL



DPSP………………………………………...DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY



GLR…………………………………………………………..GUWAHATI LAW REPORT



Id……………………………………………………………………………………IBID



JT…………………………………………………………………..JUDGMENTS TODAY



Mfg…………………………………………………………………...MANUFACTURING



NCSA, 20XY………………………………………NUDI CLOUD SEEDING ACT, 20XY



PARA……………………………………………………………………….PARAGRAPH



P………………………………………………………………………………….PAGE



PIL………………………………………………………PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION



Regd………………………………………………………………………..REGISTERED



SC……………………………………………………………………..SUPREME COURT



SCALE…………………………………………………….SUPREME COURT ALMANAC



SCC……………………………………………………………SUPREME COURT CASES



SCR………………………………………………………..SUPREME COURT REPORTER



UNCCD……………….UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION TO COMBAT DESERTIFICATION



UNEP…………………………………..UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME



UNFCC…………………………UNITED NATIONS FRAMEWORK ON CLIMATE CHANGE



V………………………………………………………………………………VERSUS

9
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

SYNOPSIS

This writ petition in the Supreme Court is with regard to the validity of the ‘Nudi Cloud
Seeding Act, 20XY’.The petitioners are the farmers of the ‘North Eastern Dry ZoneTalukas’ have filed for a writ petition seeking a declaration that the ‘Nudi Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY is ultra vires to the Constitution of Sindya. Cloud Seeding is the artificial method of inducing rainfall through certain methods which are prevalent in the United States of America, in areas which are facing a shortage of rainfall. But there hasn’t been any conclusive benefit that has been reported from this activity. The State has enacted the ‘Nudi Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY’ to carry out cloud seeding in the talukas of the state of Nudi. The farmers of the North
Eastern Dry Zone have complained of low rainfall in their talukas due to cloud seeding in the neighboring talukas. Their fundamental right to “equality before law”, occupation and life has been violated as a result of the adverse effects of cloud seeding in the neighboring talukas.

10
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Sindya has a written constitution and a democratic, parliamentary system of Government.
The laws of Sindya (the Constitution and all other statutes) are in pari materia to the laws of
India.

2. Nudi is one of the states in the Union of Sindya and is a federal member of the Republic of
Sindya, functioning in accordance with the Constitution of Sindya and all the major international conventions, treaties, protocols and other resolutions to which the State of
Sindya is a signatory.

3. The agriculture in the State of Nudiis dependenton the South-West rainfall, buthas been exposed to recurrent drought that threatens desertification. The Policy- Makers sought guidance from a committee of experts (CE) who recommended cloud seeding in the needy dry talukas, where monthly rainfall is less than 20% of the monthly average over the last 50 years. 4. With respect to the recommendations made by the CE, the State Legislature passed the Nudi
Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY. This allowed for cloud seeding in the Northern Dry Lands.
However, the Talukas in the North Eastern dry zone protested against the cloud seeding, claiming that such activity amounts to tampering with biodiversity and results in climate modification. 5. The rainfall in the months of August 20XY had been less than 30% of the average of the last
50 years ending with 2010, and thisdeficiency was due to the cloud seeding in the neighboring Talukas. The farmers of the NorthEastern Dry zones have complained of 50% lower crop yield.

6. Feelingaggrieved, the talukas formed an association called the “North Eastern Dry Zone
Talukas Anti Cloud Seeding Association (unregistered)” and filed a Writ Petition under
Art.32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court of Sindya seeking, inter alia, a declaration that the Nudi Cloud Seeding Act of 20XY is ultra vires of the Constitution.

11
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
The Petitioner has approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing a writ petition in public interest under Article 32which confers upon this Court the jurisdiction to issue any directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III of the
Constitution. The Petitioner humbly submits to the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Supreme
Court.

12
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

I.

WHETHER THE PRESENT PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IS MAINTAINABLE?
A. Whether the petitioner has the locusstandi to file the writ petition?
B. Whether there is a violation of fundamental rights?
a) Whether there is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 14 of the
Constitution?
b) Whether there is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 19(1) (g) of the
Constitution?
c) Whether there is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 of the
Constitution?

II.

WHETHER THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS COMPETENT TO PASS THE “NUDI CLOUD
SEEDING ACT OF 20XY”?

III.

WHETHER THE FARMERS OF THE TALUKAS FALLING IN THE NORTH EASTERN DRY
ZONE HAVE ANY FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AGAINST TAMPERING WITH THE
BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION?
A. Whether the state of Nudi has failed to fulfill its constitutional obligation to safeguard the fundamental rights against tampering with Biodiversity and Climate Modification of the farmers of the north eastern dry zone?
a) Whether the farmers have a fundamental right against tampering with biodiversity and climate modification?
b) Whether there is a violation of the fundamental right under Article 21 and Article
19(1) (g)?
B. Whether the NCSA has infringed the farmer’s rights under Article 21 ofthe
Constitution of Sindya?
a) Whether the State has violated the right to a decent environment of the people of
Nudi
i. Whether there is a violation of Sustainable Development? ii. Whether there is a violation of Precautionary Principle? iii. Whether there is a violation of Public Trust Doctrine?
b) Whether the state of Nudi has violated the right to livelihood?
C. Whether the state of Nudi has infringed the farmers’ freedom under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of Sindya?

IV. WHETHER THE NUDI CLOUD SEEDING ACT OF 20XY MANDATING CLOUD SEEDING
IS OPPOSED To THE RULE OF ‘EQUALITY BEFORE LAW’ UNDER ART 14OF THE
CONSTITUTION?
13
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

I.

The present writ petition is maintainable.
It is submitted that the present writ petition raises serious issues of violations of the fundamental rights under Article 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the Constitution of the farmers of the North-Eastern Taluka. These violations are as a result of cloud seeding in the Northern Dry Zone Talukas. Therefore, the present writ petition is maintainable before this Hon’ble Court for it to exercise its jurisdiction in this matter.

II.

The State Legislature is not competent to pass the “Nudi Cloud Seeding Act,
20XY”.
The State Legislature is not competent to pass the “Nudi Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY”, as it is beyond the scope of its powers under List II or List III of Schedule VII of the
Constitution. The subject matter of the said Act falls under List I of Schedule VII.
This is determined by applying the test of ‘pith and substance’ to the Act. It is shown that the pith and substance of the Act is climate modification, which does not fall under the purview of the exclusive powers of the State Government. Therefore, the
State Legislature may not encroach upon the powers of the Union.

III.

The farmers of the talukas falling under the North-Eastern dry zone have a fundamental right against tampering with biodiversity and climate modification.
The farmers have a fundamental right against tampering with biodiversity and climate modification. It is shown that there is a right to environment which is implicit under
Article 21 of the Constitution. Under this provision, any state tampering with biodiversity and climate modification violates the right to a decent environment and the right to enjoy Earth’s natural resources in its pristine form. It is also violating the fundamental right of the farmers under Article 19(1) (g) as a result of a decreasing rainfall due to cloud seeding.

IV.

The Nudi Cloud Seeding Act of 20XY mandating cloud seeding is opposed the rule of ‘equality before law’ under Article14 of the Constitution.
The Nudi Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY violates Article 14 of the Constitution, which requires ‘equality before law’. This is determined by applying the test of ‘intelligible differentia’ and the ‘direct nexus’ test. The Act does not satisfy these tests and treats
North-Eastern farmers unequally, as the entire State is in a condition of drought threatening desertification.

14
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

I.

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION IS MAINTAINABLE.

A. On Grounds Of Locus Standi.

1. Public Interest Litigation (hereinafter ‘PIL’) as a process by which basic constitutional rights are protected of the poor, downtrodden and vulnerable sections of the society, by the petitioner, state and judiciary. 1 It is a litigation undertaken for the purpose of redressing public injury, enforcing public duty, protecting social, collective and diffused rights and interests or vindicating public interest of any citizen acting bona fide and who has sufficient interest.2 However, no rigid rule of locus standi can be applied to a PIL.
The Supreme Court has permitted any person acting bona fide and having sufficient interest in maintaining an action for judicial redress for public injury to put the judicial machinery in motion.3

2. In accordance with the Supreme Court Guidelines, 1998 with regard to PILs filed before the Supreme Court itself, petitions falling under ten categories can be brought before the
Court.4 One category is the disturbance of ecological balance.The growth of PIL has been classified under phases; the second phase which started in the 1980s saw the Supreme
Court of India using its creativity and innovation in including cases dealing with the protection and, preservation of ecology, the environment, etc.5The Supreme Court has therefore been willing to hear public interest litigation where violations of environmental or ecology statuteshavebeen brought to its notice, particularlywhen the executive while
1

State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, 2010 (3) S.C.C. 402, para. 30; People's Union for Democratic
Rights & Others v. Union of India & Others, 1982 (3) S.C.C. 235, para 5; Delhi Jal Board v National Campaign
Etc.& Ors., 2011 (7) S.C.A.L.E. 489, paras 15-16.
2
S.P. Gupta v Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149, para 19A; See also: Bandua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India
AIR 1984 SC 802, para 58; Janata Dal v. H.S. Choudhary, AIR 1993 SC 892, para 92; Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar, AIR 1991 SC 420, para 1; State of Himachal Pradesh v. A. Parent, AIR 1985 SC 910, para 6; BALCO
Employees v. Union of India, AIR 2002 SC 350, para 80; D.C.Wadhwa v. State of Bihar, AIR 1987 SC 579, para 2.
3
Janta Dal v. Chaudhary, H.S., 1992 (4) S.C.C. 305, para 64; Mahila Jagran Manch v. The State Of Karnataka
And Ors, ILR 1997 KAR 2110, para 8.1.
4
http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/circular/guidelines/pilguidelines.pdf; See Also: Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co.
Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, AIR 2006 SC 1489, para 48, 53-54.
5
State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaugal, 2010 (3) S.C.C. 402 para. 81.

15
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

exercising its administrative functions or making subordinate legislations has interfered with the ecological balance with impunity.6 Therefore, this Court should entertain this
PIL for the same.

3. The petitioners are contending, in the current case, that the State Government by its act of cloud seeding has caused an ecological imbalance. Therefore, the present case is filed by the “North Eastern Dry Zone Talukas Anti Cloud Seeding Association”, is a representative of the farmers of the North Eastern Taluka, whose fundamental rights have been affected. Since, the petitioners have directly been affected by the legislative act of the State of Nudi; a PIL may be filed before this court for the redressal of their grievance. 7 Therefore, the Supreme Court of Sindya should grant locus standi to petitionersinthisPIL. 4. Representative or class action may be initiated by any members of the class affected by any order or action or inaction on the part of the government8. This form of proceedings helps to fasten our people’s vicarious involvement in our justice system with a broad based concept of locus standi, which is necessary in a democracy where the masses are in many senses weak.9Whether the petitioners belong to a recognized union or not is not an important fact, instead the fact that the petitioners are a large body of people who have a common grievance10 and have hence approached the court under Article 32 11 must be considered. 5. Therefore, petitioners, though an unregistered association, have the right to file a petition on behalf of its members, in the form of a representative class action.

6

Id.
Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group, AIR 2006 SC 1489, para 48, 5354.
8
Sand Carrier’s Owener’s Union and others v Board of trusties for the port of Calcutta and others, 1995 (1)
S.C.C. 85, para 13 (d).
9
Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1978 SC 1675, para 6(m).
10
Akhil Bharatiya Soshit Karmachari Sangh v. Union of India, AIR 1981 SC 298; Bandhua Mukti Morcha v.
Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802; Bombay Dyeing and Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Bombay Environmental Action Group
AIR 2006 SC 1489.
11
Constitution of India, 1950.
7

16
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

B. There is a violation of fundamental rights under Article 14, 19 (1) (g) and 21 of the
Constitution:
6. It is submitted to this Hon’ble Court that in the present case there has been a breach of
Article 14 and Article 19(1) (g) and Article 21. Courts may exercise judicial review, which is a basic feature of the Constitution of Sindya,12 over any policy decisions made by the Executive, if such policy13 decision, even prima facie,14 violates Part III of the
Constitution.15 In the present case, there have been serious violations of the fundamental rights of the farmers of the North Eastern Talukas of the State of Nudi.

a) There is a violation of the fundamental right to equality under Article 14 of the
Constitution

7. Equality before law is prima facie violated in this particular case as the classification is not based on any intelligible differentia, which even if present it shows no nexus between the object of the statute and the classification.16In the statute under question in the present case, there is an absence of intelligible differentia in the classification of talukas with an average of more or less than 20% rainfall. It is stated that the basic object of the NCSA,
20XY was to prevent drought threatening desertification. However, such classification limits the target areas for cloud seeding.17This act was to be taken for the entire state and not only to benefit certain areas. Therefore, the Act violates Article 14. 18

12

State of Bihar v. Subhash Singh, 1997 (4) S.C.C. 430.
Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam v. Union of India, 2009 (7) S.C.C. 561; See also: S.R. BHANSALI (rev.),
DURGA DAS BASU’S HUMAN RIGHTS IN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 142 (Ed. 3, 2008).
14
Kharak Singh v. State of U.P, AIR 1963 SC 1295; D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab, 1971 (2) S.C.C. 261.
15
All India Council for Technical Education v. Surinder Kumar Dhawan, AIR 2009 SC 2322; BALCO
Employees Union v. Union of India, 2002 (2) S.C.C. 333, paras: 88, 92;Directorate of Film Festivals v. Gaurav
Ashwin Jain, 2007 (4) S.C.C. 737; State of Orissa v. Gopinath Dash, 2005 (13) S.C.C. 495.
16
Suneel Jatley Etc v. State of Haryana, AIR 1984 SC 1534.
17
http://www.weathermodification.com/resources.php.
18
Vajravelu Mudaliar P. v. Special Dy. Collector, AIR 1965 SC 1017; State of Gujurat v. Shantilal Mangaldas,
AIR 1969 SC 634; Sube Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 2001 SC 3285.
13

17
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

b) There is a violation of the fundamental right to occupation under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution.

8. The petitioners’’ right to occupation has been violated by the State of Nudi. An Act may not create a provision as such which protects a few and violates the rights which Part III of the Constitution guarantees to all.19 The fundamental right of the farmers’ to carry on their occupation has been infringed as a result of the NCSA, 20XY. The petitioners have suffered a 50% loss of the usual yield. 20 The cloud seeding has imposed an indirect restriction on their occupation/business. And further indiscriminate cloud seeding would lead to permanent discontinuing of farming due to the loss of rainfall. The basic structure of Sindya advocates policies to sub serve the common good.21Therefore, it is the duty of the State of Nudi to protect this right of the petitioners.

c) There is a violation of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the
Constitution.

9. It is shown that the fundamental right to life of the petitioner has been violated by the
State of Nudi under Article 21. There exists an implicit right to environment under Article
21.22Sustainable development has been treated as an integral part of life under Article
21.23Under the Public Trust Doctrine, certain resources like air, sea, water and the forests which have great importance to the people as a wholeshould be made freely available to everyone. 24 This Act of NCSA is impeding the people’s right to enjoy the natural resources in their pristine form.

10. The stated objectof NCSA, 20XY was to prevent drought. A study by the U.S. Weather
Bureau, clearly shows that operations like cloud seeding might actually inhibit rainfall and might have caused severe droughts.25Petitioners humbly request thisCourt to holdthe
19

Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305.
Statement of Facts, p10, para 5.
21
Article 39(b), Constitution of India, 1950; Samatha v. State of A.P, 1997 (8) S.C.C. 191; State of Karnataka v.
Ranganatha Reddy, 1977 (4) S.C.C. 471.
22
Narmada Bachoa Andolan v Union of India, AIR 2000 SC 3751; N.D. Jayal v Union of India , AIR 2004 SC
867, para 24.
23
Jayal N.D. v. Union of India, AIR 2004 SC 867.
24
Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Board Vs. Sri. C. Kenchappa and Ors, AIR 2006 SC 2038.
25
Dennis, A S, Weather modification by cloud seeding, Cloud seeding Debated.. JSTOR Article (2010).
20

18
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

Nudi Cloud Seeding Act void. This must be done as a precautionary act to prevent future harm to the biological diversity. The fact that the Government is tampering with the climate such that it results in benefiting one area and not another is incorrect26. This not only deprives them of their gifts of nature, but also tampers with their benefits. Therefore, the NSCA, 20XY should be declared void as it is unconstitutional to do so.

II

THE STATE LEGISLATURE IS NOT COMPETENT TO PASS THE “NUDI CLOUD
SEEDING ACT OF 20XY”

11. It is submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the state legislature does not have the competency to pass the NCSA, 20XY as it violates the Constitution of Sindya as per
Article 246. According to Article 24527 of the Indian Constitution, the parliament may make laws for the whole or any part of India and the state legislature may make laws for the whole or any part of the state which is subject to the provisions stated in the constitution. 12. The legislature may enact laws subject to provisions of the Constitution. Article 246 refers to the ambit and scope of the state and union legislature to enact laws in the territory of India. Article 24628 states that the Parliament has the exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the subjects listed in List I in the Schedule VII of the
Constitution. The State Legislature has the exclusive power to make laws with respect to any of the subjects contained in List II of the Schedule VII. The Parliament and the State
Legislature have the power to make laws on the subjects listed in List III of the Seventh
Schedule. According to this Article, the State has powers only to legislate on matters in the state list and the concurrent list enumerated in the Schedule VII of the Constitution of
India.
13. When there is a question of determining whether a particular law relates to a particular subject mentioned in one of the lists mentioned in the Seventh Schedule, the courts have

26

Supra note 22.
The Constitution of India, 1950.
28
The Constitution of India, 1950.
27

19
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

to look into the subject matter of the enactment29. The “pith and substance” doctrine30 helps determine the intent, objective and the true nature and character of the legislation to know whether it falls in a forbidden sphere.31

14. “This doctrine of ‘pith and substance’ is applied when the legislative competence of a legislature with regard to a particular enactment is challenged with reference to the entries in the various lists. For instance, a law dealing with the subject in one list mightalso touchon a subject in another list. In such a case, what has to be ascertained is the pith and substance of the enactment.”32The NCSA, 20XY was passed in the State of Nudi in order to artificially induce rainfall by a method of Cloud Seeding33 . This method is widely accepted as a form of human induced weather modification and also deals with artificiallychangingtheclimatetosuitone’s particular needs.

15. When applying the principle of ‘pith and substance’, the Court must consider (i) the enactment as a whole, (ii) its main objects, and (iii) the scope and effect of its provisions.34The NCSA as a whole deals with the procedure of weather modification and climate changein needy areas to suit the particular needs of the region. Its main object was to increase rainfall by the method of cloud seeding where it collects moisture from the atmosphere to affect the precipitation downwind,35 and increase rainfall in drought stricken areas over the past 50 years. Therefore, applying the principle laid down by the above cases it may be inferred that the substance of this Act36 is weather modification and climate change.

29

Bharat Hydro Power Corpn. Ltd. v State of Assam, 2004 (2) S.C.C. 553.
Id; A.S. Krishna v. State of Madras, AIR 1957 SC 297; Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, 1994 (3) S.C.C. 569;
Prafulla Kumar Mukherjea v. Bank of Commerce Ltd., Khulna, AIR 1947 PC 60.
31
Prafulla Kumar Mukherjea v. Bank of Commerce Ltd., Khulna, AIR 1947 PC 60; Union of India v. Shah
Gobardhan L. Kabra Teachers’ College , 2002 (8) S.C.C. 228.
32
Kartar Singh v State of Punjab, 1994 (3) S.C.C. 569.
33
Bruintjes, Roelof T., A Review of Cloud Seeding Experiments to Enhance Precipitation and Some New
Prospects, National Center for Atmospheric Research.
34
Southern Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals v. State of Kerala, 1981 (4) S.C.C. 391.
See also: State of Rajasthan v. G. Chawla, AIR 1959 SC 544; Amar Singhji v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1955 SC
504; Delhi Cloth and General Mills Co. Ltd. v. Union of India, 1983 (4) S.C.C. 166; Vijay Kumar Sharma v.
State of Karnataka, 1990 (2) S.C.C. 562.
35
Weather Modification Incorporation, Information Resourses, http://www.weathermodification.com/resources.php. 36
The Nudi Cloud Seeding Act of 20XY.
30

20
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

16. Climate change and weather modification are new concepts to countries like Sindya, and their introduction into these countries has taken place only in the recent years. The technological progress in this area is also limited to a certain extent and its definite effects are not definitively known.37 This subject has not been discussed earlier or been dealt with. Hence, environmental terms like climate change and weather modification have not been enlisted in any of the subject lists. Therefore, as per entry 97 of the List I of the
Schedule VII, the Union has the power to legislate on matters which are not discussed in any of the other two lists 38 . Therefore, the State Legislature is not competent to enactthislawandtheActshouldbevoid. 17. Cloud seeding and weather modification are new concepts being newly introduced tocountries such as India, Africa, and Australia. This new technology has not been discussed and its effects towards the environment of the nations are unknown with regard to its geographical locations and physical conditions. It is because of these factors that there has not been any legislation governing this issue. Due to this legislative vacuum, the international conventions39 and norms are to be read into them in the absence of enacted domestic law occupying the field when there is no inconsistency between them.40 This is implicit from Article 51(c) and the enabling power of the Parliament to enact laws for implementing the International Conventions and norms by virtue of Article 25341 read with Entry 1442 of the Union List inSchedule VII of the Constitution43. Therefore, it can be concluded that the Union has the powers to legislate on matterssuchasthis.

18. The Environment Protection Act, 1986 was enacted as per the statements, objects and reasons referring to the Stockholm Conference. The existing laws were relating to
37

Davis, R J, American Meteorological Society, Legal Response to Environmental Concerns about Weather
Modification: It stated in a policy statement that seasonal precipitation increases of up to 10 percent have been realized, but it also notes that cloud seeding effectiveness to suppress hail and reduce crop damage has remained indeterminate due to a wide range of documented experimental and operational outcomes.
38
Any other matter not enumerated in List II or List III including any tax not mentioned in either of those Lists.
39
The UNCCD, UNFCC and the Convention on Biodiversity.
40
Vishaka v State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.
41
Legislation for giving effect to international agreements: Notwithstanding anything in the foregoing provisions of this Chapter, Parliament has power to make any law for the whole or any part of the territory of
India for implementing any treaty, agreement or convention with any other country or countries or any decision made at any international conference, association or other body.
42
Entering into treaties and agreements with foreign countries and implementing of treaties, agreements and conventions with foreign Countries.
43
The Constitution of India, 1950.

21
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

environment so far touched specific aspects 44 and this legislation deals with a wider aspect of environmental issues and apply to a wider area.45 Activities like cloud seeding affect a large number of people and a wider space as we cannot place a wall on the atmosphere or the climate of a given area. Many scientists have asserted with evidence saying that cloud seeding effects upto 100-200 km from the primary target area.46 The atmosphere cannot be appropriated and apportioned along country, state or national diving lines.47 Therefore, laws relating to a larger sphere have to be passed by the union as itwillhaveamoregeneralapplicationofthelawanditsconsequences.

19. Therefore, Petitioners humbly submit that the substance of this Act is climate and weather modification which does not fall under the purview of the List - II of the Seventh
Schedule of the Constitution of Sindya, which forms the exclusive domain of each one of the State Governments within Sindya.

44

Air (Prevention And Control Of Pollution) Act 1981, Water (Prevention & Control ) Act 1974, Wildlife
Protection Act, 1972.
45
Padia, R G, Global Concern for environment hazarda and remedial measures, environmental law in India- issues and responses, publisher concept publishing company, new Delhi (1996), p1.
46
Dennis, A S, Weather modification by cloud seeding, p. 199.
47
Wood, L D, The status of Weather Modification Activities under United States and International Law, p1

22
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

III

THE FARMERS OF THE TALUKAS FALLING UNDER THE NORTH-EASTERN
DRY ZONE HAVE ANY FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT AGAINST TAMPERING WITH
BIODIVERSITY AND CLIMATE MODIFICATION

A. The state of Nudi has failed to fulfill its constitutional obligation to safeguard the fundamental rights of the farmers of the North Eastern dry zone.
a) The farmers have a fundamental right that protects them against tampering with biodiversity and climatemodification.

20. It is submitted before the Hon’ble court that the farmers have a fundamental right against tampering with biodiversity and climate modification. Fundamental rights have been defined as the basic human rights of all citizens. Part III of the Constitution of India confers upon its citizen’s certain fundamental rights. 48 Article 21 guarantees “the enjoyment of life and its attainment and fulfillment” and that without the protection and preservation of nature’s gifts, life cannot be enjoyed.49 Further, the court held that Article
21 provided the fundamental right to the “enjoyment of the quality of life and living.”50 It is therefore submitted that Article 21 provides the right to a decentenvironment and that the farmers possess this right.

b) There is a violation of the farmers’fundamental right to life under Article 21 and right to occupation under Article 19(1)(g).

21. The State of Nudi, has failed to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens, the farmers of the North Eastern Talukas. Part III of the Constitution of Sindya confers upon its citizens, protection of their fundamental rights.51 In the present case, it is shown that by the virtue of cloud seeding being conducted, the environment has been tampered with from its pristine form. The State has therefore as a consequence of this act interferedwith the enjoyment and quality of life that is led by the petitioners.

48

M. Nagaraj v. Union of India, 2006(8) S.C.C. 212.
T. Damodhar Rao v S.O. Municipal Corporation, Hyderabad,AIR 1987 AP 171.
50
Chhetriya Pardushan Mukti Sangharsh Samiti v State of UP,1990 AIR 2060.
51
Constitution of India, 1950.
49

23
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

22. The farmers have not only received 30% less rainfall, but they also suffered economic losses owing to the slashed harvests.Thus, their right to livelihood, under Article 21 has been impaired. The right to life means something more than “mere animal existence”52.
Under Article 21, the right to decent environment, the right to sustainable development, the precautionary principle and the public trust doctrine have also been violated.Article
21 creates an obligation on the State to secure the right to life. 53 This right has been violated by the State.

23. Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of Sindya confers upon the citizens the right to carry on trade and business. This right is subjected to reasonable restrictions under Article
19(6) of the Constitution. Reasonable restrictions under this article include restrictions made in the ‘interest of general public’. The State may not pass an act which protects a certain section of the society, but in turn violates the fundamental rights of another.54 The petitioners contend that in the present case, the State might believe that it has passed
NCSA, 20XY for the furtherance of the interest of the people of Nudi; however, it has affected the rights of the petitioners. Their right to profession and livelihood has been impaired by the indiscriminate cloud seeding which has led to the decrease in rainfall in the North Eastern Dry Zone.

c) There is a violation of the international obligations with respect to the right to environment. 24. It is submitted before the Hon’ble Court that the State has violated its international obligations of protecting the environment and ecological balance. The Supreme Court in various decisions 55 has adopted many international conventions and obligations while construing fundamental rights.In cases involving violation of human rights, the most supreme of which being the right to life, the Courts must forever remain alive to the international instruments and conventions and apply the same to a given case when there

52

Karak Singh v Union of India, AIR 1963 SC 1295, p 333; Sunil Batra v Delhi Administration, AIR 1978 SC
1675, para 60, 251; Munn v Illinois, 94 U.S. 113 (1877).
53
.P. Unnikhrishnan v. State of A.P., 1993(1) S.C.C. 645, See also:Synthetics and Chemicals Ltd. v. State of
U.P., 1990(1) S.C.C 109; Vincent v. Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 990.
54
Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305.
55
Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa, 1993(2) S.C.C. 746; Vishaka v State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011;
Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Forum v Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715.

24
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

is no inconsistency between the international norms and the domestic law occupying the field. 56 Therefore, there is no reason why international conventions should not be consideredin construing the fundamental rights.

25. The State of Nudi is a part of the country of Sindya, which is a member of the United
Nations. Thus, it is the duty of the State of Nudi to uphold the principle of the Rio
Declaration, 1992, which is a part of the United Nations Environment Programme, which states that it is the duty of the State to ensure environmental protection and prevention of ecological degradation. The State of Sindya is also a member of the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC), Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD) and Stockholm Declaration. These International Conventions and
Declarations reiterate the point of protection, development and prevention of degradation of the environment and ecology. Thus, it is the duty of the State of Nudi to uphold the principles followed by Sindya in relation to these international covenants. The State has failed to do so by passing the NCSA, 20XY, which tampers with the climate and disturbs the biodiversity as it seen in the North Eastern Dry Zones.

B. The NCSA, 20XY has infringed the farmer’s fundamental rights under the
Constitution of Sindya.
a. The State has violated the right to a decent environment of the people of Nudi.

26. The State has violated the right to a decent environment of the people of Nudi by tampering their environment and climate which has caused a drastic decline in rainfall.
27. Theright to life means something more than “mere animal existence”57. The right to a decent environment58has been read under Article 21. It is submitted that indiscriminate cloud seeding damages the environment and is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.

28. It has been shown that the rainfall has fallen drastically by 30% as compared to the last 50

56

Id.
Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, 1978(4) S.C.C. 494; Vikram v. State of Bihar, AIR 1988 SC 1782.
58
Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame, 1990(1) S.C.C5. 20; Rural Litigation and Entitlement
Kendra v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1999 SC 2187; Virender Gaur v. State of Haryana, 1995 (2) S.C.C. 577.
57

25
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

years59. This strongly indicates that there has been a human induced change in the climate of the regions of Nudi, as such drastic changes were not observed previously. There is an imperative on the State Government to safeguard proper environment and take adequate steps to protect the natural environment60.
29. An international obligation is an essential element of state responsibility.61Principle 11 of the Stockholm Declaration62 states that,
“The environmental policies of all States should enhance and not adversely affect the present or future development potential of developing countries, nor should they hamper the attainment.”

Cloud seeding is adversely affecting certain talukas of the state of Nudi by reducing the rainfall in those regions. The rainfall has been slashed by a drastic 30%, which is threatening not only the present generation but also future ones.

30. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), 1992defines
“adverse effects of climate change” as “the changes in the physical environment or biota resulting from climate change which have significant deleterious effects on the composition, resilience or productivity of natural and managed ecosystems or on the operation of socio-economic systems or on human health and welfare.”63

31. It is shown that the cloud seeding has caused physical change in the environment by reducing the amount of rainfall in the neighboring talukas. The talkuas havehad a deleterious effect on the productivity of the managed ecosystems (agricultural lands) and on the human welfare by causing them economic losses. Therefore, this can be seen as an adverseeffectofclimatechange. 59

Statement of Facts, p 10, para 3.
Virendra Gaur v. State of Haryana, 1995(2) S.C.C. 577.
61
Yearbook ILC 1980 II PART 2 30.
62
The United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, having met at Stockholm from 5 to 16 June
1972,having considered the need for a common outlook and for common principles to inspire and guide the peoples of the world in the preservation and enhancement of the human environment.
63
The United Nations Framework Convention, United Nations, (1992).
60

26
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

32. Air, water, land are representative of samples of natural environment and geophysical, atmospherical and hydrological systems that determine the character of biosphere including biota and mankind of a region. It has been found, through scientific study that if we disturb the nature or natural environment in excess, they disturb and damage us irreparable64. 33. It is thus humbly submitted before this Court that by deliberately tampering with the climate, the State of Nudi has adversely affected an already fragile ecosystem and the harvest of North Eastern dry zone farmers. The aggrieved farmers are left stranded in a deliberately altered ecosystem, which violatestheir right to a decent and unhampered environment. i. There is a violation of the right to sustainable development

34. Sustainable development may be defined as the form of development which satisfies the needs of the present generation without compromising on the needs of the future generation.65 35. There is a clear difference between weather modification and climate modification.
Weather modification deals with temporary attempts to produce transient effects on localized weather systems to produce for immediate or short term results66 . Since the government is carrying out climate modification the consequences of the act will be permanent and long lasting.

36. Adecision-making authority must give due weight and regard to ecological factors such as the environmental policy of the government and sustainable use of natural resources.67A government decision that fails to take into account relevant considerations affecting the environment is invalid.68Any Act which harms the state can be held as void.69 Therefore,

64

Padia, R.G, Global concern for environmental hazards and remedial measures.
Brundtland Report, 1992; Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India, 1996 (2) S.C.C. 281.
66
Wood, L D, The status of Weather Modification Activities under United States and International Law, p. 368
67
State of Himachal Pradesh v. Ganesh Wood Products, AIR 1996 SC 149, 159, 163.
68
Pleasant stay hotel v. Palani hills conservation council 1995 (6) SCC 127, 136, 139, 140
69
M.C. Mehta v Kamal Nath, AIR 2000 SC 1997.
65

27
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

the doctrine enjoins upon the Government to protect these resources for the enjoyment of the general public.70

ii. There is a violation of the Precautionary Principle.

37. Article 3 of the United Nations Declaration on Human Rights sets out that, “The rights to life, liberty, and personal security are basic human rights that are the foundation for deriving other widely recognized rights found in international law and practice.”

38. These rights have been the basis of the doctrines such as the ‘precautionary principle’.
The "Precautionary Principle" - in the context of the municipal law - means :
“(i) Environmental measures - by the State Government and the statutory authorities - must anticipate prevent and attack the causes of environmental degradation. (ii) Where there are threats of serious and irreversible damage, lack of scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation.”71

39. The Convention on Biodiversity also offers decision-makers guidance based on the precautionary principle that where there is a threat of significant reduction or loss of biological diversity, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to avoid or minimize such a threat72. Hence, by the above principle, however legitimate the legislation might be, the legislation has to held invalid as it is creating a significant threat of reducing rainfall in the surrounding areas to a new 30% low which is a significant threat of reduction of rainfall and the 50% slash in crop yield shows the significant loss in biodiversity.

70

Id.
Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715.
72
Vellore Citizen Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715; A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof.
M.V. Nayudu (Retd.) and Ors, 2000(3)S.C.A.L.E. 354.
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India and Others, AIR 2000 SC 3751
71

28
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

iii. There is a violation of the Public Trust Doctrine.

40. The Public Trust Doctrine primarily rests on the principle that certain resources like air, sea, waters and the forests have such a great importance to the people as a whole that it would be wholly unjustified to make them a subject of private ownership73 . The said resources being a gift of nature, they should be made freely available to everyone irrespective of the status in life.

41. The doctrine requires the Government and its instrumentalities to protect these resources for the enjoyment of the general public. The petitioners argue that every citizen has a right over public property. Hence, no citizen can be denied a right to use them to carry on their occupation in order to earn their livelihood. 74 These concepts have now found sanctuary in Indian legal thought.75 State agencies are not just authorized but mandated to carry forward the principles of the public trust doctrine, in their own actions.76 Therefore, it is shown that the State has violated the public trust doctrine under Article 21.

C. The state of Nudi has violated the petitioners’ right to livelihood.

42. The State of Nudi has violated the petitioners’ right to livelihood under Article 21 of the
Constitution. The Right to livelihood has been read as an integral facet to the right to life, encapsulated in Article 21.77 It has been held that if the right to livelihood is not treated as part and parcel of the constitutional right to life, the easiest way of depriving a person of his right to life would be to deprive him of his means of livelihood to the point of abrogation.78 73

Satish Shastri, environmental ethics and the constitution of India, p.1.
Sodan Singh v. New Delhi Municipal Corporation, AIR 1989 SC 1988.
75
Vellore Citizens' Welfare Forum v. Union of India, 1996 (5) S.C.C. 647; Indian Council of Enviro-Legal
Action v. Union of India, 1998 AIR SC 3861; M.C Mehta v. Kamal Nath, 1997 (1) S.C.C. 388; M. C. Mehta
(Calcutta, Tanneries' Matter) v. Union of India, 1997 (2) S.C.C. 411; M. C. Mehta v. Union of India, 1997 (11)
S.C.C. 327; T. N. Godavarman Thirumulkpad v. Union of India, 1997 (10) JT 697; M. C. Mehta (Badkhal and
Surajkund Lakes Matter) v. Union of India, 1997 (3) S.C.C. 715; S. Jagannath v. Union of India, 1997 (2)
S.C.C. 87.
76
Id.
77
Board of Trustees of Port of Bomabay v. Dilip Kumar R. Nandkarni, AIR 1983 SC 109.
78
S.K. Mastan Bee v. G.M. South Central Railway, 2003 (1) S.C.C. 184; Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708; D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A. Industries, 1993 (3) S.C.C. 259; Olga Tellis
v. Bomay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
74

29
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

43. In Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation79, it was held that,
“The right to livelihood is born out of the right to life, as no person can live without means of living, that is, means of livelihood. It was held that if the right to livelihood is not treated as part and parcel of the constitutional right to life, the easiest way of depriving a person of his right to life would be to deprive him of his means of livelihood to this point of abrogation.”80
44. An agriculturist has the right to cultivation as his part of the fundamental right to livelihood under Article 21 81 . Such deprivation would not only denude the life of its effective content and meaningfulness but it would make life impossible to live. There is thus a close connection between life and the means of livelihood and as such that, which alone makes it impossible to live, leave aside what makes life livable, must be deemed to be an integral component of the right of life.82

45. In the case at hand, the state of Nudi by conducting cloud seeding is seen to directly impede the right to livelihood of the farmers, who have suffered a substantial loss in harvest due to lesser rainfall. Low rainfall is impeding their ability to cultivate crops. The low rainfall is not a natural phenomenon, but due to the actions of the State.

D. The State Of Nudi Has Infringed The Farmers Freedom Under Article 19(1) (g) Of
The Constitution Of Sindya.

46. The State has violated the right of the petitioners which they have with regard to Article
19(1) (g). According to Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of Sindya, all citizens have the right to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business.83Occupation has been defined as any regular work, profession, job, principal activity, employment, business or a calling in which an individual is engaged... including
79

Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
Olga Tellis v Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
See also: D.K. Yadav v J.M.A. Industries, 1993 (3) S.C.C. 259; Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v Bar Council of
Maharastra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708.
81
Dalmia Cement (Bhora) Ltd. v Union of India, 1996 (10) S.C.C. 104, para 21.
82
Dr. Haniraj L. Chulani v. Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, AIR 1996 SC 1708; D.K. Yadav v. J.M.A.
Industries, (1993) 3 S.C.C. 259; Olga Tellis v. Bomay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.
83
The Constitution of India, 1950.
80

30
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

all the avenues and modes though which a man may earn his livelihood. In a nutshell the guarantee takes into its fold any activity carried on by a citizen of India to earn his living.84 47. The State in the present case is denying the petitioners their right to use the environment and biodiversity, which is one of the most essential factors in agriculture for its development. Hence, when in the present case, the petitioners are denied this right, the
State is said to be tampering with their right. As a result of the tampering, the petitioners have incurred a loss of 50% of yield of crops as compared to the previous years. Hence, this is affecting the petitioners’ right under Article 19(1) (g).

48. The Supreme Court has stated that an Act is considered as good if it protects certain sections of the society.85 Yet, even if the object of a particular Act is desirable, the State may not make such provisions as would infringe upon the rights which are conferred upon them under Article 19(1).86 It is the duty of the state to rely upon another method which does not violatethe Constitution.87

49. In the present case,petitioners contend that in order to provide benefit to certain talukas and prevent desertification from happening there, the petitioners’ right under Article
19(1) (g) cannot be infringed. The State must find other ways of irrigation in order to improve the condition of the talukas and to prevent drought and desertification.

50. Thus, it is stated by the petitioners that “the legitimacy of the result intended to be achieved does not necessarily imply that every means to achieve it is permissible; for even if the end is desirable and permissible, the means employed must not transgress the limits laid down by the Constitution, if they directly impinge on any of the fundamental rights guaranteed by the Constitution it is no answer when the constitutionality of the measure is challenged that apart from the fundamental right infringed the provision is otherwise legal.”88

84

Sodan Sindh v. New Delhi Municipal Committee, 1989 (4) S.C.C. 155.
Sakal Papers (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 305.
86
Id.
87
Id.
88
Id.
85

31
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

IV

THE NUDI CLOUD SEEDING ACT OF 20XY MANDATING CLOUD SEEDING IS
OPPOSED TOTHE RULE OF ‘EQUALITY BEFORE LAW’ UNDER ART 14 OF
THE CONSTITUTION.

51. It is submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the Nudi Cloud Seeding Act of
20XY is violating “equality before law” under Article 14 of the Constitution. Article 1489 states that,it guarantees equal protection before the law within the territory of India and that there should not exist any discrimination based on religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.

52. The Supreme Court has reestablished that equality is a very dynamic concept and it has many dimensions and it cannot be imprisoned with traditional and doctrinaire limits90. It states that there should be non-arbitrariness in state action and should ensure fairness and equality of treatment to all persons. This article stresses on the non-conjunction of arbitrariness, unreasonableness with equality91. Article 14 propounds equality not only by the law but to all persons in similar conditions and circumstancesthere should be no discrimination between one person and another if as regards the subject-matter of the legislation their position is substantially the same92 it also strikes an antithesis to any kind of arbitrariness and unreasonableness by state action93.

53. Article 14 may be also invoked to challenge government sanctions for mining and other activities with high environmental impact, where the permissions are ‘arbitrarily’ granted without an adequate consideration of environmental impacts.94In order to pass the test, two conditions must be fulfilled, namely, that the classification must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes those that are grouped together from others and that said differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved

89

The Constitution of India, 1950.
E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, 1974 (4 ) S.C.C. 3, 38; Missourie, Kansas and Tennesee Railroad vs.
May, 194 U.S. 267(1904)
91
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr, 1978 (1) S.C.C. 248; E.P Royappa v State of T.N, AIR 1974 SC
555.
92
In re the Special Courts Bill, 1978 (1979) 1 SCC 380
93
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr; 1978 1 S.C.C. 248; Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Shri Justice S.R.
Tendolkar and Ors, 1959 (1) S.C.R. 279.
94
Kinkri Devi v State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1988 HP 4, 9.
90

32
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

by the Act. The differentia which is the basis of the classification and the object of the
Act are distinct things and what is necessary is that there must be a nexus between them.95

54. The object of the Act was to increase rainfall in the dry and needy areas of the drought regions of the State of Nudi. The classification in the Act was based on the low rainfall statistics of the various regions of the State96. Considering that all the regions of State were receiving low rainfall due to the inconsistent South-West rainfall which was leading to desertification, all the regions required an increase in rainfall for equal agricultural and economic development of the Sate.

55. The NCSA, 20XY does not protect all the people of the State of Nudi equally. As it seen, cloud seeding in certain parts has led to the increase in rainfall in one region and a decrease in another. This is not the object of the Act and not a desirable effect as it against the principle of Article 14 of the Constitution as it does not protect everyone who is under the same circumstances and conditions in the same manner. There is no nexus between the objective of the legislation and the consequence of the legislation.
56. Section 397 of the NCSA, 20XY promises to undertake cloud seeding activities in areas with rainfall less than 20% of the average monthly rainfall in the last 50 years. This principle on which the cloud seeding activities are carried upon are fallacious and will not help mitigate or improve the rainfall status in the already drought stricken areas of Nudi.
It has been scientifically studied that a better approach to cloud seeding which has been adopted by many operational programs across the world is to view cloud seeding as a long term water resource management tool and it is considered to be better to continue cloud seeding during non-drought conditions in order to build up water supplies for the future.98 95

State of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali Sarkar, 1952 S.C.R. 284.; Shri Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Shri Justice S.R.
Tendolkar and Ors, (1959) 1 SCR 279 at p.296; Sube Singh and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Ors. 2001 (7)
S.C.C. 545.
96
Statement of Facts, p 10, para 4.
97
Section 3 of the said Act, states that – “The Government shall undertake cloud seeding, from time to time during Kharif season, in the talukas falling in the agro climatic zones of Northern dry zone, North eastern dry zone and Central dry zone, if the monthly rainfall in these talukas is less than 20% of the monthly average of the series of 1960 to 2010.”
98
Brientjes, R T: “A Review Of Cloud Seeding Experiments To Enhance Precipitation And Some New
Prospects”, National Center For Atmospheric Research (2009).

33
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

57. It has been established that the classification based on which the cloud seeding activities are carried out by this act is not founded on an intelligible differentia. There is also no rational nexus between the object of the act and basis of the classification. The reasoning behind this Act was to provide rainfall to the drought stricken agro regions of the State of
Nudi.

58. The Act states that they will carry out cloud seeding only in areas which have 20% lesser rainfall in the past 50 years. It has been shown in the studies that there will be no sufficient increase in rainfall if cloud seeding is carried out in regions with low moisture levels. 99 Therefore there is no nexus between the object of the act and the basis of classification in the Act as it will not be able to provide rainfall in a sustainable manner where there is a drought and very few clouds to begin with.

59. The Act requires treating all persons equally by providing the benefits of cloud seeding to all, as they are experiencing the same conditions and are in similar circumstances.
Increasing rainfall in one region which results in the decrease of rainfall in the other is not in the spirit of the Constitution as it does not expound fairness and quality of treatment to all.100The NCSA, 20XY thereforeviolates ‘equality before law’ under Article 14 of the
Constitution.

99

Cloud Seeding debated, The Science News-Letter, Vol. 71, No. 18 (May 4, 1957), p. 275Published by: Society for Science & the Public. “It seems such operations might actually have been inhibiting rainfall, and might have caused recent severe droughts.”
100
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr, 1978(1) S.C.C. 248.

34
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

ULC Bangalore, XVI All India Moot Court Competition, 2012

PRAYER
Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is humbly requested that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

1) Maintain the current writ petition.

2) Adjudge that the Nudi Cloud Seeding Act, 20XY is ultra vires to the Constitution of
Sindya.

And pass any such order as it deems fit and proper, for this the Petitioner shall duty bound pray. ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED

35
Written Submission On Behalf Of The Petitioner

Similar Documents

Free Essay

Legal

...------------------------------------------------- Guidelines for writing a MemorialParticipation in the Telders International Law Moot Court Competition consists of an oral and a written part, the memorials. Through the years, many teams have lost vital points on editorial technicalities in their memorials even though these memorials were of a very high legal quality. Considering the fact that the memorials make up 50% of the total score, a proper presentation of the written arguments, in conformity with the Rules of Procedure, is vital in a competition that is getting more competitive each year. Why such an emphasize on presentation? Is the legal reasoning not the most important issue in this competition? Certainly so, but every participant should realize that also in legal practice, solidly and neatly presented legal documents are a "must". A well-written submission, a logically built-up argument is easier for a judge to understand. He or she is more likely to pick up counsel's line of argument and, hopefully, its submission. Uniformly used editing rules make it easier for a judge to find the documents, referred to in the Memorials and it will be easier for him or her to read through the document in general. A well written and neatly and uniformly presented document will show the judge that effort is being put into the case. Combine that with excellent legal arguments and most judges will at least be willing to listen to your case with an open mind.Clarity and consistency...

Words: 1734 - Pages: 7

Free Essay

Guide to Mooting

...research the area of law in question and bring a prepared case to the competition. However, for the purpose of the workshops we will be practising the art of mooting using speed moots. This means that we will provide you with an outline of your arguments/submissions, allowing you simply to attend and moot straight away without having to do any preparation. Usually a moot would follow the structure below: Leading Appellant: 20 minute speech Leading Respondent: 20 minute speech Junior Appellant: 12-15 minute speech Junior Respondent: 12-15 minute speech Judge’s comments. However, the nature of speed mooting means we will be shortening the length of speeches to 8 minutes each for leading counsel and 5 minutes each for junior counsel. THE LINGO Submission – your arguments (each counsel usually makes two – one legal and one based on public policy grounds) Ground of appeal – basic legal point you are arguing (you usually have two of these per side) My learned junior/senior – how you refer to your team mate My learned friend – how you refer to you opponent ETIQUETTE Mooting isn’t like debating. You must always be polite and respectful to both the judge and the other participants, much like an actual trial in court. When the judge walks in at the beginning of the moot, participants all stand and bow as he/she comes in, sitting only after him/her. The same is done in reverse as the judge leaves. You must always refer to the judge as My Lord/Lady...

Words: 1070 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Grant Thornton App Questions

...Hogan Lovells - Model Answers The model answers below are specific to Hogan Lovells, but are a good insight into the level of detail you need to go into in any similar application form. Therefore, this guidance is helpful for applications to Allen & Overy and Clifford Chance as well as Hogan Lovells. Now that you have read Hogan Lovells application form advice, and The Rare guide to clear writing, you are nearly ready to start your answers. Below you will find a selection of model answers. The purpose of these answers is to illustrate the level of detail and the quality of writing you need to display. Do NOT copy or lift any passages from the text, or try to paraphrase what is written here. Give details of how you spend your extra-curricular time, including your contribution to any clubs/societies. For at least one of these explain the benefits you derive from this activity. In September 2009, I was elected Academic Affairs Officer to represent the academic interests of students on the college's JCR Executive Committee. In working to improve academic welfare, I have successfully negotiated with college authorities to change disciplinary procedures, as well as implementing a pioneering system of academic feedback. This experience taught me how to find accord on sensitive issues without alienating opponents. I have also organised Open Days and helped to organise Freshers’ Week. Working in a committee and supporting other team members by researching legal issues...

Words: 1232 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Vlc - Venture's Lab Investment Competition

...(http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/Centers/Venture-Labs-Investment-Competition/). This competition is generally viewed as the “Super Bowl” of business plan competitions and will deliver excellent examples for your case study analysis. The report should have a body of text no less than 5 pages and no more than 10 pages, the paper should be 1.5 spaced. A 12-point font similar to Times New Roman should be used. An acceptable paper will be written in a professional business manner in the form of a briefing memo from you to me. Submit this as a Word document via the D2L Dropbox. *With aspiring entrepreneurs soliciting start-up funds from experienced investors, VLIC simulates the real-world process of raising venture capital. MBAs from business schools around the globe come to The University of Texas at Austin each May to present their business plans to panels of investors. The best new-venture opportunity is then selected from the myriad of offerings. Since the inaugural event in 1984, VLIC (formerly Moot Corp) is the oldest operating...

Words: 519 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Vnvxkclkjhx

...ABC Company (NAME OF COMPANY IN CASE) Date: September 24, 2012 (DATE ASSIGNMENT DUE) Prepared by: Really Smart Senior (YOUR NAME) Reviewed by: Professor Robert Elya ISSUE: Accounting for ABC’s sale-sublease-leaseback of solar equipment with customers and third party investors. (THIS TOPIC/ISSUE LINE SHOULD SUCCINCTLY DESCRIBE THE OVERALL ACCOUNTING ISSUE BEING ADDRESSED IN THE MEMO) BRIEF BACKGROUND OF COMPANY (THIS SECTION IS DESIGNED TO PUT THE ISSUE IN CONTEXT) THIS SECTION SHOULD BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT THE COMPANY THAT A READER OF MEMO WOULD FIND HELPFUL IN EVALUATING THE ISSUE, INCLUDING NATURE OF ITS BUSINESS, RELATIVE SIZE (TO PROVIDE DEGREE OF MATERIALITY OF ISSUE TO THE COMPANY’S OVERALL FINANCIAL STATEMENTS),PUBLIC/PRIVATE (TO DETERMINE SEC CONSIDERATIONS), AND AN INTRODUCTION TO THE OVERALL QUESTION BEING ADDRESSED ABC Company is a publicly held alternative energy firm that develops and leases solar panel technology to residential, government and commercial markets. As of December 31st, 2011, ABC Company recognized $X billion in revenue for the sale, lease and installation of photovoltaic solar systems. Customers have the choice of either purchasing or leasing ABC’s solar panels. ABC Company is currently involved in a sale and leasing arrangement involving residents and third party investors. KEY CONSIDERATIONS INVOLVED IN THE ACCOUNTING QUESTIONS (IN THIS SECTION YOU WILL BREAKDOWN THE OVERALL ACCOUNTING QUESTION INTO...

Words: 1921 - Pages: 8

Premium Essay

Fadsdffasfasfas

...Law and Politics 9/2/15 Office hours 10-11 Monday and Wednesday Hickman 411 What is law- set of rules made by government and enforced by government 4 Institutions that make Laws 1. Legislative Bodies (Ex. Congress, State Legislators, City council) Statutory Law 2. Courts/Judges- Set precedent by ruling: Common Law 3. Executive Branch: bureaucracy/administrative agency Administrative Law 4. Constitutional Law 9/4/15 Constitutional law-makes rules for govt Has gone largely unchanged Blueprint Creates and limits govt Fundamental law that sets up rules for how other kinds of laws can be made What isn’t in the Constitution? Democracy Separation of church and state Right to privacy Right to education One-person one vote Political parties God Articles of Confederation -1777 Loose association States retain sovereignty One house Congress Every state one vote Needed 9 to pass Couldn’t tax Problems Congress little power No taxes State sovereignty Own paper money States could sign foreign treaties No natl army No executive No national courts Shays Rebellion Final spark for constitutional convention Constitutional Convention Philly 1787 Signed in Sept 39 out of 55 delegates Undemocratic Elements Slavery: 3/5ths compromise, no ban on slave trade till 1808 Fugitive Slave clause article IV, fed govt helps slates put down insurrections Senators chosen by state legislators No right to suffrage. Qualifications left...

Words: 3907 - Pages: 16

Free Essay

Case for Minister

...10/16/2015 Checkpoint | Document Checkpoint Contents   Federal Library     Federal Source Materials       Federal Tax Decisions         American Federal Tax Reports           American Federal Tax Reports (Prior Years)             1995               AFTR 2d Vol. 76                 76 AFTR 2d 95­5815 ­ 76 AFTR 2d 95­5724 (60 F3d 833)                   WEBER v. COMM., 76 AFTR 2d 95­5782 (60 F3d 1104), Code Sec(s) 62; 3401, (CA4), 7/31/1995 American Federal Tax Reports WEBER v. COMM., Cite as 76 AFTR 2d 95­5782 (60 F3d 1104), Code Sec(s) 62; 3401, (CA4), 7/31/1995 Michael D. WEBER; Barbara L. WEBER, PETITIONERS­APPELLANTS v. COMMISSIONER of the Internal Revenue Service, RESPONDENT­APPELLEE. Case Information: [pg. 95­5782] Code Sec(s): 62; 3401 Court Name: U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Docket No.: Docket No. 94­2609, Date Decided: 7/31/1995. Prior History: Tax Court, (1994)  curiam. 103 TC 378, affirmed per Tax Year(s): Year 1988. Disposition: Decision for Govt. 60 F.3d 1104. Related Proceedings: Related Proceedings at Weber v. Commissioner,  103 T.C. 378 (1994) Cites: 76 AFTR 2d 95­5782, 60 F3d 1104, 95­2 USTC P 50409. HEADNOTE https://checkpoint­riag­com.umiss.idm.oclc.org/app/view/toolItem?usid=11f6a7l15d8cd&feature=tcheckpoint&lastCpReqId=2242675 1/17 10/16/2015 Checkpoint | Document 1. Business deductions—employee or independent contractor. 4th Cir. affirmed ruling th...

Words: 7834 - Pages: 32

Free Essay

Disbursement Acceleration Program

...THE DISBURSEMENT ACCELERATION PROGRAM MELISSA R. MARTIN MPAD 610 –PUBLIC MANAGEMENT AND SOCIAL CHANGE CONTENT * What is DAP? * Why was DAP introduced? * How did the DAP work? * How did DAP benefit the economy? * How did DAP support the budget reform agenda? * DAP Timeline * Constitutional and Legal Bases of DAP * SC Ruling on DAP * Why did the Aquino Administration terminate DAP? * SC modifies ruling on DAP What is DAP? The Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP) is a spending reform measure to speed up public expenditure and catalyze economic growth. Why was DAP introduced? * Need to Clean House: Curb Corruption and Leakages * Freeing up operational bottlenecks * Inefficient implementation * Poor planning * Slow procurement * By the third quarter of 2011, it became clear that if we wanted public spending to accelerate enough for economic growth, we had to use idle funds. (Sec. Florencio Abad, DBM ) * The Aquino Administration therefore launched the DAP in 2011 KEY REFORMS (the DAP as Package of Reform Intervention) * Zero-based budgeting Implementation of zero-based budgeting to weed out inefficient, ineffective and leakage-ridden programs and projects * Early enactment of the budget Early preparation, submission and enactment of the annual National Budget including the adoption of the Online Submission of Budget Proposal * Disaggregation of lump sum funds ...

Words: 2422 - Pages: 10

Premium Essay

Ims Paper

...Dear Mayor Adam & Town Manager Smith, You, Sirs, Need IMS. You look out of your window at Town Hall to see the city in ruins, lone policemen cut off from the rest of their units, firefighters in burning rubble with no idea where they are, and worse, nobody knows they are lost in the fray. Riots have begun explode out of control, and when response to unrest by authorities is slow and uncoordinated, things turn ugly. Chain-of-command has completely broken down, US Army generals are being knocked off their feet by firefighters ordered to prevent them from entering the area, phone and power lines are down across the city hampering communication, and looters are running rampant in a state of anarchy. National Guardsmen unleash a hail of bullets toward a two-family home after a police officer yells ‘cover me!’. Are the levees compromised, or not? You can’t get a straight answer. Your emergency management plans provided one-stop solutions that weren't applicable, scalable, or adaptable to more complex situations, like the ones you are now facing. And eventually, the people are going to blame this lack of preparedness and proper response on you, putting an end to a fine career of public service. But it doesn't have to be this way. In fact, you can save your city and your career by supporting and implementing an Incident Management System – you might even be able to swing some extra federal funding your way in the form of emergency preparedness grants! Although we do our...

Words: 2705 - Pages: 11

Free Essay

Management

...St. Thomas University School of Law St. Thomas University School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2012-01 THE DEAN'S ROLE IN BUILDING A POSITIVE WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT Douglas E. Ray Electronic copy available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2011129 RAY_FINAL.DOC 8/15/2011 2:46 PM THE DEAN’S ROLE IN BUILDING A POSITIVE WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT Douglas E. Ray* UCH of a dean’s job involves reaching out to various communities. We reach out to and build relationships with alumni and donors for needed financial support. We reach out to and build relationships with members of the bench and the bar to help expand employment opportunities for our students. We reach out to and build relationships with members of the University community to ensure cooperation and access to resources. We reach out to and build relationships with our students. This essay is about reaching out to and building relationships with our most important communities: those who work within the law school. In these difficult economic times, most law schools face the challenge of doing more with less. Budgets have been reduced, staffing levels have fallen, and there are limits on how much we want to raise tuition in light of the economic conditions our students face. To do well in this environment and to provide the most effective legal education and student services we can, we must make identifying and fostering the “people potential” of our institutions a high priority. This essay is about treating...

Words: 4639 - Pages: 19

Free Essay

Manegerial Organization

...An Analysis of McDonnell Douglas’s Ethical Responsibility in the Crash of Turkish Airlines Flight 981 The Memorial of Flight 981 at Ermenonville (Johnston, 1976). Executive Summary In 1974, Turkish Airlines Flight 981 experienced a mid-flight cargo door failure which led to the first total loss of a wide-bodied aircraft in history. The aircraft was a McDonnell Douglas DC-10, and this tragedy was compounded by the fact that sufficient corrective action had not been taken by the manufacturer after precursory failures had occurred over the four previous years. The purpose of this report is to evaluate the ethical nature of McDonnell Douglas’s decisions throughout this crisis, discerning their priorities with regard to safety and financial gain, and to assess if these qualities have changed in response. The origin of this catastrophe lay in a poor handling of design and manufacturing. The cargo door’s design employed faulty philosophies, and decisions regarding its manufacture were driven by savings at the expense of safety. However, though the door’s faults were later exposed, a more serious problem involving the tail control lines in the passenger floor was continually overlooked until the crash. This was due primarily to a policy of using old design strategies which met minimum federal requirements. The company oversimplified the control lines’ failure mode when confronted with it in ground testing and, being committed to their own design, were unable to...

Words: 8952 - Pages: 36

Free Essay

Bail

...* there must be some proof and not mere opinion in the shape of a statement. * ---Names of accused were not mentioned in F.I.R. nor description of their features or their stature was given---Accused had not been identified and their identification test took place two- months after incident---Alleged identification of accused was based on flashing of torch light which was a weak form of identification. * When material on record was not showing as to which accused caused fatal injury leaving room for consideration regarding common intention of other accused, such case called for further enquiry- * ---Assessment of evidence ---Principle---Deeper appreciation of record cannot be gone into at bail stage, but only its tentative Assessment is to be made just to find out as to whether the accused is, prima facie, connected with the commission of crime or not. * ---No final findings could be given regarding plea of alibi at bail stage, as same would require recording of evidence ---Tentative Assessment of such plea, could be made, if it was found that accused had succeeded in establishing an opposite version then the case of accused would become one of further inquiry and on that score, accused would become entitled to the concession of bail. * one of accused was shown as armed with dagger, while other with Kalashinikov---Injuries sustained by the complainant were blunt which could be the result of danda attributed to absconding accused---No role seemed of accused persons...

Words: 11061 - Pages: 45

Premium Essay

Wikileak

...     About us Advertise Contact Us Send Comments/Tips Home My FDL Firedoglake News TBogg La Figa Book Salon FDL Action The Dissenter Pam's House Blend Elections FDL TV Just Say Now Password Remember Me Login              Username: « Is the UK Torture Inquiry an Attempt to Limit Further Disclosure? Another Obama Recess Appointment For Someone Not Named Johnsen » Wikileaks Leaker Bradley Manning Finally Charged By: emptywheel Tuesday July 6, 2010 12:14 pm submit Tweet 93 The government has finally charged Bradley Manning, the Wikileaks leaker. He is charged with two counts of violating the UCMJ, one related to loading onto his own unsecure computer a set of information and adding unauthorized software to a military network computer, and the other related to accessing and passing information onto someone not entitled to have it. I find the charge sheet particularly interesting for two reasons. What the government says that Manning did with the material he accessed, and an apparent discrepancy between the government’s depiction of the timing and Wired’s depiction of it. What the government knows about what Manning did with the information First, it describes the information he accessed differently as follows:   The video of the July 12, 2007 Apache killing of Reuters journalists (obtained via unauthorized access, loaded onto his unsecured computer, transmitted to someone unauthorized to receive it) The Rejkjavik State Department...

Words: 8363 - Pages: 34

Free Essay

Entrepreneurship

...Entrepreneurs with Disability in Uganda By Rebecca Namatovu1, Samuel Dawa, Fiona Mulira and Celestine Katongole Makerere University Business School Kampala, Uganda ICBE-RF Research Report No. 31/12 Investment Climate and Business Environment Research Fund (ICBE-RF) www.trustafrica.org/icbe Dakar, July 2012 1 Contact: rybekaz@yahoo.com This research was supported by a grant from the Investment Climate and Business Environment (ICBE) Research Fund, a collaborative initiative of TrustAfrica and IDRC. It’s a working paper circulated for discussion and comments. The findings and recommendations are those of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the views of the ICBE-RF Secretariat, TrustAfrica or IDRC Executive Summary This report addresses entrepreneurship activity among Persons with Disability in Uganda and their potential to contribute to economic development. Data was collected from Entrepreneurs with Disabilities (EWDs) in Kampala using mixed methods research. In the study we sought to answer questions about the environment, business activities EWDs are involved in, attitudes towards business, their motivations, challenges and growth aspirations. Key findings were that the majority of the EWDs are involved in retail trade. Most of them had started their own businesses using their own savings and had previously closed a business because it wasn’t profitable. Most of their businesses weren’t registered because they said they didn’t need to yet the majority of those...

Words: 11589 - Pages: 47

Free Essay

Bush

...FAMILY OF SECRETS The Bush Dynasty, America’s Invisible Government, and the Hidden History of the Last Fifty Years RUSS BAKER Contents Foreword by James Moore 1. How Did Bush Happen? 2. Poppy’s Secret 3. Viva Zapata 4. Where Was Poppy? 5. Oswald’s Friend 6. The Hit 7. After Camelot 8. Wings for W. 9. The Nixonian Bushes 10. Downing Nixon, Part I: The Setup 11. Downing Nixon, Part II: The Execution 12. In from the Cold 13. Poppy’s Proxy and the Saudis 14. Poppy’s Web 15. The Handoff 16. The Quacking Duck 17. Playing Hardball 18. Meet the Help 19. The Conversion 20. The Skeleton in W.’s Closet 21. Shock and . . . Oil? 22. Deflection for Reelection 23. Domestic Disturbance 24. Conclusion Afterword Author’s Note Acknowledgments Notes Foreword When a governor or any state official seeks elective national office, his (or her) reputation and what the country knows about the candidate’s background is initially determined by the work of local and regional media. Generally, those journalists do a competent job of reporting on the prospect’s record. In the case of Governor George W. Bush, Texas reporters had written numerous stories about his failed businesses in the oil patch, the dubious land grab and questionable funding behind a new stadium for Bush’s baseball team, the Texas Rangers, and his various political contradictions and hypocrisies while serving in Austin. I was one of those Texas journalists. I spent about a decade...

Words: 249168 - Pages: 997