1

Dr.D.Y.Patil Law College Pimpri, Pune.

THE HON’BLE SUMMARY OF LEADINGPREME COURT OF DELHI , AT DELHI

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION

In the matter of

Dhairyashil Bapusaheb Gayke …Petitioner

v/s
Union Of India …Respondent

Writ Petition No.7550/2020

Name- Kalyani Meghe

Roll No.
Group No. 17

Counsel on behalf of the petitioner Dhairyashil Bapusaheb Gayke

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SR No. Particulars Page Number

1 Vakalat Nama 3
2 List of Sources 4
3 List of Abbreviations 6
3 Statement of Jurisdiction 7
4 Statement of Facts 9
5 Statement of Issues 11
6 Summary of Arguments 12
7 Detailed Arguments 13
8 Prayer 19

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 3

VAKALATNAMA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL

APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.1665 OF 2015

Dhairyashil Bapusaheb Gayke …Petitioner

v/s

Union Of India …Respondents

I, Dhairyashil Bapusaheb Gayke, the petitioner in the above petition do hereby

appoint and retain Adv. Kalyani Meghe, High Court, to act and appear for me in the
above petition and on my behalf to conduct and prosecute (or defend) the same and
all proceeding that may be taken in respect of any application connected with the same
or any decree or order passed therein, and to fill and obtain return of documents and
to represent me and to take all the necessary legal steps on my behalf in the above
matter. I agree to ratify all acts done by the aforesaid Advocate in pursuance of this
authority.

Sd/-

(Petitioner)

Sd/-

(Adv. for Petitioner)

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 4

LIST OF SOURCES

LIST OF STATUTES
1. Constitution of India,1950
2. Indian Evidence Act,1872
3. The Code of Criminal Procedure,1973
4. The Indian Penal Code,1860 Act

LIST OF WEBSITE
1) WWW.Manupatra.com
2) WWW.Ssconline.in
3) WWW.Indiankanoon.org
4) WWW.prsindia.org
5) www.thehindu.com
6) www.casemine.com

DICTIONARIES REFFERED
1) Oxford Dictionary
2) Google Translate

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 5

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

ABBREVIATIONS FULL FORM

PIL PUBLIC INTREEST LITIGATION

HON’BLE HONORABLE

ART. ARTICLE

SEC. SECTION

S.C. SUPREME COURT

H.C. HIGH COURT

i.e. THAT IS

& AND

Vs. VERSUS

BTW. BETWEEN

AIR ALL INDIA REPORTER

GOVT. GOVERNMENT

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONE

 6
Statement of Jurisdiction

The Hon’ble Supreme Court Has The Jurisdiction To Hear The Matter Under
Art. 32

Art. 32 of the constitution of India, 1950 reads as:

32. Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this part-

1. The right to move the supreme court by appropriate proceedings for the
enforcement of the rights conferred this part is guaranteed.

2. The supreme court shall have the power to issue directions or order writs,
including writs in the nature of hebeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition,
quo warranto and certiorari , whichever may be appropriate for the
enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this part.

3. Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the supreme court by

clause (1) and (2), parliament by law empower any other court for exercise
within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable
by the supreme court under clause (2).

4. The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended expect as

otherwise provided for by this Constitution.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 7

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. After the Independence of India farmers used to sell their products. Due
to the some reason of prevailing system of Zamindars farmers were
trapped in debt. But farmers needs to many more things for growing crop.
For buying all those thing they needs money so farmers took loans from
Zamindars. But they charge very high interest. Zamindars buy this produce
in very less amount & farmers did not have bargaining power. Next year
farmers again required money for new crop then they are borrow money
from same Zamindars . That’s why farmers trapped in a cycle of debt.

2. To check this system gov. of India introduced APMC Act in 1960’s. That
time green revolution was in progress &that APMC’s structureMandi’s or
Markets across India. In that time around 7000 APMC’s are present in
India.

3. The process of selling all produce after harvesting crops are brought to
the markets or mandis. When they sell the produce through auctioning
or price discovery and that produce taken by the Middlemen or Arhatiyas.
The Middlemen is the people between farmer and retailer.
E.g. Farmers sell their produce to the Middlemen to the vendor & the
gov. give license to the Middleman to provide the APMC. So overall it is
a self thriving ecosystem. But the APMC’s control by state gov. &charged
the tax.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 8

4. But if APMC reject the produce them this produce bought by the gov. at
MSP. MSP is same in allover country. If everything is good so farmers
attempting suicides according to National Crime Bureau Report 2018 in
India.

5. This system was good in only 1960’s and not much done to APMC’s. That’s
why some problems popped up. Middleman started exploiting farmers
&started buying produce at MSP rate & selling out high amount. In a way
we can say Minimum Support Price. Voice arose gov. brought the there
Acts in 2020.

6. Farmers agreement on price Assurance & Farm Services Act 2020, Farmers
produce trade & commerce act 2020, Essential commodities act 2020. This
acts doing a vital role in economy. These act sought to bring much needed
reform in the agricultural marketing system &removing restriction of
private stock holding. Kisan Morcha filed a PIL in the SC of India. This case
is now fixed for the final argument.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 9

Statement of Issues

1. whether the PIL file in SC of India by Kisan Morcha is maintainable or not?

2. Whether laws will allow inter state trade and encourage hike electronic trading of agricultural
produce?
3. Whether right to carry occupation voilets
4. Is MSP a fundamental Right?

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 10
Summary of Pleadings

1. Is MSP a fundamental Right?

Ans: A constitutional right under article 21
Thus forcing the farmers to sell below MSP leads to denial of their 'right to livelihood'
guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution protects citizens.

2.Whether laws will allow inter state trade and encourage hike electronic trading of
agricultural produce?
Ans: The system is to provide for the creation of an ecosystem where the farmers and
traders enjoy the freedom of choice relating to sale and purchase of farmers' produce
which facilitates remunerative prices through competitive alternative trading channels;
to promote efficient, transparent and barrier-free inter-State and intra-State trade and
commerce of farmers' produce outside the physical premises of markets or deemed
markets notified under various State agricultural produce market legislations; to
provide a facilitative framework for electronic trading.

3.Whether right to carry occupation ?

Ans: Yes article 19 (1)(g) of Indian constitution provides right to practice any profession
or to carry on any occupation, Trade or business to all citizens subject to article 19(6)
which enumerated the nature of restriction upon the above right of the citizens.

4.Whether the PIL file in SC of India by Kisan Morcha is maintainable or not?

Ans:A constitutional right under article 21,Thus forcing the farmers to sell below MSP
to denial of their'right to livelihood'guaranteed under article 21 of the constitution.
Further article 23 of the constitution protects citizens against exploitation here the
violation of fundamental Right of the farmers which is given in the article 21 protect
citizens against exploitation and article 19 (1)(g) of the Indian constitution.
Right to practice any profession or to carry on any occupation Trade or business to all
citizens. So that the PIL file in SC of India by Kisan Morcha is maintainable because
under article 32 of Indian constitution is given.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 11

ABOUT THE CONTROVERSIAL ACTS-

The three controversial Acts which aim to change the way agriculture produce
is marketed, sold & stored across the country were initially issued in the form of
ordinances in June. They were then passed by voice-vote in both the Lok Sabha
& Rajya Sabha during the delayed mansoon session.

There is a Lot of Benefits of this Acts

1. Farmers have got a new option insofar they will have the freedom to sell
their produce outside the APMC market and there will be no tax on such
trade which will give a higher price to the farmers.

2. Farmers can sell their produce within the state or anywhere else in the
country and there will be no restriction on this type of trade. This will
benefit the farmers that they will be able to sell their produce to merchant
wherever they get a higher price.

3. There will be no need for any kind of license for traders to purchase
agricultural produce of farmers in the trade area outside the APMC mandi,
but also those holding PAN card or any other document notifiedby the
Central government can join this trade. This will facilitate trade in
agricultural products and will benefits the farmers.

4. In case of any dispute arising in such business, the matter will be settled
within 30 days by the sub-Divisional Magistrate.

5. There are also provisions of heavy penalty for violation of rules and
regulations.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 12

CASE LAW-

Narmada Bachao Andolan

V/S

State of Madhya Pradesh

( AIR 2011 SC 1989 (2001): 2011 AIR SCW 3337: (2011)5SCALE 624)

In that case - Acquisition of land does not violate any constitutional/fundamental

rights of the displayed persons. However, they are entitled to resettlement and
rehabilitation as per the policy framed for the ouster of the concerned project.

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

 13

THE PRAYER

Wherefore, In light of the facts explained, issues raised, arguments advanced,

reasons given and authorities cited, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

1. The Honorable Court may give order to give government allowing them to trade
freelywithout any license stock limit.

2. The Honerable court may give order to government that msp is include in the farm bill
andit give the legal backup by the parliamentary Act .

3. The Honerable Court may give order to parliament the farm bill and MSPis it rollback
andreplace in new law
And/Or

Court may pass any other order that it deems fit in the interest of Justice,
Equity and Good Conscience.
And for this, The Respondent as in duty bound, Shall humbly pray.

COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT

Sign & Date

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER