PIMR Petitioner

Padma Shri Dr. N.N.
Jain National Moot Court Competition, 2023
Team Code: P19
Before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana
PIL under Article 32 of Constitution of Indiana
In The Matter Of
Environmental NGOs & Ors. …………………………….Petitioner
Vs.
Government of Indiana ……………………………………Respondant
Most Respectfully Submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana
MEMORANDUM ON THE BEHALF OF THE PETITONER
Page 1
Padma Shri Dr. N.N. Jain National Moot Court Competition, 2023
TABLE OF CONTENT
List of Abbreviations
Index of Authorities
Statement of Jurisdiction
Statement of Facts
Issues Raised
Summary Of Arguments
Arguments Advanced
Prayer
Page 2
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Abbreviations Expansions
Sec. Section
¶ Paragraph
& And
AIR All India Reporter
SC Supreme Court
v. Versus
Ors. Others
HC High Court
Hon’ble Honorable
CONSTI. Constitution
ACC. According
P. Page
r.w.s Read with section
SCC Supreme Court Cases
IUCN International Union for Conservation of
Nature
UNFCCC United Nation Framework Convention on
Climate Change
GHG GreenHouse Gas
NGRBA Act, 2016 National Ganga River Basin Authority
Act, 2016
INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
Page 3
A. CASES
1. People’s Union for Democratic rights v. Union of India

2. BALCO Employees’ union (regd.) v. Union of India
3. Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappa Maiyam v. Union of India
4. Olga Tellis & Ors. V. Bombay Municipal Corporation
5. M/S Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame & Ors.
6. Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravaedi
7. Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa & Ors.
8. L.K. Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan& Ors.
9. M.C. Mehta v. Union Of India
10. Intellectuals v. State of A.P.
11. Goa Foundation, Goa v. Diksha Holding (pvt.) Ltd.
12. Kehar Sigh v. Union of India
13. Indian Railway Board v. Shyam Kumar & Ors.
14. R. v. Secretary of state for the Home Department
15. Coal India Ltd. v. Mukul Kumar Choudhuri
16. Om Kumar v. Union of India
17. M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
18. Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board v. M.V. Nayudu
19. Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
B. Online Sources and Research Papers
1. Prof. Satish C. Shastri, Environment Law. LIII (6th Edition EBC 2002)
2. International Rivers org., How dams effect water supply
3. Article by: Florida keys National Marine sanctuary
4. Lima, I.B.T, Ramos, F.M., Bambace, L.A.W. et al. Methane Emission
for Large Dams as Renewable Energy Resources: A developing
National Prospective. Mitig Adopt Strategy Glob Change 13, 193-206
(2008)
C. Statutes Referred
1. Constitution of India
a. Preamble
b. Public Interest Litigation under Article 32
c. Article 14,21,19
Page 4
d. Article 48A and 51A (g)
2. National Ganga River Basin Authority Act, 2016
a. Preamble
3. Environment Protection laws and The Environment (Protection) Act,

1986
a. Section 3
D. International Conventions
1. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

2. Paris Agreement
3. Kyoto Protocol
E. Books Referred
1. Constitution of India: Narender Kumar, M.P. Jain 8th edition
2. Envionment Law and Policy: Aruna Venkat
3. Environmental Law in India: P. Leelakrishnan
4. Administrative Law: Dr. J.J.R Upadhyaya
5. Intellectual Property Right: V.K. Ahuja
F. Online Sources (Case Laws and Judgements)
1. SCC online
2. Manupatra
3. Indian Kanoon
4. CaseMine
5. Law Library India
G. Other Sources
1. Ipleaders
2. Legalservice India
3. UN Conventions
STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
Page 5
THE HON’BIE SUPREME COURT EXERCISES JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND

ADJUDICATE OVER THE MATTER UNDER ARTICLE 321 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIANA.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1.1. Passing of Law by Government

1
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 by
this Part is guaranteed
(2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs, including writs in the nature of
habeas 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 may by law
empower any other court to 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 except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution
Page 6
The Central Government of Indiana recently passed a law aimed at

promoting economic growth by allowing large- scale industrial
development in ecologically sensitive areas. The law provides for the
establishment of a regulatory body to oversee the implementation of
environmental safeguards, but critics argue that the body lacks sufficient
independence and is heavily influenced by industrial interests.
1.2. Government’s plan to construct Dam
The government plans to construct a new dam on the river Sanges,

aimed at increasing the country’s hydroelectric power generation
capacity.
1.3. Impact of Dam on River Sanges
The proposed dam would be one of the largest in the world, and would
have significant environmental and social impacts on the region and is
located in an area that is home to several endangered species, including
the Sanges river dolphin and the Gharial crocodile, which are both listed
as critically endangered under the IUCN Red List. The area is home to
several indigenous communities who rely on the river for their
livelihoods, includhing fishing and agriculture.
ISSUES RAISED
Page 7
ISSUE 1
WHETHER THE PETITIONERS HAVE THE STANDING TO BRING THE

CASE, AND WHETHER THEY HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT THE LAW
WILL CAUSE SIGNIFICANT HARM TO THE ENVIRONMENT OR PUBLIC
HEALTH?
ISSUE 2
WHETHER THE LAW VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONL RIGHTS TO A

HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT, AND IF SO, WHETHER THE VIOLATION IS
JUSTIFIABLE UNDER THE DOCTRINE OF PROPORTIONALITY?
ISSUE 3
WHETHER THE LAW VILOATED INDIA’S INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS

UNDER THE UNFCCC AND PARIS AGREEMENT?
ISSUE 4
WHETHER THE CONSTRTUCTION OF DAMS WOULD VIOLATE THE

PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL GANGA RIVER BASIN AUTHORITY ACT,
2016?
ISSUE 5
WHETHER THE USE OF BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY, ARTIFICIAL

INTELLIGENCE AND METAVERSE- BASED VISUAL REPRESENTATION
RAISE NEW LEGAL AND ETHICAL ISSUES, SUCH AS DATA PRIVACY,
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, AND CULTURAL APPROPRIATION, AND
WHETHER THESE ISSUES NEED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE CONTEXT OF
THE DAM CONSTRUCTION PROJECT?
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS
Page 8
ISSUE 1. Whether the petitioners have the standing to bring the case, and
whether they have demonstrated that the law will cause significant harm
to the environment or public health?
It is humbly submitted that the petitioners have the standing to bring the case,
and also they have demonstrated that the law will cause significant harm to
the environment or public health. The communities living in the area located
near to river Sanges are indigenous communities that lack socially and
economically. Further it is violation of their fundamental rights to build a dam
near the place of living and source of livelihood. Therefore, it is the
communities who were deprived of their right to livelihood and were being
denied their rights under Article 21 of the consti. And since the petitioners
were championing their rights, the PIL must be held to be maintainable.
ISSUE 2. Whether the law violates the constitutional right to healthy

environment, and if so, whether the violation is justifiable under the
doctrine of proportionality?
It is humbly submitted that the law strictly violates the constitutional rights to
a healthy environment. The law aims at promoting economic growth by
allowing large- scale industrial development in ecologically sensitive areas. This
law passed by the respondents for construction of dams can cause devastating
effects to the environment like, alter aquatic ecology and river hydrology
upstream and downstream, affecting water quality and quantity and
displacement of indigenous communities and also effects the river dolphins
and Gharial crocodile which are enlisted as endangered under IUCN Red List.
ISSUE 3. Whether the law violates India’s International Obligations under

the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement?
It is humbly submitted that the law violates India’s International obligations

under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement. Indiana is a signatory of both
the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, where both agreement’s main objective
is to reduce the GHG emission. But the government through implementation of
law in the country to construct hydroelectric generator is concerning more on
industries which may lead to emission of GHG, also dams lead to emission of
GHG in the nearby area leading to change in climate factors.
ISSUE 4. Whether the construction of dam would violate the provisions of

the National River Ganga Basin Authority Act, 2016?
Page 9
It is humbly submitted that the construction of dam clearly violate the

provisions of the NRGBA, Act 2016. The dams affect the water quality and
ecological integrity and also emits GHG, which is clearly violating to the
provisions of the preamble of the NRGBA Act, 2016 .
ISSUE 5. Whether the use of block chain technology, artificial intelligene

and metaverse- based virtual representation raise new legal and ethical
issues, such as data privacy, intellectual property, and cultural
appropriation, and whether these issues need to be addressed in the
context of the dam construction project?
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
Page
10
ISSUE 1. Whether the petitioners have the standing to bring the case, and
whether they have demonstrated that the law will cause significant harm
to the environment or public health?
It humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the petitioners have the
standing to bring the case and they have demonstrated that the law will cause
significant harm to the environment or public health.
Further it is submitted that the river Sanges is a home to several endangered

species, including the sanges river dolphin and Gharial crocodiles, which are
both listed as endangered species under the IUCN Red List. the area is also
home to several indigenous communities who rely on the river for their
livelihoods, including fishing and agriculture. Moreover, the construction of
dam would have significant social and economic impact on the region,
including job displacement and inequality.
1.1. Locus Standi
It is submitted that Locus Standi, or standing to sue, is the “right of an

individual or a group, to have a court enter upon an adjudication of the issue
brought before the court. Acc. to the traditional rule of locus standi, the right
to move to the court of judicial redressals is available only to those whose legal
right or legally protected interests has been infringed. This rule results in the
denial of the equal access to justice to those because of their poverty or socially
or economically disadvantageous position, re unable to approach the court for
relief, “lest the golden key to unlock the doors of justice remain only with the
moneyed people”, the SC took a dynamic approaches and pioneered the
concept of PIL, permitting litigation at instance of “public spirited persons for
the enforcement of right of any other person.2
It is submitted that the communities living in the area located near to the river
Sanges are indigenous communities that lack socially and economically.
Further it is violation of their fundamental rights, to build a dam near their
place of living and source of livelihood.
It is humbly submitted that relying on BALCO Employees’ Union (regd.) v.

Union of India3, the court stated that the only ground on which a person can
maintain a PIL is where there has been an element of violation of Art. 21 on
Human Rights or where the litigation has been initiated for the benefit of the
2
People’s Union for Democratic Right v. Union of India; A.I.R. 1982 SC 1473
3
(2002) 2 SCC 333
Page
11
poor and under privileged that are unable to come to the court due to some
disadvantage.4
It is submitted that the Bombay HC in the case of Olga Tellis & ors. V. Bombay
Municipal Corporation & ors.5, entertained writ petition filed by a journalist
and two pavements dwellers for enforcing the Fundamental Rights of pavement
and slum dwellers under Art. 21, 37, 39(a) and 41 of the Consti. Against their
forcible eviction and the removal of their rootments under the Bombay
Municipal Corporation Act, 1988. It is further submitted that this court made it
clear that writ petition filed by Olga Tellis & two others were maintainable since
the right to life guaranteed under Art. 21 include the right to livelihood from
which they would be deprived if the slim dwellers were evicted from their slums
and pavement dwelling, which would be unconstitutional.
Further it is submitted that in M/s shantistar Builder v. Narayan Khimalal

Totame & ors.6, this court also had occasion to consider the width and ambit of
Art. 21 of the Consti. , to include the right to shelter. It was observed that the
right to life would take within its sweep the right to food, the right to clothing,
the right to decent environment and reasonable accommodation to live in. the
difference between the need of an animal and human being for shelter has to
be kept in view. Therefore, it is the indigenous communities who were
deprieved to their right to livelihood and were being denied their rights under
Art. 21 of the Consti. And since the Petitioners were championing their rights,
the PIL must be held to be maintainable.
1.2. The Law will Cause harm to Environment and Public Health
It is submitted before the hon’ble court that the petitioner has demonstrated
that the law will cause significant harm to the environment or public health.
It is submitted that the govt. under the law has planned to construct a new
dam on the river Sanges which aims at increasing the country’s hydroelectric
power generation capacity. This construction of dam would cause habitat
fragmentation, flooding and the destruction of surrounding habitat, GHS,
sediment builds up behind the dam, downstream sediment erosion, negative
impact on local fish population and even displacement of indigenous
communities living near the river.
4
Villianeer Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam v. Union of India; (2009) 7 SCC 561
5
(1985) 3 SCC 545
6
(1990) 1 SCC 520
Page
12
1.2.1. Violation of Article 14
It is submitted that article 14 of the consti. Guarantees that “right to equality” 7,

means equality before the law and equal protection of law has been guaranteed
to every citizen without any discrimination. This indicates that any action of
the states’ relating to the environment must not infringe upon the right to
equality as mentioned in the Art. 14 of the Consti.
Further it is submitted that the Stockholm Declaration, 1972, also recognized

this principle of equality in environment declaration 8 and it called up all the
world’s nations to abide by his Principle.
It is humbly submitted that in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi9, the Sc

of India struck down the arbitrary official sanction on environmental matters
on the basis that, it was a violation o Art. 14 of the Indian Consti.
It is further submitted that in Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa &

Ors.10, the hon’ble Sc took notice of the utilization of an empty plot of land
which was reserved for the construction of a public park but it was the BDA
who allotted that open space for a hospital’s construction. Such allotment was
challenged by the local residents who claimed that such land allotment goes
against the constitutional provision for environmental protection. Considering
the facts, this hon’ble court held that any act which has been guaranteed to all
the citizens under Art.14 will directly be in conflict with the Fundamental Right
to Equality and equal protection of law. The court further held the Doctrine of
rule of law in this case by observing that any action which stands against the
law of land despite being done at the behest of the executive will still be
considered as legal as the law is the supreme authority and no man is above
law.
1.2.2. Right to life and livelihood
It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that Art, 21 of the consti.
Guarantee the right to life and personal liberty. 11 This Art. Does not directly
confer the right to clean water and a healthy environment. In L.K. Koolwal v.
7
Article 4 of the constitution of India states that “ the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law
and the equal protection of law within the territory of India”
8
Stockholm Declaration, 1972, Principle 1, “Man has the fundamental right to freedom, equality and adequate
conditions of life, in an environment of a quality that permits a life to dignity and well being”.
9
(1981) 1 SCC 722
10
(1991)
11
Article 21: “no person shall be deprived of his life and personal liberty accept according to the procedure
established by law”
Page
13
State of Rajasthan & ors.12, the Rajasthan HC held that maintaining the quality
of water, environment, sanitation and well being comes under the jurisdiction
of Art. 21 of the Indian Consti.
Further it is submitted that in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India13, Singh J. stated

that the closure of the tranneries may create unemployment and also there is
loss of revenue, but life, health and ecology have greater importance for the
people because no person shall be deprieved of his life under Art.21 of the
Consti.
It is humbly submitted that the right to livelihood is included within the ambit
of Art.21 of the Indian Consti. Which concern s the right of life and personal
liberty. Also Sc in its landmark judgement of Olga Tellis v. Bombal Municipal
Corporation14, held that the “right to life” included the right to livelihood.
It is submitted that the river Sanges is a home to several indigenous

communities who rely on the river for their livelihood. This construction of dam
would violate their right to livelihood.
Therefore it is humbly contended before the court the petitioners have the
standing to bring the case and the law cause significant harm to the
environment or the public health.
ISSUE 2. Whether the law violates the constitutional right to healthy

environment, and if so, whether the violation is justifiable under the
doctrine of proportionality?
12
AIR 1988 RAJ 2
13
(1987) 4 SCC 463
14
1986 AIR 180
Page
14
It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the law strictly violates the
constitutional rights to a healthy environment. The law aims at promoting
economic growth by allowing large scale industrial development in ecological
sensitive areas.
It is submitted that mankind is a part of nature and life must be influenced by

an undisturbed functioning of natural resources which safeguards the supply
of energy and nutrients which is an indispensible aspects of the life support
system. Thus, the prescription arises that giving protection to the environment
means safeguarding and preserving humanity.15
2.1. Preamble
It is submitted that the preamble of the Consti. Starts with the statement “ WE
THE PEOPLE OF INDIA SOLEMNLY RESOLVE TO CONSTITUTE INDIA INTO A
SOVEREIGN SOCIALIST SECULAR DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC AND SECURE
ALL ITS CITIZENS.” It implies Indian Consti. Follows the SOCIALIST pattern of
society, where the primary concern is to first deal with social problems rather
then the individual. Here, the welfare of the public interest is the utmost
important aspect of the country.
2.2. Violation of Article 48A and 51A(g)
It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble SC that the respondent have violated
Article 48A and 51A (g) of the Consti. Of India. It may be noted that Article 48A
and 51A (g) which embodies India’s Constitutional concerns, find their place in
part IV of the Consti., Titled “ Directive Principles of State Policy” which
embodies several enforceable directives addressed to the state.16 While Art. 48A
imposes a Constitutional obligation on the state to protect and improve the
environment and to safeguard the forests and wildlife of the county, Artilce 51
A (g) enjoins all the Indian citizens to protect and improve the natural
environment, including forests, lakes and wildlife.
It is further submitted that hon’be justice A.R. Lakshmanan in Intellectuals v.

State of AP17 observed:
“ these two articles are not only fundamental in the governance of the country
but also it shall be the duty of the state to apply their principles in making
15
Prof. Satish C. Shastri, environmental law. LIII 16th edition EBC 2002
16
Article 37 of the Constitution declares “ the provision contained in this part shall not be enforceable by any court,
but the principle therein laid down as nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the
duty of the state to apply these principles in making laws.”
17
S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 7196-7197 OF 2001)
Page
15
laws and further, these two articles are to be kept in mind in understanding
the scope and prospectus of fundamental rights guaranteed by the
Constitution of India and also the various laws enacted by the parliament and
the state legislature.”
It is further submitted that this law passed by the respondent for the
construction of dams can cause devastating effects to the environment,
namely:
Firstly, alter aquatic ecology and river hydrology upstream and downstream;
Secondly, affecting water quality and quantity, and;
Thirdly, affecting breeding grounds.
It is further submitted that in Goa Foundation, Goa v. Diksha Holding (pvt.)

Ltd.18, J. Pattanaik opined:
“ the society shall have to prosper, but not at the cost of environment, and in a
similar vein, the environment shall have to be protected, but not at the cost of
development of the society… there shall be both development and proper
environment and as much as balance has to be found out..”
2.2. Violation of Fundamental Rights
It is submitted that the law clearly violates Fundamental rights under Art. 21
of the individual living near the area of river Sanges. Art. 21 ensures right to
life to the citizens of India. This supreme provision of Indian Constitution
provides “ No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except
according to the procedure established by the law.” a constitutional bench of
SC in Kehar Singh v. Union of India19, observed:
“ to any civilized society, there can be no attributes more important than the
life and personal liberty of its members… these twin attributes enjoy a
fundamental ascendancy overall their attributes of its political and social
order..”
Further it is submitted that the construction of Hydroelectric dams has an

environmental impact. These dams can damage or otherwise impact the
environment both downstream and upstream through their construction
process during the formation of the dam to build a dam, new roads and
18
AIR 2001 SC 184
19
AIR 1989 SC 653
Page
16
powerlines must be installed that disrupt the environment. Dams often form
reservoirs that flood large areas and displace natural habitats. Further when
dams flood areas, it creates section of still or stagnant water that kill
vegetations which emits GHG.
It is further submitted that reservoirs not only displace animals from their
habitats but they also displace people. This disadvantageous impact of
hydroelectric energy can have quite a large impact on indigenous communities
living near the area. This may lead to displacement leading to economic
instability in the lives of people and violation of their right to livelihood.
It is further submitted that in Olga Tellis v. Bombal Municipal Corporation 20,

the Sc held:
“the right to life… does not mean merely that life cannot be taken away or
extinguish, as, for example, by the imposition and execution of the death
sentences except according to the procedure established by law. This is but one
aspect of the life. An equally important aspect of the life is the right to
livelihood. If the right to livelihood is not treated as part of 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… in view of the fact that Art.
39A and 41 require the state to secure an adequate means of livelihood and the
right to work it would be sheer pedantry to exclude the right to livelihood from
the content of life.”
2.3. Violation is justified under the Doctrine of Proportionality
It is humbly submitted that proportionality means that the administrative

authority must not be more drastic than it ought to seek the desired outcome.
It is further submitted that in Chairman, All India Railway Board v. Shyam

Kumar & Ors.21, the Apex court had defined the proportionality test as the
“least injurious means” or the “minimal impairment test” for protecting the
fundamental rights of citizens and guaranteeing fair equilibrium between the
individual rights and interests of the public.
Further it is submitted that in R. v. Secretary of state for the Home

Department22, the lord Bridge in this case held that when convention rights,
20
AIR 1986 SC 180
21
(2010) 6 SC 291
22
[1989] 1 QB 26
Page
17
i.e., fundamental rights are invoked then the court will act as a primary
reviewer.”
It is further submitted that in Coal India Limited v. Mukul Kumar Choudhuri23,

the Apex court observed that the imposition of punishment exercised in a
manner which is out of proportion to the fault. If the award of punishment is
grossly in excess of the allegations made, it cannot claim immunity and make
itself amendable or interference under the limited scope of judicial review.
It is further submitted that in case where fundamental freedoms are being

restricted by administration, the doctrine of proportionality is applied to check
the validity of such restrictions. In Om Kumar v. Union of India 24, the SC
observed that restriction of on Fundamental freedoms have always been
checked on the “anvail of proportionality”, it is further said that the court have
been using this doctrine since 1950 to test the validity of restriction imposed
by administrative actions.
Therefore it is contended that the law violates fundamental rights and freedoms
and is thus violation of doctrine of proportionality is justified.
ISSUE 3. Whether the law violates India’s International Obligations under

the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement?
it is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the law violates Indian’s
Interntionl obligations under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement.
3.1. Paris Agreement and India
23
(2009) 15 SCC 620
24
AIR 2000 SC 3689
Page
18
It is submitted that the core objective of paris Agreement is to improve the

Global climate response, holding Global hearing far below 2 degrees Celsius in
this country and striving to restrict the temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius, to
meet these core objectives, there are two types of actions. These are:
Firstly, the world has to make efforts to reduce the GHG emissions;
Secondly, the signed countries have to limit the options to sequester GHG
emissions.
It is further submitted that India is a signatory of Paris agreement where it has

committed to adjust its carbon emissions and reduction of GHG.
3.2. UNFCCC and India
It is humbly submitted before the court that India is a signatory of UNFCCC

also. Where the main objective of this international framework is:
“ to stabilize the concentration of GHG’s in the atmosphere at a level which

would prevent the interference of anthropogenic activities with a system of
climate where the level must be achieved by ensuring the following conditions:
 To allow the development of economy to follow in a sustainable

development .
 To permit the ecosystem to accommodate naturally to the change of
climate.
 To confirm that the production of food is not threatened.”
It is submitted that the govt. through the law to construct hydroelectric

generator is concerning more on industries which may lead to emission of GHG
and damaging of climate. Thus resulting in climate change. Also construction
of dams may lead to emission of GHG and sedimentation leading to devastating
destruction.
3.3. Precautionary Principle
It is humbly submitted that in the present case, precautionary principle is

applied. The precautionary principle states that if there is risk of severe
damage to humans and the environment, absence of inconvertible and
conclusive or definite scientific proof is not a reason for inaction. This principle
provides that if there is a risk of severe damage to humans and/ or the
Page
19
environment, absence of inconvertible, conclusive or definite scientific proo is

not a reason for inaction.
It is humbly submitted that the construction of dams can lead to destruction

and affect human life too. Dams may lead to flood, earthquakes, effect of
upstream and downstream of river and also impact the marine ecosystem.
It is further submitted that Art. 3 of UNFCCC was just one in a long list of
international agreements that contains the precautionary principle. 25 Art. 3 of
UNFCCC states:
1. The parties should protect the climate system for the present and future
generation of human kind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with
their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective
capability.
It is further submitted that it was held by the hon’ble court the closure of all
tanneries in certain districts which were not connected with common effluent
treatment plants the precautionary principle came to be directly applied in
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India26.
It is further submitted that it Andhra Pradesh Pollution Control Board v. M.V.

Nayudu27, the Apex court noted that it is better to err on the side of caution
and prevent environment harm, then to run the risk of irreversible harm. The
court observed :
“ the principle of precaution involves the anticipation of environmental harm

and taking measure to avoid it or to choose the least environmentally harm
activity. It is based on scientific uncertainty. Environment protection should
not only aim at protecting health, property and economic interest but only be
triggered but suspicion of concrete danger but also by (justified) concern or risk
potential.
Further it is submitted that international treaties, agreements, conventions

and decisions taken at international conferences have to be incorporated into
the law of land by parliamentary legislation. 28 However in the Narmada Bachao
Andolan v. Union of India29, where the SC held that the doctrine will ‘apply in a
25
Rabbi elamparo Deloso, The Precautionary Principle: relevance in International Law and Climate Change
26
AIR 1997 SC 734
27
AIR 1999 SC 812
28
Article 253, Constitution of India
29
AIR 2000 SC 3751
Page
20
case of polluting or other project r industry where the extent of damage likely
to be inflicted is not known.’ The court explained:
“ when there is a state of uncertainty due to lack of data or material about the
extent of damage or pollution likely to be caused, then, in order to maintain the
ecology balance, the burden of proof that the said balance will be maintained
must necessarily be on the industry or the unit which is likely to cause
pollution. On the other hand where the effect on ecology or environment of
setting up of an industry is known, what has to be seen is that if the
environment is likely to suffer, then what mitigating steps can be taken to
offset the same. Merely because there will be a change is no reason to presume
that there will be ecological disaster. It is when the effect of the project is
known then the principle of sustainable development would come into play,
which will ensure that mitigative steps are and can be taken to preserve the
ecological balance.
Therefore, it is humbly contended before the hon’ble court that the law
undermines India’s commitment to reduce GHG emission and combat climate
change.
ISSUE 4. WHETHER THE CONSTRTUCTION OF DAMS WOULD VIOLATE

THE PROVISIONS OF THE NATIONAL GANGA RIVER BASIN AUTHORITY
ACT, 2016?
It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the construction of das
would violate the provisions of NGRBA Act,2016.
Page
21
4.1. National Ganga River Basin Authority Act, 2016
It is humbly submitted that the preamble of the NRGBA Act, 2016 states its
objectives as:
(a) To ensure effective abatement of pollution and conservation of the River

Ganga by adopting a river basin approach to promote inter- sectoral co-
ordination for comprehensive planning and management; and
(b) To maintain minimum ecological flow in the river Ganga with the aim of
ensuring water quality and environmentally sustainable development.
It is further submitted that the NRGBA Act, 2016 along with sustainable
development, ensures the protection of water quality and ecological integrity.
It is submitted that water quality describes the condition of water, including

chemical, physical and biological characteristics, usually with respect to its
sustainability for a particular purpose such as drinking or swimming. 30
4.2. Effect of Dams on Water Quality
It is humbly submitted that generally, reservoirs and artificial lakes have a

large surface area than the rivers and channels that feed them. Larger surface
areas expose more water to the sun, which speeds up evaporation, and due to
the nutrient rich water from traced sediments, dams and reservoirs also
promote aquatic plant growth. The plants’ transpiration contributes to the
already heightened evaporation rate. Every yea, about 170 cubic Kilometers of
water evaporates from the world’s reservoirs. This account for roughly 7% of all
fresh water consumed by human activities.31
It is further submitted that dams disturb the flow and composition of the water
within the rivers and channels. Water released downstream from dams are
unnaturally high energy and very little sediment, which causes “ hungry water”
run forcefully, eroding the riverbeds, without sediment concentration to slow it
down.32 This deepens the riverbed compared to the surrounding water table,
which causes the ground water to rush into the channel and become surface
water- a process known as incision.
4.3. Emission of Green House Gases
30
Article by: Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
31
How dams affect water supply 1727- international rivers org.
32
https://www.wou.edu//as/physic/taylor/g407/kondolf_97.pdf
Page
22
It is humbly submitted that a recent study found that reservoirs account for
about 4% of human made climate change.33
It is further submitted that most reservoirs, especially those in tropical regions,

emit significant amounts of GHG because of anaerobic bacteria that break
down the vegetation at the base of reservoir, giving of carbon dioxide and
methane.
It is humbly submitted that additionally, the changes to river’s timing,

chemical and sediment composition and flow lead to dramatic variations in
floodplains and wetlands, which can cause the destruction of surrounding
forest.34
Therefore it is contended that the construction of dams violates the provisions

of NRGBA act,2016 as the construction is completely against the law and donot
reduce GHG emission and combat climate change rather increases the reasons
of climate change and GHG emission
ISSUE 5. Whether the use of blockchain technology, artificial intelligene

and metaverse- based virtual representation raise new legal and ethical
issues, such as data privacy, intellectual property, and cultural
appropriation, and whether these issues need to be addressed in the
context of the dam construction project?
33
Lima, I.B.T, Ramos, F.M. Bambace, L.A.W. et al. Methane Emissions from large dams as Renewable Energy
Resources: A developing Nation Perspective. Mitig Adapt strateg Glob Change 13, 193-206 (2008)
34
International rivers. Org: Article on how dams affect water supply
Page
23
It is humbly submitted before the hon’ble court that the use of bloc chain
technology, artificial intelligene and metaverse- based virtual representation
will raise new legal and ethical issues, such as data privacy, intellectual
property, and cultural appropriation, and further these issues are need to be
addressed in the context of the dam construction project.
5.1. Artificial intelligence and its problems
It is further submitted that when we look at the adoption of artificial

intelligence from a legal and regulatory point of view, the main issue we need to
consider is, are the existing laws sufficient to address the legal issues which
might arise or do we need a new set of laws to regulate the artificial intelligence
technologies. Whilst certain aspects like intellectual property rights and use of
data to develop artificial intelligence might be covered under the existing laws,
there are some legal issues which might need a new set of regulation to
overlook the artificial intelligence technology.
It is humbly submitted that for the development of better artificial intelligence

technologies, the free flow of data is crucial as it is the main fuel on which
these technologies run. Thus, artificial intelligence technologies must be
developed in such a way that they comply with the existing laws of privacy,
confidentiality, anonymity and other data protection framework in place. There
must be regulations which ensure that there is no misuse of personal data or
security breach. There should be mechanisms that enable users to stop
processing their personal data and to invoke the right to be forgotten. It further
remains to be seen whether the current data protection/security obligations
should be imposed on AI and other similar automated decision-making entities
to preserve individual’s right to privacy which was declared as a fundamental
right by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in KS Puttaswamy & Anr. v Union of India
and Ors[6]. This also calls for an all-inclusive data privacy regime which would
apply to both private and public sector and would govern the protection of
data, including data used in developing artificial intelligence. Similarly,
surveillance laws also would need a revisiting for circumstances which include
the use of fingerprints or facial recognition through artificial intelligence and
machine learning technologies.
At this point in time there are a lot of loose ends to be tied up like the rights
and responsibilities of the person who controls the data for developing artificial
intelligence or the rights of the data subjects whose data is being used to
develop such technologies. The double-edged sword situation between
Page
24
development of artificial intelligence and the access of data for further

additional purposes also needs to be deliberated upon.
Therefore it is submitted that in this evolving world of technology with the

capabilities of autonomous decision making, it is inevitable that the
implementation of such technology will have legal implications. There is a need
for a legal definition of artificial intelligence entities in judicial terms to ensure
regulatory transparency. While addressing the legal issues, it is important that
there is a balance between the protection of rights of individuals and the need
to ensure consistent technological growth. Proper regulations would also
ensure that broad ethical standards are adhered to. The established legal
principles would not only help in the development of the sector but will also
ensure that there are proper safeguards in place.
5.2. Artificial Technonoly in Dam Construction
It is humbly submitted that Artificial intelligence (AI) generally refers to

technology that uses algorithms to process data and simulate human
intelligence. Examples of AI technology include machine learning, image
recognition and sensors-on-site, building information modeling (BIM), and
"smart contracts" stored on a blockchain-based platform. This technology can
be used in the construction industry by way of design, operations and asset
management, and construction itself.
Further it is submitted that Machine learning at its core is a simple process:

using an algorithm and statistics to learn from huge amounts of data. This
type of technology recognizes patterns, extracts specific data, makes data-
driven predictions in real-time, and can optimize many processes. Machine
learning can also help assess project risk, constructability issues, asset
maintenance, and identify various materials and technical solutions. Machine
learning's ability to process and learn from large amounts of data makes the
technology ideal for data-intensive tasks.
5.3. Smart Contracts and Blokchain Technology
It is humbly submitted that "Smart contracts" use computer code that

automatically executes all or parts of an agreement and is stored on a
blockchain-based platform. Like traditional contracts, smart contracts define
the rules and penalties of an agreement; however, smart contracts
automatically enforce their obligations and penalties. Once operational, smart
Page
25
contracts generally require no human intervention to execute and enforce their

terms. An example is automatically transferring funds from one party to
another when specific criteria are met and imposing penalties if certain
conditions are not met. Hybrid contracts, however, consist of a traditional
written contract alongside a smart contract to cover an automated function,
such as payment.
Further it is submitted that smart contracts pose a variety of legal issues.

Since data shared on blockchain technology cannot be altered or modified, it is
virtually impossible to alter the terms of the contract. Additionally, courts will
likely struggle adjudicating smart contracts and blockchain technology due to a
lack of familiarity with the nascent technology. However, as this new
technology is slowly, but increasingly, implemented across industries, the
steepness of the learning curve should decline. Hybrid contracts allow some
automation and provide security for parties by having a written contract that
can easily be read and interpreted by a court, holding the most promise for
industry-wide application.
Therefore it is contended that Technological advancement and the

implementation of AI in construction pose new legal implications and questions
for industry stakeholders. While most concerns can be addressed through
careful drafting of contracts, stakeholders should be aware of these legal
issues. There is still much uncertainty regarding the legal standards,
responsibilities, and expectations of parties when integrating this technology to
construction. However, early adopters stand to gain a competitive advantage
over others who lag behind. Acting not blindly, but with an acute awareness of
legal issues not previously encountered, is of the highest importance.
PRAYER
Wherefore in the light of facts presented, issued raised, arguments advanced and authorities
cited, the counsel on the behalf of petitioner before this hon’ble court pray that it may be pleased
to adjudge and declare that:
Page
26
1. The petitioner have Standing to bring the case and the law will cause significant harm to
the environment of public health.
2. The law violates the Constitutional right to healthy environment and the violation is
justificable under th doctrine of proportionality.
3. The law violates India’s International oobligations under the UNFCCC and Paris
agreement.
4. The construction of dam violates the NRGBA Act, 2016
5. The use of blockchain technology and AI raise new legal and ethical issues in the context
of dam construction project.
Also pass any order that hon’ble court may deem fit in the favour of the petitioner to meet the
ends of equity, justice and good conscience.
For this act of Kindness, the petitioner shall duty bound forever pray.
Counsel for Petitioner
Page
27

PIMR Petitioner

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIMR Petitioner

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PIMR Petitioner

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Padma Shri Dr. N.N.

Jain National Moot Court Competition, 2023

Team Code: P19

Before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana

PIL under Article 32 of Constitution of Indiana

Environmental NGOs & Ors. …………………………….Petitioner

Government of Indiana ……………………………………Respondant

Most Respectfully Submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indiana

MEMORANDUM ON THE BEHALF OF THE PETITONER

1. People’s Union for Democratic rights v. Union of India

B. Online Sources and Research Papers

d. Article 48A and 51A (g)

2. National Ganga River Basin Authority Act, 2016

3. Environment Protection laws and The Environment (Protection) Act,

1. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

F. Online Sources (Case Laws and Judgements)

THE HON’BIE SUPREME COURT EXERCISES JURISDICTION TO HEAR AND

1.1. Passing of Law by Government

The Central Government of Indiana recently passed a law aimed at

1.2. Government’s plan to construct Dam

The government plans to construct a new dam on the river Sanges,

1.3. Impact of Dam on River Sanges

WHETHER THE PETITIONERS HAVE THE STANDING TO BRING THE

WHETHER THE LAW VIOLATES THE CONSTITUTIONL RIGHTS TO A

WHETHER THE LAW VILOATED INDIA’S INTERNATIONAL OBLIGATIONS

WHETHER THE CONSTRTUCTION OF DAMS WOULD VIOLATE THE

WHETHER THE USE OF BLOCKCHAIN TECHNOLOGY, ARTIFICIAL

ISSUE 2. Whether the law violates the constitutional right to healthy

ISSUE 3. Whether the law violates India’s International Obligations under

It is humbly submitted that the law violates India’s International obligations

ISSUE 4. Whether the construction of dam would violate the provisions of

It is humbly submitted that the construction of dam clearly violate the

ISSUE 5. Whether the use of block chain technology, artificial intelligene

Further it is submitted that the river Sanges is a home to several endangered

1.1. Locus Standi

It is submitted that Locus Standi, or standing to sue, is the “right of an

It is humbly submitted that relying on BALCO Employees’ Union (regd.) v.

Further it is submitted that in M/s shantistar Builder v. Narayan Khimalal

1.2.1. Violation of Article 14

It is submitted that article 14 of the consti. Guarantees that “right to equality” 7,

Further it is submitted that the Stockholm Declaration, 1972, also recognized

It is humbly submitted that in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi9, the Sc

It is further submitted that in Bangalore Medical Trust v. B.S. Muddappa &

1.2.2. Right to life and livelihood

Further it is submitted that in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India13, Singh J. stated

It is submitted that the river Sanges is a home to several indigenous

ISSUE 2. Whether the law violates the constitutional right to healthy

It is submitted that mankind is a part of nature and life must be influenced by

2.2. Violation of Article 48A and 51A(g)

It is further submitted that hon’be justice A.R. Lakshmanan in Intellectuals v.

Secondly, affecting water quality and quantity, and;

Thirdly, affecting breeding grounds.

It is further submitted that in Goa Foundation, Goa v. Diksha Holding (pvt.)

2.2. Violation of Fundamental Rights

Further it is submitted that the construction of Hydroelectric dams has an

It is further submitted that in Olga Tellis v. Bombal Municipal Corporation 20,

2.3. Violation is justified under the Doctrine of Proportionality

It is humbly submitted that proportionality means that the administrative

It is further submitted that in Chairman, All India Railway Board v. Shyam