Docsity
Docsity

Prepare for your exams
Prepare for your exams

Study with the several resources on Docsity


Earn points to download
Earn points to download

Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan


Guidelines and tips
Guidelines and tips

Memorandum on Behalf of Petitioner in Environmental NGO Case, Schemes and Mind Maps of Law

A memorandum filed on behalf of a group of environmental ngos and concerned citizens challenging a law passed by the central government of indiana that aims to promote economic growth by allowing large-scale industrial development in ecologically sensitive areas. The law establishes a regulatory body to oversee environmental safeguards, but the petitioners argue that the body lacks independence and is heavily influenced by industry interests. The case also involves a proposed dam project on the sanges river, which the petitioners claim would have significant environmental and social impacts, including the displacement of indigenous communities and the threat to endangered species. The memorandum outlines the legal arguments and authorities relied upon by the petitioners in their challenge to the government's actions.

Typology: Schemes and Mind Maps

2023/2024

Uploaded on 10/03/2023

abhishek-sharma-67
abhishek-sharma-67 🇮🇳

5 documents

1 / 9

Toggle sidebar

This page cannot be seen from the preview

Don't miss anything!

bg1
MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER
MEMORANDUM ON THE BASIS OF PETITIONER
____________________________________________________________________________________
MOOT COURT COMPETITION
FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2022-2023
__________________________________________________________________
BEFORE
THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
__________________________________________________________________
(UNDER ARTICLE 32, AND OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)
IN THE MATTER OF:
ENVIRONMENTAL NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION (NGO) &
Ors
PETITIONER…
VS.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OF INDIANA (CGI)
RESPONDENT…
__________________________________________________________________
UPON THE SUBMISSION OF THE HON’BLE JUDGES
OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
pf3
pf4
pf5
pf8
pf9

Partial preview of the text

Download Memorandum on Behalf of Petitioner in Environmental NGO Case and more Schemes and Mind Maps Law in PDF only on Docsity!


MOOT COURT COMPETITION

FOR ACADEMIC YEAR 2022 - 2023

__________________________________________________________________

BEFORE

THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA

__________________________________________________________________

(UNDER ARTICLE 32 , AND OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA)

IN THE MATTER OF:

ENVIRONMENTAL NON-GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION (NGO) &

Ors

PETITIONER…

VS.

CENTRAL GOVERNMENT OF INDIANA (CGI)

RESPONDENT…

__________________________________________________________________

UPON THE SUBMISSION OF THE HON’BLE JUDGES

OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA

TABLE OF CONTENTS

S.NO. PARTICULAR

1. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

 Statutes referred  Books referred  Websites referred  List of cases  List of abbreviation.

  1. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION
  2. SYNOPSIS OF FACTS

4. STATEMENT OF ISSUES

5. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

6. PRAYER

WEBSITES REFERRED:

 Scribd.law.com

 Advocatekhoj.com

 Indiakanoon.org

 Supremecourtofindia.nic.in

 Highcourt.nic.in

 www.un.org

 www.findlaw.com

 www.supremelaw.in

 www.lawoctopus.com

List of cases

Cases:

(1) KENDRA VS. STATE OF UP & OTHERS ON 12 MARCH 1985.

(2) SHUBHASH KUMAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR ON 9 JANURY,

(3) SHER SINGH VS STATE OF HP ON 6 FEBRUARY, 2014.

(4) S.P GUPTA VERSUS UNION OF INDIA.

(5) MUNCIPALITY VERSUS VARDHICHARAN.

(6) STATE OF WEST BENGAL & AND OTHERS V. SUJIT KUMAR RANA,

(2004) 4 SCC 129

(7) T.N GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD V. U.O.I AND Ors, (2002) 10 SCC 606 (8) STATE OF GUJARAT VERSUS MIRZAPUR MOTI KURESHI KASAB, 26 OCTUBER, (9) Orissa Mining Corporation Vs. Ministry of Environment and Forest &OR’s. vide (10) CARIATUS INDIA VS UNION OF INDIA (11) L.K Koolwal v. State of Rajasthan and Ors, (12) Rural Litigation and Entitlement Kendra, Dehradun v. State of Uttar Pradesh (13) A.P. Pollution Control Board v. Prof. M. V. Nayudu (Retd.) & Ors., (14). MC MEHTA VS UNION OF INDIA

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

ARTICLE 32:

Remedies for enforcement of rights conferred by this part:-

It entitles the citizens of Indiana to move the supreme court or

high court for the enforcement of these rights. The state is

forbidden from making any law that may conflict with the

fundamental rights.

SYNOPSIS OF FACTS

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 industry interests. The law has been challenged by a group of environmental NGOs and concerned citizens in the supreme court of Indiana. The govt. plans to construct a new dam on the river sanges, aimed at increasing the country’s hydroelectric power generation capacity. The proposed dam would be one of the largest in the world, and would have significant environmental and social impact on the region and is located in an area that is home of several endangered species, including the sanges river dolphins and the gharial crocodile, which are both listed as critically endangered under the international union for conservation of nature (IUCN) red list. The area is also home of several indigenous communities who rely on the river for river for their livelihoods, including fishing and agriculture. The petitioners argue that the construction of the dam would violate several environmental laws and that the proposed dam would have significant social and economic impact on the region, including job displacement and inequality. They claim that the dam would result in the displacement of thousand of people, including many from indigenous communities and that the government has not adequately assessed and addressed these impacts. The government argues that the proposed dam is necessary to increase the country’s hydroelectric power generation capacity and reduce its reliance on fossil fuels. They claim that the dam will provide a reliable and suitable source of energy, and that it will create a jobs and stimulate economic growth in the region.