Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

PROF. R.V. DHANAPALAN NATIONAL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION, 2019

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF SINDIA

UNDER ART. 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF SINDIA

IN THE MATTER OF

SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION

PETITIONER

V.

UNION OF SINDIA

RESPONDENT

WRIT PETITION CIVIL NO.- _/2019

MEMORIAL ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER

1|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

Table of Contents

S.N Page
HEADINGS
O. number
1. TABLE OF CONTENTS 2
2. INDEX OF AUTHORITIES
A) STATUTES 4
B) MEMORENDUM OF SETTELMENT 4
C) INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS 4
D) BOOKS REFERRED 5
E) WEBSITES 5
F) CASE LAWS 6
3. TABLE OF ABBREVIATIONS 7
4. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 8
5. STATEMENT OF FACTS 9-11
6. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 12
7. SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS 13
8. THE ARGUEMENT ADVANCED 14-22
I- WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION” ON
SEEKING INTERFERNCE OF SUPREME COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?
A) “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION” HAS LOCUS STANDI TO FILE PIL.
B) ALTERNATIVE REMEADY IS NO BAR.
C) THERE IS VOILATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

II- WHETHER THE CITIZENSHIP TO ILLEGAL MIGRANTS ON PAR WITH

OTHER MIGRANTS UPHOLDS ART 21 AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN
RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE?

1) THE PROCEDURE IS NOT REASONABLE, JUST AND NON-ARBITRARY.

2) EXCLUSION OF PUNIYA MUSLIM ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION IS
AGIAINST THE BASIC FEATURE OF THE CONSTITUION.
3) DISCRIMINATION ON THE BASIS OF RELIGION IS AGAINST
INTERNATIONAL LAWS.

2|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

.III-WHETHER THE AMENDMENT ACT VOILATES FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF

CITIZENS THUS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION?
A) VOILATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF CITIZENS UNDER ART.14,
19, 21 AND ART.29.
B) VOILATION OF THE RIGHTS OF INDEGENOUS PEOPLE.
C) INCONSISTENT WITH THE CLAUSE 6, 7 AND 11 OF ASSAM ACCORD
AND D.P.S.P. UNDER ART. 39, 41 AND ART. 46.
.
9. THE PRAYER 23

3|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

STATUTORY COMPILATIONS:
1. THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950
2. THE CITIZENSHIP ACT,1955
3. THE FOREIGNERS ACT, 1946
4. THE PASSPORT ACT, 1967

MEMORANDUM OF SETTLEMENT:

The Assam accord, 1985

INTERNATIONAL CONVENTIONS:

1. CONVENTION ON THE REDUCTION OF STATELESSNESS, 1961

2. DECLARATION ON THE ELIMINATION OF ALL FORMS OF
INTOLERENCE AND OF DISCRIMINATION BASED ON RELIGION
OR BELIEF,1981
3. DECLARATION ON THE RIGHT OF PERSONS BELONGING TO NATIONAL
OR ETHNIC RELIGIOUS AND LINGUISTIC MINORITIES,1992
4. INTERNATIONAL COVENENT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHT, 1966
5. INTERNATIONAL COVENENT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND
CULTURAL RIGHTS,1966
6. RIO DECLARATION ON ENVIRNMENT AND DEVLOPMENT, 1992

4|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

BOOKS REFERRED:
1) Durga Das Basu, Commentary on the Constitution of India; Nagpur: Wadhwa and
Company (8th ed. 2007).
2) H.M. Seervai, Constitutional law of India, Bombay: N.M. Tripathi Private Ltd. (3rd
ed. 1983).
3) I P Messay Administrative Law, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow ( 8th edition.
2012)
4) J.N. Pandey, Constitutional Law of India, Allahabad: Central Law Agency (42nd
edition2005)
5) M.P Jain, Indian Constitutional Law; Nagpur: Wadhwa and Company (5th edition
2003)
6) Narender Kumar, Constitutional Law of India, Faridabad: Allahabad Law Agency (7th
edition2008)
7) P.M Bakshi, Public Interest Litigation, New Delhi: Ashoka Law House (3rd edition
2012)
8) P.M Bakshi, The Constitution of India; Universal Law Publishing Co. (12th edition
2013)

WEBSITES:

1. www.manupatra.com
2. www.judis.nic.in
3. www.supremecourtcaselaw.com
4. www.scconline.com
5. http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011Census/C-16_25062018_NEW.pdf
6. https://assamaccord.assam.gov.in/portlets/assam-accord-and-its-
clauses#Clause%206%20:%20Constitutional,%20Legislative%20&%20Administrative%20sa
feguards
7. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/UniversalHumanRightsInstruments.a
spx
8. https://www.humanrights.ch/en/standards/un-treaties/

5|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

CASES REFERRED:

1. BodhisattawaGautum v. SubbhraChakraborty.(1996) I SCC 490:AIR 1996 SC 922

2. Daryao vs. State of Uttar pardesh AIR 1961 SC 1457;
3. Delhi Transport Corp. v. DTC Mazdor Congress, AIR 1991 SC 101
4. Gauri Shankar v Union OF India AIR 1955 SC 55 at 58
5. Haji AbdoolShakoor& Co. v. Union of India, JT 2001 (10) SC 438
6. I.M. Chagla v. P.Shiv Shankar,(1981) 4 SCC 1975
7. K.K. Kouchunni V. State of Madras AIR 1959 SC 725

8. Louis De Radet vs. union of India (AIR1991 SC 1886)

9. Menaka Gandhi vs. union of India (AIR 1978 SC 597)

10. P.B.B. CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. DEBYAJOTI BOSE , AIR 2000 Cal 43
11. Prem Chand Garg v Excise Commissioner , AIR 1963 SC 996
12. S.R Bommai vs. union of India AIR 1994 SC 1918
13. Sarbananda Sonowal vs. Union of India (2005) 5 SCC 665
14. Shivram Poddar v. ITO, AIR 1964 SC 1095

15. State of Bombay v. united motors Ltd. AIR 1953 SC 252

16. State of Sikkim v. S.P. Sharma, AIR 1994 SC 2342
17. TilokchandMotichand v. H.B. Munshi, AIR 1970 SC 898
18. Union of India v. Int. Trading Co., AIR 2003 SC 3983)

19. VST industries ltd. Vs. VST industries workers‘s union& Anr. (2001) 1 SCC 298;

6|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

TABLE OF ABREVIATIONS

Anr. Another

Art. Article

A.I.R. All India Reporter

Ed. Edition

Govt. Government

Hon’ble Honorable

I.C. International convention

NGO Non- governmental organization

Ors Others

PIL Public Interest Litigation

S.C Supreme Court

S.C.C. Supreme Court Cases

St. State

U/A Under Article

U.O.I Union Of India

Vs. Versus

W.P. Writ Petition

W.E.F. With Effect From

& And

7|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF SINDIA EXERCISES JURISDICTION TO HEAR

AND ADJUDICATE THE MATTER UNDER ARICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF
SINDIA, 1950

THE HON’BLE COURT HAS AUTHORITY TO DECLARE THE SECTION 6 AA OF

THE CITIZENSHIP AMEMENDMENT ACT, 2019 AS UNCONSTITUIONAL SINCE
THE MATTER IS IMPORTENT FOR THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF THE
CITIZENS, PUBLIC INTREST AND NATIONAL SECURITY. THE PETITIONER HAS
FILED A SINGLE PETITON BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT. THE
PROVISION UNDER WHICH THE PETITIONER HAS APPROACHED THE HON’BLE
COURT IS READ HEREIN AS:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------

Article 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 warrant 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 clauses (1) and (2),
Parliament may by law empower any other court to exercise within the local limits of its
jurisdiction ill 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.

8|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

STATEMENT OF FACTS

BACKGROUND

The Union of Sindia is the second largest populated country. It is the second largest growing
economy and the youngest nation in the world. The country is located in the south East Asia
and shares its border with many countries including Punyadesh, Afanistan, and Balistan.

Punyadesh located in east of Sindia sharing borders with seven of its states with large borders
with two states namely Allam and West Salami. The borders in these two states are easily
breakable as it comprises of land and river Jalnath running in between.

Sindia helped in the liberation of Punyadesh from Balistan in 1971, since inception
Punyadesh has several problems such as high density of population, poverty, and
unemployment and inter and intra religious clashes based on linguistic grounds.

ILLEGAL MIGRATION FROM PUNYADESH TO THE STATE OF ALLAM

In 1950 the state of Allam was created as a separate state of Sindia, it comprised 60% of
major ethnic group namely Allamese and others.

In 1979 a major flood affected the neighboring nation Punyadesh, in 1981, there was sudden
increase in the state of Allam by 35% as per the census whereas the annual growth of the
nation was 22%.

In 1991 the population grew by 40% again and 50 % increase in number of voters, National
People’s Alliance led by Sindian congress signed an accord with the state Student’s union to
make National Register of Citizenship for the state of Allam taking 1991 as cutoff year.

The first NRC draft was released in 1994, where 40 lakh were identified as illegal migrant
and were shifted to camps as the Punyadesh refused any illegal migration from their country.

With frequent floods and other issues in Punyadesh the illegal migration continued, in 2011
the census revealed that the population of state of Allam increased by 50%.

The Allamese people number reduced to 52% of the total population and puniya population
increased to 43%.

The unemployment rate of state of Allam increased to 30%, illegal migrants taking up the
resources and employment opportunities.

9|Page
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

UPDATING NRC AND AMENDMENT IN THE CITIZENSHIP ACT, 1955

In 2015 government opened the NRC and updated it whereas 50 lakh people were identified
as illegal migrants.

In Dec 2017 the Prime Minister of Sindia signed the convention on the reduction of stateless
of 1961, and union of Sindia became party to it.

In 2018, the central legislation passed an amendment in the citizenship Act, 1955 wherein
following change have been made as follows:

Section 6AA

The state shall provide citizenship to illegal migrants from Punyadesh, Afanistan, and
Balistan who have migrated to Sindia on or before 31st December, 2018 except Puniya
speaking Muslims illegal migrants from Punyadesh.

PROVIDED they are resident of Sindia for 6 years continuously in order to maintain
international relations and human rights obligation under international instruments.

Illegal migrants from Punyadesh, Afanistan, Balistan except Puniya speaking Muslims
illegal migrants from Punyadesh, shall be

Exempted from provisions of passport (shall be Sindia) Act, 1920. An Act which mandates
foreigners to carry passports

Exempted from the application of the provisions of the Foreigners Act, 1946 by the central
government.

The provision shall remain in force for granting citizenship till 31st Dec of 2021 until
repealed earlier by the parliament.

Provided all provisions in any law contrary to this section shall remain inoperative till the
section is in operation to the extend needed to accomplish the purpose of this section 6AA

Provided the parliament shall extend the provision for the further period if needed:

The amendment came into force on 31st Dec 2018.

CONSEQUENCES OF THE AMENDMENT AND FILING OF WRIT PRTITION.

After that agitation started in state of Allam which is likely to get affected the most, this Act
was considered as “Anti- Allamese” Act, many referred this Act as political play for attracting
vote bank in election of 2019 by DPA.

Uprising and protest rose in Allam asking for repealing of the Act as stating illegal migrants
as the threat to life of local people, national resource and burden on the nation.

10 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

In this situation the petitioner “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION”, a prominent association
of native Allamese people with many top Allamese ministers and businessman as member
filed a Public Interest Litigation in the Supreme Court questioning the validity of the
amendment Act 2018.

The laws of Sindia are in pari materia with laws of India.

11 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

ISSUE-I
WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION” SEEKING
INTERFERNCE OF SUPREME COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?

ISSUE-II
WHETHER THE CITIZENSHIP TO ILLEGAL MIGRANTS ON PAR WITH OTHER
MIGRANTS UPHOLDS ART 21 AND OTHER ILLEGAL HUMAN RIGHTS
OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE?

ISSUE-III
WHETHER THE AMENDMENT ACT VOILATES FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF
CITIZENS THUS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION?

12 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

SUMMERY OF ARGUMENTS

ISSUE I). WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION”
SEEKING INTERFERNCE OF SUPREME COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?

It is humbly submitted to this hon’ble court that this writ petition is filed by the “SON OF
THE SOIL ASSOCIATION”, a NGO is working for the rights of the Allamese people
because this amendment Act by which government is providing citizenships to illegal
migrants is voilative of the fundamental rights of the citizens, petitioner has locus standi in
this issue , this matter is of national interest, national security and by the virtue of Sec 6AA a
large mass of citizens will be affected therefore petitioner directly approached the hon’ble
supreme court. As alternative remedy is no bar to approach the S.C. Art 32 is itself a
fundamental right of the citizens of Sindia

ISSUE II). WHETHER THE CITIZENSHIP TO ILLEGAL MIGRANTS ON PAR

WITH OTHER MIGRANTS UPHOLDS ART 21 AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL
HUMAN RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE?

It is humbly submitted that this amendment Act is violation of art 21 because this procedure
is not just, fair and reasonable. Exclusion of the other migrants and puniya speaking Muslims
is arbitrary and against to the principle of natural justice. Exclusion on the basis of religion is
against the basic structure of the constitution. The two tier criteria for providing citizenship is
unreasonable and unjust. The exclusion on the ground of religion, language and status is
against the principles of international conventions and customary laws.

ISSUE III) WHETHER THE AMENDMENT ACT VOILOTES FUNDAMENTAL

RIGHRT OF CITIZENS THUS ULTRA VIRES OF THE CONSTITUTION?

It is humbly submitted that this amendment Act which is providing citizenship to Illegal
migrants from Punyadesh, Afanistan, Balistan except Puniya speaking Muslims illegal
migrants from Punyadesh, will increase the burden on the country and due to limited
resources, this will lead to violation of the fundamental rights under Art14, Art 19 and Art 29
of the citizens, this also inconsistent with the Directive principle of state policy under article
39(1), art 41 and art 47. The fundamental rights of indigenous people, living in state of
Allam, have been violated due to influx of illegal migrants, which resulted the violation of
Art-21 of the constitution of Sindia. Therefore it is ultra vires of the constitution.

13 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

THE ARGUMENT ADVANCED

ISSUE I.)WHETHER THE PIL FILED BY “SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION”

SEEKING INTERFERNCE OF SUPREME COURT IS MAINTAINABLE?

This is humbly submitted to this hon’ble S.C. that this P.I.L. filed by the petitioner u/a 32 is
maintainable.

“SON OF THE SOIL ASSOCIATION” HAS LOCUS STANDI TO FILE PIL

A petitioner should have “legal standing” to file a writ petition.1The court can exercise
jurisdiction suo-moto or on the basis of PIL in the absence of any personal approach by the
victim.2 Rules of law will be "substantially impaired" if no one can have standing to maintain
an Action for judicial redress in case of public injury. If breach of public duties was
"allowed" to go underdressed by courts on the ground of standing, it would" promote
disrespect for rule of law."3Any member of the public or social Action group acting bona fide
can invoke the Writ Jurisdiction of the High Courts or the Supreme Court seeking redressal
against violation of legal or constitutional rights of persons. Parliament of Sindia is state
under art 12 of the constitution of Sindia.4 A writ lies only against a person if it is a statutory
body or performs a public function or a statutory duty or state within the meaning of art 12 of
the constitution.5

ALTERNATIVE REMEADY IS NOT A BAR

The S.C. held that the right to approach this court under art 32 is absolute and may not be
impaired on any ground, 6The court may in its discretion exercise writ jurisdiction in spite of
the availability of alternative remedy in following situation: 1) where writ seeks the
enforcement of the fundamental right, 2) where there is failure of the natural justice, 3) where
the vires of the laws is challenged.7 Also, where there is well-founded allegation that

1
P.B.B. CORPORATION OF INDIA VS. DEBYAJOTI BOSE , AIR 2000 Cal 43
2
BodhisattawaGautum v. SubbhraChakraborty.(1996) I SCC 490:AIR 1996 SC 922

3
UpendraBaxi, “Taking Suffering Seriously: Social Action Litigation in the Supreme Court of India”,212
(2014).See also, I.M. Chagla v. P.Shiv Shankar,(1981) 4 SCC 1975
4
Article 12 defines the “state” which includes: Government and Parliament of India
Government and the Legislature of each of the States
All local or other authorities.
5
VST industries ltd. Vs. VST industries workers ‘s union& Anr. (2001) 1 SCC 298; and
6
Prem Chand Garg v Excise Commissioner , AIR 1963 SC 996
7
I.P. Messay ,Administrative law, 321(8th edition 2012)

14 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

fundamental rights have been infringed alternatively remedy is no bar for entertaining writ
petition and granting relief,8 as it is not merely a discretionary power of the court.9

II.) WHETHER THE CITIZENSHIP TO ILLEGAL MIGRANTS ON PAR WITH

OTHER MIGRANTS UPHOLDS ART 21 AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL HUMAN
RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS OF THE STATE?

It is humbly submitted to the supreme court of Sindia that granting citizenship to illegal
migrants and depriving that right to other migrants is violation of Art-21. And exclusion of
puniya Muslims based on religion is against the secularism.

In Menaka Gandhi vs. union of India, 10 The Supreme Court held that a law depriving a
person of his liberty has not only to stand the test of Art-21 but it must also satisfy the
requirement of Art-14. In sindia, all the non- citizens come under the purview of foreigners
Act and non –citizens include both, migrants and illegal migrant. And this amendment Act
allows class legislation. Illegal migrant is a person who crosses an international boundary and
without any valid document, enters into another country for the purpose of carrying on any
illegal or anti-social Activities in that country or for other economic or political purposes.

Exclusion of puniya Muslim on the basis of religion is against the basic structure of
constitution

The illegal immigrants who are to be granted the benefit of this legislation are to qualify for
citizenship only on the basis of religion; a requirement that goes against one of the basic
tenets of the Indian Constitution, secularism.11 Therefore this exclusion on the basis of
religion is unreasonable arbitrary against the principle of equality.

INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHT OBLIGATION OF STATE

In various international conventions the principle of equality and non- discrimination is

given. Exclusion on the basis of religion is also against international laws, i.e.

CONVENTION ON THE REDUCTION OF STATELESSNESS, 1961- Government of

Sindia has signed this convention on Dec 2017. The external affair ministry of union of
Sindia gave a press release stating that for maintaining human right and peace in state, this
Act has been passed but Art-3 of this convention as follows:

Art-3. The Contracting States shall apply the provisions of this Convention to stateless
persons without discrimination as to race, religion or country of origin.

It means that the state shall not discriminate on the ground of religion.

8
State of Bombay v. united motors Ltd. AIR 1953 SC 252 K.K. Kouchunni V. State of Madras AIR 1959 SC 725
;ShivramPoddar v. ITO, AIR 1964 SC 1095

9
Daryao vs. State of Uttar pardesh AIR 1961 SC 1457; TilokchandMotichand v. H.B. Munshi, AIR 1970 SC 898
10
AIR 1978 SC 597
11
S.R Bommai vs. union of India

15 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

Art-38 which deals with reservation clause states as-

Art-38. At the time of signature, ratification or accession, any State may make reservations
to articles of the Convention other than to articles 1, 3, 4, 16 (1) and 33 to 42 inclusive.

Here this convention permits to allow reservation but it does not include reservation on the
basis of religion, race, etc.

INTERNATIONAL COVENENT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHT, 1966

The union of sindia ratified this convention on 10th April, 1979. In this convention the rights
are as follows:

Art 2- . Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all
individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the
present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion,
political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of

Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief, 1981
This declaration is adopted by UN general assembly in which it is clearly declared that state
shall not discriminate on the basis of religion.

Article 2

1. No one shall be subject to discrimination by any State, institution, group of persons, or

person on the grounds of religion or belief.

2. For the purposes of the present Declaration, the expression "intolerance and discrimination
based on religion or belief" means any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based
on religion or belief and having as its purpose or as its effect nullification or impairment of
the recognition, enjoyment or exercise of human rights and fundamental freedoms on an
equal basis.

International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966

In this convention also the discrimination on the basis of religion is prohibited

Art.2 (1). The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to guarantee that the rights
enunciated in the present Covenant will be exercised without discrimination of any kind as to
race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin,
property, birth or other status.

It is humbly submitted that this amendment Act is not fulfilling the international human rights
obligation of the state.

16 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

ISSUE III.) WHETHER THE AMENDMENT ACT VOILATES FUNDAMENTAL

RIGHTS OF CITIZENS THUS ULTRA OF THE CONSTITUTION?

It is humbly submitted that this amendment Act is unconstitutional as it violates following

fundamental rights.

The uncontrolled influx of illegal migrants from Puniyadesh to Assam has caused huge
demographic changes in Allam. The indigenous people who were once the majority has now
become a minority in their own land.

Violation of article 14

Article 14 - Equality before law

“The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the
laws within the territory of India.”

Art 14 prohibits discriminatory laws and guarantees that equals cannot be treated as equals
and unequals cannot be treated as equals.12 It strikes arbitrariness in state executive Action 13
and it would not be justified on the basis of doctrine of classification. 14 due to this
amendment Act the citizens of sindia and the illegal migrants from Punyadesh, Afanistan,
Balistan who have migrated to Sindia on or before 31st December, 2018 except Puniya
speaking Muslims illegal migrants from Punyadesh will be treated as equally that will violate
the right of equality.

M/S SHARMA TRANSPORT REP.BY SHRI D.P.SHARMA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A.P. &
ORS in this case supreme court defined The expression “arbitrarily” means: in an
unreasonable manner, as done capriciously or pleasure, without adequate determining
principle ,reason or judgment, non-rational. ART. 14 primarily a guarantee against
arbiterness or unreasonableness15 as every state Action must be informed by reason and
guided by public interest.16

As we know that the country Sindia is second largest population in the world and also it is top
most supplier of human resource to other country, already we have a large number of citizens
who have prime right over the limited resources of the country in this situation to provide
citizenship to illegal migrants is unreasonable, irrational and grave injustice with the citizens
of the Sindia and it is against the public interest of people of SINDIA. As we have seen the
unemployment rate of state of Allam is increased to 30%.

12
Gauri Shankar v Union OF India AIR 1955 SC 55 at 58
13
Delhi Transport Corp. v. DTC Mazdor Congress, AIR 1991 SC 101
14
Union of India v. Int. Trading Co., AIR 2003 SC 3983)
15
Haji AbdoolShakoor& Co. v. Union of India, JT 2001 (10) SC 438;
16
State of Sikkim v. S.P. Sharma, AIR 1994 SC 2342

17 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

VOILATION OF ARTICLE 19 (1) (e)

All citizens shall have the right- (e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;

It is humbly submitted to this hon’ble court that this Art 19(1) (e) which is exclusively
providing fundamental right to the citizens is violated by this amendment Act, because if the
illegal immigrants will get the citizenship they will have this right to reside and settle in any
territory in the state. The impact of the amendment Act will violate the right to reside and
settle in Sindia.

In Louis De Radet vs. union of India,17 Where supreme court ruled that fundamental right to
the foreigner was confined to Art-21 and did not extend to foreigner the right to reside and
settle in India as stated Art-19(1)(e)

VOILATION OF ART-21

The Writ Petitioners state that State of Allam has repeatedly witnessed ethnic clashes and
violence leading to loss of human lives and destruction of properties. The State is unable to
ensure the safety and security of its inhabitants thereby resulting in a direct infringement of
Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The ethnic riots and armed movements witnessed in
Assam are well documented. It is submitted that the continuous and frequent ethnic clashes
and conflicts is hugely disruptive of community development and is also in gross violation of
the right to life and dignity. Ethnic clashes arises out of existential threat perceptions, fear of
being reduced to minority in one's own homeland and/or giving up territories to foreigners,
imposition of foreign or alien culture. Ever since the dawn of human civilization every group
and community in the world has fiercely defended their homeland from the invaders.

In the case of Sarbananda Sonowal vs. Union of India, 18 the hon’ble court came to the
categorical conclusion to the effect that “…there can be no manner of doubt that the State of
Assam is facing “external aggression and internal disturbance” on account of large- scale
illegal migration of Bangladeshi nationals. It, therefore, becomes the duty of the Union of
India to take all measures for protection of the State of Assam from such external aggression
and internal disturbance as enjoined in Article 355 of the Constitution.

Right to livelihood also protected Art.21the supreme court in Olga Telis v. Bombay
Municipal Corporation , 19 a five judge bench of the court now implied that the , ‘the right to
livelihood’ is borne out of the ‘the right to life’, as no person can live without the means of
living , that is the means of livelihood. The influx of migrants will attack on the jobs and

17
AIR1991 SC 1886
18
(2005) 5 SCC 665
19
1985 SCC (3) 545

18 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

opportunities on which the people of state of Allam have prime right. It can be seen that the
unemployment rate of state of Allam increased to 30%

It is humbly submitted that from alien attack and illegal occupation, right to protect their own
homeland, territory, culture, honor and dignity from illegal alien occupation is an inviolable
right that exists in every group and community. The petitioners submit that the unabated
influx of illegal immigrants into their land violates this basic right of the Allamese
Community and has put at jeopardy the very existence of their culture, religion and national
identity.

VOILATION OF ART. 29 (1)

Article 29 - Protection of interests of minorities

Any section of the citizens residing in the territory of India or any part thereof having a
distinct language, script or culture of its own shall have the right to conserve the same.

This amendment Act violates the fundamental rights of the people of Allam because the
language, culture of the Allamese people and the indigenous Kinvi speaker has been badly
affected by the influx of these illegal migrants. The census based on language reveals that the
percentage of Allamese speaker in Allam is further declined to 48.38% in 2011 from 48.80 in
2001. While percentage of Puniya speaker increased to 28.97% in 2011 from 27.54%.
Number of Kinvi Speakers declined to 4.53% of the total population from 4.86% in 2001. In
1991, the percentage of Allamese speaker in Allam was 57.81% and that of puniya was
21.67%.20

Declaration on the rights of persons belonging to National or Ethnic, religious and linguistic
minorities. 199221

This declaration was done exclusively for the protection of the rights of minorities. Art. 1 and
Art. 5 bound the state to take care of these minorities.

Article 1
1. States shall protect the existence and the national or ethnic, cultural, religious
and linguistic identity of minorities within their respective territories and shall
encourage conditions for the promotion of that identity.
2. States shall adopt appropriate legislative and other measures to achieve those
ends.

20
http://www.censusindia.gov.in/2011Census/C-16_25062018_NEW.pdf
21
Adopted by General Assembly resolution 47/135 of 18 December 1992

19 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

Article 5

1. National policies and programmes shall be planned and implemented with

due regard for the legitimate interests of persons belonging to minorities.
It is humbly submitted that in this amendment Act, the interest of cultural and linguistic
minority is not taken into account.

RIGHTS OF INDEGENOUS PEOPLE OF ALLAM

The indigenous people’s rights have been adversely affected and will be violated because of
this amendment Act. The Sixth Schedule of the Indian Constitution provides a separate
administrative system for the tribal areas of the Northeastern region to protect the tribes from
political and economic exploitation The various provisions of the 6the Schedule also allowed
these indigenous people to preserve their distinct identity, history, customary practice and
traditional beliefs.

It is humbly submitted to this hon’ble supreme court that in many international conventions
the rights of indigenous people is been provided which should be taken into consideration.

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 2007

Sindia is the signatory in this convention and this convention was made for the protection of
Indigenous People.

Art. 5- Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct political,
legal, economic, social and cultural institutions, while retaining their right to participate fully,
if they so choose, in the political, economic, social and cultural life of the State.

Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 22

Art. 2- 1. Governments shall have the responsibility for developing, with the participation of
the peoples concerned, co-ordinate and systematic Action to protect the rights of these
peoples and to guarantee respect for their integrity.

2. Such Action includes

(b) Promoting the full realization of the social, economic and cultural rights of these peoples
with respect for their social and cultural identity, their customs and traditions and their
institutions;

22
Adopted on 27 June 1989 by the General Conference of the International Labour Organisation at its seventy-
sixth session

20 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, 1992

Principle 22 of this declaration talks about the importance of indigenous people for
environment.

Principle 22- Indigenous people and their communities, and other local communities, have a
vital role in environmental management and development because of their knowledge and
traditional practice. States should recognize and duly support their identity, culture and
interests and enable their effective participation in the achievement of sustainable
development

This amendment Act is also contrary to the accord which was signed between the government
and Allam student’s union. Clause 6, clause 7 and clause 11 will be violated by this
amendment Act.

Clause 6: Constitutional, Legislative & Administrative safeguards

Constitutional, legislative and administrative safeguards, as may be appropriate, shall be

provided to protect, preserve and promote the cultural, social, linguistic identity and
heritage of the Assamese people. 23

Clause 7: Economic Development

. The Government takes this opportunity to renew their commitment for the speedy all
round economic development of Assam, so as to improve the standard of living of the
people.

Clause 11: Restricting acquisition of immovable property by foreigners

11. It will be ensured that the relevant law restricting acquisition of immovable property by
foreigners in Assam is strictly enforced.

It is humbly submitted that this amendment Act is contrary to the D.P.S.P. as under article
39(1), art 41 and art 46

ART. 39. The State shall, in particular, direct its policy towards securing –
(a) that the citizen, men and women equally, have the right to an adequate means of
livelihood;

23
https://assamaccord.assam.gov.in/portlets/assam-accord-and-its-
clauses#Clause%206%20:%20Constitutional,%20Legislative%20&%20Administrative%20safeguards

21 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

ARTICLE 41: RIGHT TO WORK, TO EDUCATION AND TO PUBLIC ASSISTANCE IN

CERTAIN CASES
The State shall, within the limits of its economic capacity and development, make effective
provision for securing the right to work, to education and to public assistance in cases of
unemployment, old age, sickness and disablement, and in other cases of undeserved want.

ARTICLE 46: PROMOTION OF EDUCATIONAL AND ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF

SCHEDULED CASTES, SCHEDULED TRIBES AND OTHER WEAKER SECTIONS
The State shall promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the
weaker sections of the people, and in particular, of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes, and shall protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.

22 | P a g e
 Memorial on behalf of The Petitioner

THE PRAYER

In the light of issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited it is most
humbly and respectfully submitted that this Hon’ble Court may adjudge and
declare that:
In W.P.( PIL) NO.---/2019 that

PIL filed by “Son of the Soil Association” is maintainable.

The citizenship to illegal migrants on par with other migrants does not uphold
Art-21 and other international human rights obligations of the state.

The Amendment Act violates the fundamental rights of the citizens thus ultra
vires of the constitution.

The hon’ble court may also be pleaded to pass any other order, which this
hon’ble court may deem fit in the light of justice, equity and good conscience.

Counsel for Petitioners

Place:
Date:

23 | P a g e