JAI NARAIN VYAS UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
PROJECT

TOPIC:- MOOT FILE

SUBMITTED TO SUBMITTED BY
Dr. JAYA DADHICH PAWAN THANVI
B.A.LLB (5TH SEM)
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I Would Like To Express My Special Thanks Of Gratitude To My

Teacher Dr. JAYA DADHICH she Gave Me The Golden Opportunity
To Do This Wonderful Project On The Topic ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
MOOT FILE Which Also Helped Me In Doing A Lot Of Research And I
Come To Know So Many New Thing. I Am Really Thankful To Them.

Secondly, I Would Also Like To Thank My Parents And Friends and

there support, valuable information, time and guidance, which helped me in
completing this task through various stages and their encouragement
without which this a assignment would not be possible.

Thank you

PAWAN THANVI
BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Under Article 132 of the Constitution of India, 1950

MR. AHMAD ALI

(APPELLANT)

v/s.

AIR JHARKHAND
(RESPONDENT)

ON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

MEMORANDUM ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENT

 TABLE OF CONTENT

1. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION.

2. STATEMENT OF FACTS.

3. STATEMENT OF ISSUES.

4. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS.

5. ARGUMENTS ADVANCED.

6. PRAYER.

Memorandum On Behalf Of respondent

 STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Counsel for the respondent has approached the Jurisdiction to this
Hon’ble Supreme Court of India under Article 132 of the Indian
Constitution, 1950 to hear the present matter and adjudge accordingly.

1 ARTICLE 132 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 :- Appellate

jurisdiction of Supreme Court in appeals from High Courts in certain cases
( 1 ) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, decree
or final order of a High Court in the territory of India, whether in a civil,
criminal or other proceeding, if the High Court certifies underArticle 134A
that the case involves a substantial question of law as t the interpretation
of this Constitution

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

 STATEMENT OF FACTS

Air - Jharkhand (AJ) is a statutory public corporation incorporated by

Parliament through ‘the Jharkhand Air Corporation Limited Act, 2002
having 30% fully paid up share capital acquired by Jharkhand
Government and rest by Central Government.

AJ was developed during the formation of Jharkhand State to boost up

state’s tourism industry with social restructuring of employees and is
presently doing business mainly in area domestic airlines with 15
airbuses as per norms of Director General of Civil Aviation and
Airport Authority of India.

The corporation has the Board of Directors and Board is the highest
authority in the management and regulation of corporation. The Air
Jharkhand Rules, 2004 was framed by corporation which has given
absolute authority to Chairperson of AJ relating to managerial and
decision making process. On 31st September 2011 AJ decided to sale
its 5 aircrafts through one board meeting and as per rules of 2004 one
expert committee was formed under the headship of chief executive
aeronautical engineer to select the aircraft for sale and also to find out
buyer.

On 23rd December a notification was published in local newspaper by

chairman relating to sale of aircrafts through auction and highest
bidder would be able to purchase. Finally 5 aircrafts were sold to
Ranchi based businessman Ram Ratan Lakhani of White star Airlines
on 12th April 2012 at rupees 6 crores which was the highest bidding.
There was a canard that Lakhani group was very much closely
associated with Chairman of AJ.

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

 On 10th august 2012 one of the employees Mr. Ahmad Ali filed a writ
of mandamus at High Court against the decision of AJ about selling of
5 aircrafts. Petitioner also claimed the rules of AJ have given
excessive power to chairman and on the personal interest
chairman has sold aircrafts one of his associates. Due to this
administrative decision corporation has suffered huge loss which has
affected normal course of business. But the
High Court rejected the petition mentioning that petitioner has no
locus standi and also chairman has done everything according to
provision of rules of 2004.

 Now Ali has filed one appeal against the decision of high court.

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

STATEMENT OF ISSUES
1. WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAS A LOCUS STANDI IN THE PRESENT
CASE?

2. WHETHER THERE IS AN EXCESSIVE DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE

POWER TO AIR JHARKHAND?

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

1. WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAS A LOCUS STANDI IN THE PRESENT

CASE?
It is humbly contended before this hon’ble supreme court that the appellant
does not has locus standi in the present case because the air Jharkhand public
corporation has not used an absolute excessive delegation of legislative power
which did not directly or indirectly effect/infringe the right of Mr Ahmad Ali
who is member of the public corporation.

2. WHETHER THERE IS AN EXCESSIVE DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE

POWER TO AIR JHARKHAND?
It is humbly contended before this Hon’ble Supreme Court that there is no
excessive delegation of legislative power to Air-Jharkhand under the Air-
Jharkhand rules, 2004 which was framed by public corporation. But same
power has been provided by the parliament to Air-Jharkhand under Parent Act.
If Air-Jharkhand does any work by using absolute excessive delegation power
under Air-Jharkhand rules, 2004.It do contravene the parent Act and
constitution of India and it is valid.

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED
1. WHETHER THE APPELLANT HAS A LOCUS STANDI IN THE PRESENT
CASE?
It is humbly contended before this Hon’ble Supreme Court that the
appellant does not has a locus standi {the right or capacity to bring an
action or to appear in a court.} in the present case because it Air-
Jharkhand Public Corporation has not used an absolute excessive
delegation of legislative power which did not directly or indirectly
effect/infringe the right of Mr Ahmad Ali who is member of the public
corporation.
The stand by the appellant of locus standi is highly arbitrary by the
appellant as in the higher court it has been dismissed on the grounds that
the power which was exercised was reasonable by the AJ as per the
rules .AJ was given the power and that to absolute power with regard to
the managerial and while excising its exclusive power he has the power to
sell the aircraft.
And as per the question of selling it to the lakahani s white star airline, I
will like to tell the my opposite council that the selling was done on the
basis of auction and the one who bid the highest bid will take the aircraft
and as per the fact auction was taken place and the star airline bids the
highest bid of 6 crore so the appellant has no base to strike the case and
has no local standi.
The locus standi do not apply to this matter as the appellant has directly
approach this hon’ble court and do not availing the opportunity of
resolving this issue in the tribunal{a body established to settle certain
types of dispute}does wasting the precious timing of this hon’ble court
and that’s the reason appeal should be quashed and set aside.
MEANING:-
locus standi {the right or capacity to bring an action or to appear in a
court.}

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

2. WHETHER THERE IS AN EXCESSIVE DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE

POWER TO AIR JHARKHAND?
It is humbly contended before this Hon’ble Supreme Court that there is no
excessive delegation of legislative power to Air-Jharkhand under the Air-
Jharkhand rules, 2004 which was framed by public corporation. But same
power has been provided by the parliament to Air-Jharkhand under
Parent Act. If Air-Jharkhand does any work by using absolute excessive
delegation power under Air-Jharkhand rules, 2004.It do contravene the
parent Act and constitution of India and it is valid.
Delegated legislation (sometimes referred as secondary legislation or
subordinate legislation or subsidiary legislation) is a process by which the
executive authority is given powers by primary legislation to make laws in
order to implement and administer the requirements of that primary
legislation
In this case the power was delegated to the AIR JHARKHAND PUBLIC
COPORATION which was headed by the board of director. As per the
corporation act of 2004, states that the board was given the exclusive
power to make any decision regarding the regulation and management of
the corporation. As the board is the highest authority the act made by the
appellant is highly un- reasonable and straight away should be quashed
and set aside.
All the power exercised by the AJ was very much constitutional and within
the power delegated to them and hence this appeal should quashed and
should remain the status quo made by the judgement of the high court. .
MEANING:-
Delegated legislation:- (sometimes referred as secondary legislation or
subordinate legislation or subsidiary legislation)

Memorandum On Behalf On respondent

PRAYER
Where fore in the light of the facts stated, issues raised, argument
advanced and authorities cited, it is most humbly prayed and implored
before the honourable Supreme Court of the INDIA that it may be
graciously pleaded to adjudge and declare that:

*. THE APPELLANT HAS NO LOCUS STANDI IN THE PRESENT CASE.

* THERE IS NO EXCESSIVE DELEGATION OF LEGISLATIVE POWER TO
AIR JHARKHAND.
&
1. The appeal is not maintainable.
2. The Air Jharkhand Rules, 2004 is valid.

Also pass any order that it may seem fit in the favour of the RESPONDENT
in the light of equity, justice and good conscience for this act of kindness,
the Prosecution shall be duty bound forever pray.

ALL OF WHICH IS RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED.

COUNCEL FOR THE RESPONDENT

Memorandum On Behalf Of respondent