TEAM CODE: VAAGAI

THE INTER-COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT

COMPETITION (2022-2023)

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF YAVANA

UNDER ARTICLE.32 IN THE MATTER OF

WRIT PETITION NO. OF 2022

DIGNITY ASSURANCE FOR YAVANINANS …………………………… PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF YAVANA ………………………….. RESPONDENT

AND

NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ………………………… PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF YAVANA ………………………… RESPONDENT

AND

MRS.MERSINA & 3 OTHERS ……………………… PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF YAVANA ……………………… RESPONDENT

AND

SENGAI VALLEY DWELLER’S SOCIETY ………………………… PETITIONER

VERSUS

UNION OF YAVANA ………………………… RESPONDENT

MEMORANDUM ON THE BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT

UPON SUBMISSION TO THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF YAVANA
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………… II

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES………………………………………………….…… III

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION………………………………………….…… IV

STATEMENT OF FACTS………………………………………………………… V

ISSUES RAISED…………………………………………………..……….……… VI

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS…………………………………………………… VII-VIII

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED……………………………………………………… 1-24

1. WHETHER THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL

SCAVENGER AND THEIR REHABILITATION ACT, 2013
ISCONSTITUTIONALLY VALID ? 1-8

2. WHETHER GOVERNMENT HAS COMPLIED WITH ITS

INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS? 9 - 13

3. WHETHER THE DEPENDANTS OF THE DECEASED WERE

ENTITLED TO CLAIM COMPENSATION? 14-17

4. WHETHER THE BIO-MEDICAL WASTE DISPOSAL

REGULATIONS ARE FULFILLING THE CONSTITUTIONAL
MANDATES? 18-24

PRAYER…………………………………………………………………………. IX

I
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AIR All India Reporter

Hon’ble Honorable

SCR Supreme Court Reports

SCC Supreme Court Cases

Vs/v. Versus

DM District Magistrate

SRMS Self-employment Scheme for Rehabilitation

of Manual Scavengers
RGA Rashtriya Garima Abhiyan

ICERD International Convention on the Elimination

of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
ICCPR International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights
PHRA Protection of Human Rights Act

NHRC National Human Rights Commission

ILO International Labour Organization

UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights

CrPC Code of Criminal Procedure

GHS Global Healthcare Service

WHO World Health Organization

CSR Corporate Social Responsibility

ICESCR International Covenant on Economic, Social

and Cultural Rights
NSKFDC National Safai Karamcharis Finance and
Development Corporation

II
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

1. A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras, AIR 1950 SC 27

2. Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India, AIR 1980 S.C. 1622
3. B.L. Wadehra v. Union of India and others, AIR 1996 SC 2969 ILR (2001) AP 323,
(328) (DB) Appeal No. 63 0f 2012
4. C.S. Prakash and others v. the HUDA and others, 2001
5. Haat Supreme Wastech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Haryana &Ors, Appeal No. 63 of
2012
6. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs Union of India, (1996) 5 SCC 281
7. Kanubhai Brahmbhatt v State of Gujarat, AIR 1987 SC 1159
8. Kesavananda Bharati Vs. Union of India, Writ petition (civil) 135 of 1970
9. Keshwanand Bharati v. State of Kerala, Writ Petition (civil) 135 of 1970
10. Kihoto Hollohan Vs. Zachillhu, 1992 SCR (1) 686, 1992 SCC Supl. (2) 651
11. M.C. Mehta vs Union of India, AIR 1987 SC 965
12. Nihal Kaur v. Director, P.G.I., Chandigarh, August 23,1996
13. P.N. Kumar Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi, Writ Petition No. 9144 of 1983
14. R.M.D.C vs Union of India, 1957 AIR 628, 1957 SCR 930
15. Ratlam Municipality case, 1980 AIR 1622, 1981 SCR (1) 97,1980 SCC (4) 162
16. Satish Chandra v. Registrar of Cooperative Societies, 1994 3 SCR 618, 1994 (2) UJ
280 SC, (1994) 4 SCC 332.
17. State of Bombay v. Balsara, 1951 AIR 318, 1951 SCR 682
18. State of West Bengal vs Kesoram industries, Appeal (civil) 1532 of 1993

III
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of Yavana has the jurisdiction in this matter under Article 32 of
the Constitution of Yavana which reads as follows:

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 warranto and certiorari,
whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this
Part.

IV
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. Union of Yavana is the second most populous Nation in the World. The Yavanian
Constitution is the finest and lengthiest Constitution in the World and it describes the
human dignity of an individual at the core of its heart.
2. In efforts to abolish the practice of manual scavenging the Government have formulated
the Safai Karamchari Andolan in 1994. Safaimitra Suraksha Challenge, launched in 2021,
aims to completely mechanize all septic and sewage tank cleaning operations in 243 cities
across Yavana by 2023. In ensuring dignity life for manual scavengers, Yavana banned
the practice of Manual Scavenging under the Prohibition of Employment as Manual
Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.Dignity Assurance for Yavanians, a Non-
Governmental Organization filed public interest litigation in the Supreme Court to
challenge the constitutionality of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger
and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.
3. Global Healthcare Services (GHS) is a Multi-National Company situated in a commercial
complex in Maruvai. GHS had a contract with “Navila Multi-Services” (NMS) a
sanitation service, who do septic and sewage tank cleaning operations. On that day, the
NMS was not available even after continues calls. They hired Mrs. Mangai Selvendiran,
Mr. Selvendiran, and Mr. Arivu, for manual scavenging. They were offered to pay Rs.
600 per head per day.
4. Selvendiran and Arivu first stepped inside the tank to clean it, but they couldn’t tolerate
the smell and fell unconscious. Ms. Jonila, a Utopian citizen, was conducting her research
in the Maruvai, she witnessed the struggle of Mangai and moved to give her hands, but
losing her balance she fell inside the septic tank and consequently died along with the
other three.
5. The Maruvai police registered a case under Section 304 read with Section 107 & Section
109 of Yavanian Penal Code and they was arrested the General Manager of GHS.
Subsequently, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of Yavana took suo
moto cognizance on the issue. Understanding the severity of the case NHRC decides to
move the matter to the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Yavanian Constitution.
Mrs. Mersina mother of Jonila rushed to Yavana and filed an Intervention Application to
implead in the case for claiming compensation for the sewer deaths. The Apex court
admitted the application.
6. GHS also owns a huge plant of incinerator for medical waste in suburban of Maruvai
which is adjacent to the “Sengai Valley” gated community consist of 500 residents. Of
late the residents experienced throat infection, lung problems, headaches, fainting,
eyesight problems, nausea and even coughing blood and there are several cases reported
in Sengai Valley hospitals. Society approached the GHS as their incineration producing
noxious fumes in the vicinity of Sengai Valley, the situation was totally ignored by GHS.
Society approached the State Pollution Control board (SPCB) of Poigai. Since, there is no
satisfactory actions on the part of SPCB of Poigai, the Society filed a writ petition in the
Apex Court of the Union of Yavana.
7. The Apex Court of Yavana integrated all the above petitions and scheduled the matter for
a hearing.

V
THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

ISSUES RAISED

ISSUE I

WHETHER THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL

SCAVENGER AND THEIR REHABILIATION ACT, 2013 IS
CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID?

ISSUE 2

WHETHER GOVERNMENT HAS COMPLIED WITH ITS

INTERNATIONAL COMMITMENTS?

ISSUE 3

WHETHER THE DEPENDANTS OF THE DECEASED WERE ENTITLED

TO CLAIM COMPENSATION?

ISSUE 4

WHETHER THE BIO-MEDICAL WASTE DISPOSAL REGULATIONS ARE

FULFILLING THE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES?

VI
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

SUMMARY OF ARGUMENTS

Whether the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation

Act, 2013 is constitutionally valid?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the petition filed by
the Petitioner is regarding the constitutional validity of the Prohibition of Employment as
Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013. It is further pleaded that the Act does
not violate the fundamental right under Article 21 and Article 14. It is further requested to the
Hon’ble Court to dismiss the case.

Whether Government has complied with its International Commitments?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the Government has
complied with its International Commitments. It is further submitted that the Government has
enacted several Act such as the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 in accordance with its
International Commitments. Hence it is pleaded to dismiss the petition filed.

VII
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

Whether the dependents of the deceased were entitled to claim compensation?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the dependents of
the deceased are not entitled to claim the compensation from Government of Yavana. It is
further submitted that there is an alternative remedies available to the dependents of the
deceased so we hereby plead the court to give direction to claim compensation from the
Global Healthcare Service under Victim Compensation Scheme and Fatal Accident Act.

Whether the Bio-Medical Waste Disposal Regulations are fulfilling the Constitutional
mandates?

It is humbly submitted before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the Bio-Medical
Waste Disposal Regulations are fulfilling the Constitutional mandates. It is submitted that the
Bio-Medical Waste Disposal Regulations does not violate the Article 21. It is further
submitted that the Bio-Medical Waste Disposal Regulations are framed in exercise of the
powers conferred upon it by Sections 5, 8 & 25 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986.

VIII
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED

WHETHER THE PROHIBITION OF EMPLOYMENT AS MANUAL SCAVENGER

AND THEIR REHABILIATION ACT, 2013 IS CONSTITUTIONALLY VALID?

1. It is most humbly submitted before the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the
Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 does
not violate the Constitution of Yavana.
2. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act 2013
is an Act to provide for the prohibition of employment as manual scavengers,
rehabilitation of manual scavengers and their families and for matters connected therewith
or incidental thereto.
3. The purpose of this enactment is to get rid of dehumanising practice of manual scavenging,
arising from continuing existence of insanitary latrines and a highly inquitious caste
system still persists in various parts of the country and it has been brought up to correct the
historical injustice and indignity suffered by the manual scavenger and to rehabilitate them
to a life of dignity.1
4. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act 2013
contains the following provision for abolition of manual scavengers effectively :
 Identification of insanitary latrines and manual scavengers :
 Section 4 - Every local authority (municipality, panchayat, cantonment board
or railway authority) has to carry out a survey of insanitary latrines within its
jurisdiction.
 The authorities have to publish a list of such latrines within two months of the
law coming into force and give notice to the occupiers to either demolish or
convert them into sanitary latrines within six months.

*The legal system and legislations of India are in pari material with that of Yavana
1
The preamble of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act 2013

1
THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

 Section 11 - The Chief Executive Officer of a municipality or a panchayat

may conduct a survey to identify manual scavengers. Individuals may also
self-identify as manual scavengers.
 Prohibition and conversion of insanitary latrines :(Section 5)
 Every occupier (and in some cases, owner) of an insanitary latrine shall
demolish or convert the latrine into a sanitary latrine at his own cost within
six months of the Act. If he/she fails to do so, the local authority shall convert
or demolish the latrine and be entitled to recover the cost from the occupier.
 State governments may provide assistance to occupiers for converting
latrines. However, non-receipt of assistance shall not be a valid ground to use
an insanitary latrine beyond nine months of the law in force.
 Each local authority shall carry out an awareness campaign to enforce the
above provisions of the law.
 Prohibition and rehabilitation of manual scavengers :
 Existing contracts with manual scavengers shall be void once the law is in
force.(Section 6). However, the employer shall retain full-time scavengers on
the same salary and assign different work to them.
 All persons listed as manual scavengers shall be rehabilitated with one-time
cash assistance, scholarships for their children and a residential plot with
financial assistance for constructing a house. One adult member of the family
will be trained in a livelihood skill and given a monthly stipend of at least Rs
3,000 during training. A subsidy and concessional loan shall also be given for
taking up an alternative occupation.(Section 13)
 Implementing authorities under the 2013 Act :
 Each District Magistrate (DM) and local authority is responsible for ensuring
that:(Section 19)
o No person within his jurisdiction is engaged as a manual scavenger,
o No insanitary latrines are constructed, maintained or used
o Manual scavengers are rehabilitated and
o Offenders of the Act are investigated and prosecuted.

2
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

 In addition to the DM, the state government may appoint subordinate officers
and inspectors. They shall be responsible for carrying out the said duties.
o Examining of latrines, open drains, premises to establish offence under
this Act
o Examining a person employed as manual scavenger
o Seizing relevant records establishing offence on the part of the
employer
 The law mandates that the implementing authorities create provisions for the
construction of an adequate number of sanitary community latrines to
eradicate open defecation within their jurisdiction and for the use of
appropriate technological appliances for cleaning sewers and septic tanks.
 Central and State Monitoring Committees, and Vigilance Committees shall be
established in each district to oversee implementation.(Section 29,26 and 24)
 The National Commission for Safai Karamcharis (a statutory body) shall
monitor implementation and inquire into complaints about contraventions of
the Act.[2]
It is submitted that the above provision are adequate to eradicate the practice of manual
scavenging and are not contrary to any of the fundamental rights conferred in the Indian
Constitution.
5. Prohibition of Manual Scavenging and their Rehabilitation Rule 2013 have the following
rules:
 There is a clear mention of employers obligation towards employees engaged in
cleaning septic tank and sewer which includes :
 Rule 4 - 44 types of protective gears and 14 types of cleaning devices.
 Rule 6 - A periodical check of safety devices and Protective gears in every 6
months and Comfortable bodysuits.
 Rule 4 to 8[3] obliges the employers to provide protective gears and safety devices to
the Manual Scavengers whom they engage in cleaning sewers and septic tanks. Also,

2
http://www.dalits.nl/pdf/ResourceHandbookForEndingManualScavenging.pdf
3
Prohibition of Manual Scavenging and their Rehabilitation Rules 2013

3
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

the sections mention the precautions that must be taken before, during and after the
process of cleaning.[4]
 Rule 7[5] states that employer shall ensure the following safety precautions at the time
when the person is engaged in the cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank:
 Flashlights and communication devices such as two-way radios shall be carried
into sewer.
 The employer shall ensure availability of ambulance anf follow-up in close
proximity.
 Rule 8[6] states that the employer shall ensure the following post-cleaning safety
precautions after a person engaged in the cleaning of a sewer or a septic tank comes
out of the sewer or septic tank after a session of cleaning-
 Provide facilities for removal of contaminated clothing and for wash-up as well as
cleaning, dry clothing.
 Wash-up material shall include but not br limited to water, soaps, hand sanitizers
and adequate and medically authenticated skin cream for applying on the body for
post cleaning safety.
 Any cuts/bruises on the skin or problems with a respiratory organ suffered on
account of cleaning of sewer shall be immediately cured.
These provisions are expressly provided to safeguard, rehabilitate and protect manual
scavengers.
6. Penalty prescribed in the 2013 Act:
a. The penalty for employing manual scavengers or failing to demolish insanitary
latrines is imprisonment of one year and/or a fine of Rs. 50,000 for the first
offence. Subsequent offences will be punished with imprisonment up to two years
and/or a fine of Rs. 1,00,000. The penalty for the hazardous cleaning of septic
tanks and sewers is imprisonment of two years and/or a fine of Rs. 2,00,000 for the
first offence, and five years and/or a fine of Rs. 5,00,000 for subsequent offences.

4
https://idsn.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Report-Justice-Denied-Death-of-workers-engaged-in-manual-
scavenging-while-cleaning-the-Septic-tank-or-Sewer2.pdf
5
Prohibition of Manual Scavenging and their Rehabilitation Rules 2013
6
Ibid

4
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

b. Offences under this law are cognizable and non-bailable(Section 22). The law
permits the state government to confer powers of a Judicial Magistrate of the first
class on an Executive Magistrate to conduct trials. Complaints have to be made
before the court within three months of the offence.(Section 10)
7. Doctrine of Severability: This doctrine means that if an offending provision can be
separated from that which is constitutional then only that part which is offending is to be
declared void and not the entire statute.
8. The doctrine of severability was considered by the supreme court of India in the case of
R.M.D.C vs Union of India[7] and the rules regarding severability was laid down in this
case-
1. The intention of the legislature behind this is the determine whether the invalid portion of
the statute can be severed from the valid part or not.
2. And if it happens that the both the valid and invalid parts can‘t be separated from each
other then the invalidity of the portion of the statute will result in invalidity of the whole act.
3. Even if it happens that the invalid portion is separate from the valid portion.
The foundation of this power of judicial review is that the constitution which is the
fundamental law of the land, is the will of the people, while the statute is only the creation of
the elected representatives of the people, when therefore the will of the legislature as
declared in a statute, stands in opposition to that of the people as declared in the
Constitution, the will of the people must prevail [8].
9. It is submitted that apart from constitutional limitation, no law can be struck down on the
ground that it is unreasonable or unjust was held in the case of Kesavananda Bharati Vs.
Union of India[9] .
10. In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras[10] the Supreme Court while declaring Section 14 of
the Preventive Detention Act, 1950 observed that the impugned Act minus this section can
remain unaffected. The omission of the section will not change the nature or the subject of
the legislation. Therefore the decision that Section 14 is ultra vires does not affect the
validity of the rest of the Act.

7
1957 AIR 628, 1957 SCR 930
8
Heba Ali, Doctrine of Severability, June 25 2019,https://blog.ipleaders.in/doctrine-of-severability/,Accessed on
9
Writ petition (civil) 135 of 1970
10
AIR 1950 SC 27

5
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

11. In State of Bombay v. Balsara[11] a case under Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949, it was
observed that the provisions which have been declared as void do not affect the entire
statute therefore there is no necessity for declaring the statute as invalid[12].
[13]
12. Kihoto Hollohan Vs. Zachillhu which is very famously known as the defection case.
In this case the paragraph 7 of the Tenth Schedule which was first inserted by the 52nd
Amendment Act of 1985 was declared as unconstitutional because it had violated the
provisions under Article 368(2)[14]. But, the whole part was not declared unconstitutional.
So, the rest of the Tenth Schedule excluding paragraph 7 was upheld by the Constitution.
13. The Act is a result of Article 46[15] of the constitution provides that the state shall protect
the weaker sections and particularly, the scheduled castes and the scheduled tribes from
social injustice and all forms of exploitation.
14. Thus the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act,
2013 does not violate the Constitution of Yavana.

Facts and Figures:

 An Indian start-up called Genrobotics has made the world‘s first manhole-cleaning robot,
which it calls ‗Bandicoot‘. The four-legged robot weighs 50 kg and cleans a manhole in a
mere 20 minutes, which would take three workers 2-3 hours. The robot has a magnetic
mechanism to lift the manhole lid on its own, while a technician can also lower it into a
manhole to clear blockage. It has one arm with a 360-degree rotating ability. The legs
latch on to the walls inside the drainage pipe to balance the robot while the arm scrapes
the sewer debris and dumps it into a bucket-like structure on the main body of the robot.
 Government of India appointed several committees, commissions to deal with problems
of manual scavenging and suggest appropriate practical recommendation, policy
measures to abolish its practices and their social inclusion. They are;
(i) The Scavengers‘ Living Conditions Enquiry Committee,1949 (ii) Backward
Classes Commission,1953 (iii) Central Advisory Board for Harijan welfare, 1956 (iv)

11
1951 AIR 318, 1951 SCR 682
12
https://aishwaryasandeep.com/2021/10/08/laws-inconsistent-with-or-in-derogation-of-fundamental-rights/
13
1992 SCR (1) 686, 1992 SCC Supl. (2) 651
14
Article 368 (2) of the Indian Constitution
*The legal system and legislations of India are in pari material with that of Yavana.
15
Article 46 of the Indian Constitution, 1950.

6
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

Scavenging Conditions Enquiry Committee, 1958 (v) Committee on Customary

Rights to Scavengers, 1965 (vi) National Commission on Labour, 1966 (vii)
Committee on Conditions of Sweepers and Scavengers, 1968 (viii) 1991 Task Force
for Tackling the problem of scavengers and suggesting measures to abolish
scavenging with particular emphasis on their rehabilitation[16]
 It is submitted that Legislative efforts of Government for eradicate manual scavenging
are;
o The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
o The SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989
o Employment of Manual Scavengers and Construction of Dry Latrines (Prohibition)
Act, 1993
o Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013
 Rehabilitation:
‗Self-employment Scheme for Rehabilitation of Manual Scavengers‘ (SRMS). Each
identified manual scavenger would receive a loan from a public sector bank, and
subsidy; some would also receive training. Government reports that under 500,000
scavengers have been assisted since 1993 with loan and subsidy under this
programme[17].
 Rashtriya Garima Abhiyan (here after RGA) has been working for the liberation and
rehabilitation of manual scavenger around 31000 women and men from the inhuman
practice of manual scavenging. The campaign played a major role in the formulation of
MS Act 2013. Being the member of Central Monitoring Committee, it has successfully
facilitated the recent survey of identification of Manual Scavengers.
 Under the Swachh Bharat Mission, since October 2, 2014, more than 10.94 crore
sanitary toilets have been constructed in rural areas and over 62.65 lakh in urban areas.
Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment has launched a mobile app ―Swachhata
Abhiyaan‖ on 24.12.2020 to capture the data of insanitary latrines and manual

16
Srivastava, 1997; Parameshara, 2013, Noronha, Singh and Malik, 2018, p. 7
17
http://www.dalits.nl/pdf/ResourceHandbookForEndingManualScavenging.pdf

7
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

scavengers. Any person can upload the data of insanitary latrines and manual
scavengers on the mobile app[18].
 In addition to these committees and legislative efforts, the government has formulated
some schemes and rehabilitation programs for the people, who are systematically forced
to take up inhuman practice like manual scavenging. They are;
(i) Valmiki Ambedkar Malin Basi Awas Yojna (VAMBAY), 2001, (ii) Pre-Metric
Scholarships for the Children of those Engaged in Unclean Occupations (iii) Total
Sanitation Campaign (TSC), 1999, (iv) National Scheme of Liberation and
Rehabilitation of Scavengers (NSLRS), 1992, (v) Integrated Low Cost Sanitation
Scheme (ILCS), 1980-81, (vi) Self-employment scheme for rehabilitation of manual
scavenging (SRMS), 2007, (vii) Nirmal Bharat Abhiyaan (NBA) and Swachh Bharat
Abhiyaan (SBA), 2012 & 2014, (viii) National scheme of liberation and rehabilitation
of scavengers and their dependents (NSLRSD), (xi) Integrated low cost sanitation
scheme, (x) Pay and Use Toilet Scheme, (xi) National Safai Karamcharis Finance and
Development Corporation (NSKFDC), 24 Jan, 1997, (xii) Assistance to State Scheduled
Castes Development Corporations (SCDCs), 1978[19] .
 The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and their Rehabilitation
(Amendment) Bill, 2020:
○ It proposes to completely mechanise sewer cleaning, introduce ways for ‗on-site‘
protection and provide compensation to manual scavengers in case of sewer deaths.
○ It will be an amendment to The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavengers and
their Rehabilitation Act, 2013.

18
http://cpcb.nic.in/technical-guidelines-2
19
https://barti.in/upload/pdf/Manual_Scavenging_report.pdf

8
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

WHETHER GOVERNMENT HAS COMPLIED WITH ITS INTERNATIONAL

COMMITMENTS?

1. It is most humbly submitted in the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the petition
filed is that whether the Government has complied with its International Commitments.
2. It is submitted that the Government of Yavana has complied with all of its International
Commitments.
3. Constitutional Provisions related to International obligations [20]:
 Article 51: The state has the responsibility to promote international peace and
security in the nation and maintain just and honourable relations with other
nations.
o This Article tells the state to respect international law but does not
explicitly make it a part of the Indian laws.
o Article 51 of the constitution is a directive principle which is to be
understood with Article 37 of the Constitution of India.

Article 51(c) [Promotion of International Peace and Security] The basic provision
of the Constitution of India, by virtue of which international law becomes
implementable through municipal laws of India is Article 51 (c)

 Legislative powers of the government:

o According to Article 253, the parliament has the sole right to make
laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India with the motive
of executing an international treaty, agreement or convention with
other countries or any decision made at any association or conference.

Thus Article 253 empowers the parliament to pass laws on matters mentioned in list II of
schedule VII in order to execute international treaties, agreements and conventions.

The legal system and legislations of India are in pari material with that of Yavana
20
https://www.drishtiias.com/printpdf/india-and-international-law-part-1

9
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

4. India is a party to more than one hundred and sixty treaties and conventions dealing with
various fields of law like air law, space law and maritime law.
5. The Legal & Treaties Division was established in the Ministry of External Affairs in
1957 as a nodal point to deal with all aspects of international law advice to the
Government of India.
6. Each of the core international human rights treaties has a monitoring body within the UN
human rights system which monitors the implementation of the treaty provisions by its
States parties. A United Nations Treaty Body is a group of specialists or experts that is
set up/established to monitor the implementation of an international treaty by its states
parties.
7. CORE INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES & THEIR OPTIONAL
PROTOCOLS RATIFIED BY INDIA - DATE OF ACCESSION / RATIFICATION :
 International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial
Discrimination (ICERD), 1965 India ratified the Convention on 3 December 1968
with certain reservations
 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), 1966 India acceded
to the Convention on 10 April 1979
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), 1966
India acceded to the Convention on 10 April 1979
 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women
(CEDAW), 1979 India signed the Convention on 30 July 1980 and ratified it on 9
July 1993 with certain reservations
 Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC), 1989 India acceded to the
Convention on 11 December 1992
 Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), 2006 India ratified
the Convention on 1 October 2007
 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the
Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict, 2000 India ratified the Optional
Protocol on 30 November 2005

10
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

 Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) on the Sale
of Children, Child Prostitution and Child Pornography, 2000 India ratified the
Optional Protocol on 16 August 2005
8. CORE ILO CONVENTIONS RATIFIED BY INDIA - DATE OF ACCESSION /
RATIFICATION :
 Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29) - India ratified Convention No. 29 on
30 November 1954 Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) - India
ratified Convention No. 100 on 25 September 1958
 Abolition of Forced Labour Convention, 1957 (No. 105) - India ratified
Convention No. 105 on 18 May 2000
 Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) -
India ratified Convention No. 111 on 03 June 1960
9. General assembly in 1985 adopted a declaration on the human rights of individuals who
are not nationals of the country in which they live in order to make the position of alien
clear. Article 5 provided for the enjoyment by aliens of certain basic human economic
and social rights
 Aliens have right to life and security of person (Article 5 para 1(a))
 Aliens have right to health protection, medical care, social security, social
services, education [Article 8 para 1(c)]
It is submitted that the Government has legislated Foreigners Act,1946
10. The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) of India was established on 12
October 1993 by an Act of Parliament – the Protection of Human Rights Act (PHRA),
1993. The NHRC has contributed significantly to the protection and promotion of human
rights in the country through the powers accorded to it by the PHR Act, 1993.
11. Section 12(f) of the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 (PHRA) mandates the
National Human Rights Commission of India to ―study treaties and other international
instruments on human rights and make recommendations for their effective
implementation‖.
12. The NHRC carries out this function primarily through recommendations to and
discussions with the concerned Ministries of the Central Government. The NHRC uses

11
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

this power to ensure that draft bills conform to the international human rights standards
that have been accepted by the Government of India.
13. In addition to pursuing the case for the signing and ratification of International Human
Rights Instruments with the Government of India, the NHRC also reviews the domestic
laws of the country to ensure the implementation of the International Conventions at the
national level and to ensure that domestic laws are in line with international standards. [21]
14. Since 1993, the NHRC has undertaken numerous initiatives with respect to the review of
existing domestic laws and implementation of international conventions/treaties and other
instruments on human rights, which are outlined in the following sections :
The NHRC, India has given its views, among others, on the following:
(i) Terrorists and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (TADA),(ii) Persons with
Disabilities Act, 1995,(iii) Prevention of Terrorism Bill, 2000, (iv) The Freedom of
Information Bill, 2000, (v) Prevention of Terrorism Ordinance, 2001 (POTO), (vi)
Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002 (POTA), (vii) Protection from Domestic Violence
Bill, 2002, (viii) Anti-terrorism Legislation and the Rule of Law, 2004, (ix) National
Rural Employment Guarantee Bill, 2004, (x) Food Safety and Standards Bill, 2005, (xi)
Communal Violence (Prevention, Control and Rehabilitation of Victims) Bill, 2005, (xii)
Right to Education Bill, 2005, (xiii) The Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006, (xiv)
Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 2007, (xv) Rehabilitation and Resettlement Bill,
2007, (xvi) Prevention of Torture Bill, 2009, (xvii) Copyright (Amendment) Bill, 2010.
15. The Indian Constitution was greatly influenced by the values imbibed in The Universal
Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The basic fundamental rights which all human
beings are entitled to:
 The Fundamental Rights in Part III of the constitution and the Directive Principles
of state policy in Part IV of the constitution can be compared with the UDHR and
many common points can be seen.
 Further it can be seen that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
(ICCPR) is reflected in Part III of the constitution whereas The United Nations
Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) is reflected in Part IV and the Preamble
to the constitution, thus greatly benefiting the scope of human rights law in India.

21
https://nhrc.nic.in/sites/default/files/A_Handbook_on_International_HR_Conventions.pdf

12
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

 Fundamental Duties: Article 51 A of the constitution of India gives force to

Article 29(1) of the UDHR which mentions the duties of the citizens towards the
state which help to build the nation and understand the importance of individual
responsibility.
16. The supreme court in the case of State of West Bengal vs Kesoram industries[22] (2004)
(para 1 line 2) reemphasized that India obeys the doctrine of dualism and stated that any
treaty that has been entered into by India cannot become the law of the land unless the
parliament passes a law as under section 253 of the constitution of India.
17. In Keshwanand Bharati v. State of Kerala[23] (para 2189 line 1 pg no.660) the
Supreme Court observed that 'The (Universal) Declaration (of Human Rights) may not be
a legally binding instrument but it shows how India understood the nature of Human
Rights' at the time the Constitution was adopted. Since many of provisions resembling
universal declaration of human rights.24

Thus it can be observed from the above cases that the court has the liberty to apply
international treaties to domestic law provisions if they are not inconsistent with the existing
municipal laws[25].

18. Thus, Government of Yavana has complied with its International Commitments.

22
Appeal (civil) 1532 of 1993
23
Writ Petition (civil) 135 of 1970
24
Dr .H.O. Agarwal ― international law and human rights ― 21st edition

13
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

WHETHER THE DEPENDANTS OF THE DECEASED WERE ENTITLED TO CLAIM

COMPENSATION?

1. It is most humbly submitted before the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the petition
filed by the dependents of the deceased is to claim compensation.
2. It is submitted that the dependent of the foreigner rushed to Yavana and filed an
Intervention Application to implead in the case along with the relatives of the other three
deceased for claiming compensation for sewer deaths. It is submitted that the Apex Court
admitted the application.
3. It is submitted that the Union of Yavana is not liable to pay compensation to dependents of
the deceased.
4. It is submitted that the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their
Rehabilitation Act, 2013 enacted by Central Government has taken all necessary steps to
prohibit the practice of manual scavenging and for rehabilitation of manual scavengers.
5. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013
strictly prohibits the employment as manual scavengers and it is provided in Section 8[26]
the penalty for contravention of section 5 (i.e. the prohibition of insanitary latrines and
employment and engagement of manual scavengers)—
Whoever contravenes the provisions of section 5 or section 6 shall for the first
contravention be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year
or with fine which may extend to fifty thousand rupees or with both, and for any 7
subsequent contravention with imprisonment which may extend to two years or with fine
which may extend to one lakh rupees, or with both.
6. Section 23[27] states the Offences by companies.—
(1) Where an offence under this Act has been committed by a company, every person who,
at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to, the
company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be

The legal system and legislations of Tamil nadu are in pari material with that of Poigai
30
https://www.drishtiias.com/printpdf/india-and-international-law-part-1
31
Tamilnadu government gaztte G.O. Ms.No. 40 MAWS
26
Section 8 Ibid.
27
Section 23 Ibid

14
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished
accordingly.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where any offence under this
Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that offence has been committed
with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to, any neglect on the part of, any
director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager,
secretary or other officer shall be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to
be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
In this case the general manager of GHS was properly arrested by the police of Maruvai.
7. It is submitted that the above provisions of the Prohibition of Manual Scavenging and
Rehabilitation Act 2013 which was brought for the welfare of the manual scavengers by the
Government of Yavana was not fulfilled by the Global Healthcare Services (a Multi-
National Company), which paved way for this grave accident. Thus the GHS is wholly
liable to pay compensation to the dependents of the deceased.
8. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Rules , 2013
clearly states that the manual scavengers shall be provided with appropriate protective
gears before entering into the septic tank which was not followed by the GHS and as a
result four people died.
9. ―Under section 7 of the Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their
Rehabilitation Act 2013, the governor of Tamilnadu hereby notifies the 15th of march 2015
as the date from which no person ,local authority or any agency shall engage or employ
either directly or indirectly any person for hazardous cleaning of a sewer or a septic
tank‖28.
10. The foreign researcher who visited Yavana for collecting data on stratification of manual
work on moral obligation tried to help the manual scavengers but unfortunately died. The
GHS who had contract for maintenance is responsible to monitor but it failed to do so.
Hence GHS has acted negligently which caused the death of the foreigner shall be liable to
compensate.
11. The dependents of the deceased have alternative remedies for compensation under and
Fatal Accident Act as well.

15
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

12. It is submitted that Section 1A of Fatal Accident Act, 1855 states that Suit for
compensation to the family of a person for loss occasioned to it by his death by actionable
wrong:
Whenever the death of a person shall be caused by wrongful act, neglect or default and the
act, neglect or default is such as would have entitled the party injured to maintain an
action and recover damages in respect thereof, the party who would have been liable if
death had not ensued shall be liable to an action or suit for damages, notwithstanding the
death of the person injured and although the death shall be caused under such
circumstances as amount in law to felony or other crime.
13. The maxim of Res Ipsa Loquitur applies in situations like:
* The cause of the accident was under the management or control of the defendant.
*The accident is such as in the ordinary course of things and would not happen if those
who have the management use proper care.

[29]
14. In Nihal Kaur v. Director, P.G.I., Chandigarh, scissors were left in the body of a
patient during an operation. Then his condition worsened and he died. Scissors were
recovered from the ashes after cremation. Compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 was awarded to
the defendants of the deceased.
15. In the case PN KUMAR VS MUNICIPAL CORPORATION DELHI[30] (PG NO 3
PARA 2) the held that We are of the view that this petition should be disposed of without
expressing any opinion on the merits of the case reserving liberty to the petitioners to file
a petition, if so advised, before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
We accordingly dispose of this petition for the following reasons:

1. The scope of the powers of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution is
wider than the scope of the powers of this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution

2. The relief prayed for in the petition is one which may be granted by the High Court and
any of the parties who is dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court can approach this

29
1996 ; 3 CPJ 112
30
AIR 1974 SC 1779

16
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

Court by way of an appeal. The fact that some case involving the very same point of law is
pending in this Court is no ground to entertain a petition directly by- passing the High Court.

3. If the parties get relief at the High Court, they need not come here and to that extent the
burden on this Court is reduced.

[31]
16. Kanubhai Brahmbhatt v State of Gujarat a division bench of the Supreme Court
observed that a petitioner complaining of infraction of his Fundamental Right should
approach the High Court first rather than the Supreme Court in the first instance, the reason
for such an observation as given was that there was a huge backlog of cases pending before
the Supreme Court.
17. In Satish Chandra v.Registrar of Cooperative Societies[32], the remedy under Article 226
was specifically stated as the alternative remedy, and the petition under Article 32 was
consequently dismissed.
18. Thus, as per Fatal Accident Act GHS is responsible to pay the compensation to the
dependents of the deceased. The Union is not liable to pay compensation.

31
AIR 1987 SC 1159
32
(1994) 4 SCC 332

17
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

WHETHER THE BIO-MEDICAL WASTE DISPOSAL REGULATIONS ARE

FULFILLING THE CONSTITUTIONAL MANDATES?

1. It is most humbly submitted in the Hon‘ble Supreme Court of Yavana that the Bio-
Medical Waste Disposal Regulations are fulfilling the Constitutional mandates.
2. It is that submitted the waste generated by Hospitals, Nursing Homes, pathological labs
etc., termed as Bio-medical Waste, is disposed in terms of the Rules framed by
Government of India, in exercise of the powers conferred upon it by Sections
5, 8 & 25 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986, known as Bio-medical Waste
Management Rules, 2016.
[33]
3. It is submitted that, Rule 3 (f) defines ―Biomedical waste‖ as any waste , which is
generated during the diagnosis , treatment or immunisation of human beings or animals
or research activities pertaining thereto or in the production or testing of biological or in
health camps, including the categories mentioned in Schedule I appended to these rules.
[34]
4. It is submitted that , Rule 3 (l) defines ―management‖ which includes all steps
required to ensure that biomedical waste is managed in such a manner as to protect
health and environment against any adverse effects due to handling of such waste.
5. It is submitted that India is among those countries who took the menace of Biomedical
waste seriously at the very beginning and created a concrete legislative structure and tried
to curb it. The rules that were formulated in the backdrop of Stockholm conference on
Bio medical waste gave the detailed rules considering every aspect according to the
resources and technologies which were there in India and the country upgraded in
technology advances and looking to the contemporary need they are been amended time
and again.
6. The current BMWM 2016 Rules are an advancement over earlier rules in terms of
upgraded segregation, transportation, and disposal methods, to reduce environmental
pollution and make certain of the protection of the staff, patients, and public.[35]

The legal system and legislations of India are in pari material with that of Yavana.
33
Biomedical waste management rules 2016
34
Ibid

18
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

7. It is submitted that these new rules have amplified the coverage, simplified the
categorization and authorization while refining the segregation, transportation and
disposal methods to reduce environmental pollution. It has four schedule, five forms and
eighteen rules.
8. It is submitted that Scheduling the waste management and reconditioning for all of the
waste generated in the health care facilities is a fundamental task which plays an
extremely significant role in the global cleanliness, public health, preservation of
resources and sustainability of the ecosystem.
9. It is submitted that Recycling medical waste curtails utilization of raw material and
decreases the amount of the waste materials that must be disposed in a landfill. It
decreases the dangers and risks to the communities which can be at risks due to hospitals.
Decrease in the incidence of HIV/AIDS, sepsis, hepatitis, and other diseases spread by
infectious medical equipment takes place by accurate waste management.
10. It is submitted that illegal trading of used syringes, injection needles and medical tools
can also be stopped by proper management tactics. Attentiveness about perils of
biomedical waste and its appropriate disposal is compulsory for a nontoxic and vigorous
future. This is recognized in the Bio-Medical Waste Management Rules, 2016.
11. It is submitted that existing incinerators to achieve the standards for retention time in
secondary chamber and Dioxin and Furans within two years. The new rules brought by
various amendments prescribe more stringent standards for incinerator to reduce the
emission of pollutants in environment. Inclusion of emissions limits for dioxin and
furans.
12. It is submitted that Incineration is proven to be the most effective means for responsibly
disposing of biomedical and hazardous waste. It is acknowledged globally that
incineration is the preferred method for tackling waste and protecting communities and
nature from the environment impact of alternatives such as landfill.

35
Biomedical Waste Management and its Importance – AIHMS https://aihms.in › blog

19
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

13. Section 4[36]. Duties of the Occupier.- It shall be the duty of every occupier to- (a) take all
necessary steps to ensure that bio-medical waste is handled without any adverse effect to
human health and the environment and in accordance with these rules.
But in present case the GHS has failed to function its duty which caused the Sengai
Valley People to suffer from various health issues.
14. Hazardous medical waste that needs to be carefully disposed of by incineration. Items
include clinical waste such as used syringes and needles, used swabs, plastics and
bandages. Used drug blister packs and ampules. Biomedical waste is potentially
infectious.
15. It is essential that the process of incinerating biomedical waste isn‘t harmful to the
environment and doesn‘t produce harmful gases. Thus the Bio-Medical Waste
Management Rules, 2016 provides effective rules to maintain the standard of
incinerators.
16. Currently the processes handled by hospital incinerators and biomedical incinerators in
general do effectively manage this waste responsibly. There are certain by-products that
are left at the end and are released into the atmosphere as per the prescribed standards.
Thus the Bio-Medical Waste Disposal Regulations have appropriate rules for effective
disposal of bio-medical wastes.
17. The Doctrine of Sustainable Development it is often required to strike balance between
development and environment.
18. Principle for of Rio declaration 1992 claims that ―in order to achieve sustainable
development, environmental protection shall constitute an integral part of development
process and cannot be considered in consolidation from it.
19. The Supreme Court in M.C. Mehta vs Union of India37 observed that ―when science and
technology are increasingly employed in producing goods and services calculated to
improve the quality of life, there is certain element of hazard or risk inherent in the very
use of science and technology and it is not possible to totally eliminate such hazard or
risk altogether. We can only hope to reduce the element of hazard or risk to the

36
BioMedical Waste Management Rules,2016
37
AIR 1987 SC 965

20
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

community by taking all necessary steps for location of such industry in a manner which
put post at least risk of danger to community and maximizing safety requirements.
20. In Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action vs Union of India the Supreme Court
emphasized the importance of doctrine of sustainable development as follows:
While economic development shall not be allowed to take place at the cost of ecology or
by causing wide spread environment destruction and violation; at the same time, then
necessity to preserve ecology and environment should not hamper economic and other
developments. Both development and environment must go hand in hand, in other words,
there should not be development at the cost of environment and vice versa, but there
should be development while taking due care and ensuring the protection of environment.
21. Declaration on Human Environment :
The Conference adopted the Declaration on Human Environment' which was divided in
two parts besides the Preamble. While the first part Proclaims' seven truths about man in
relation to his environment, the second part laid down twenty-six 'Principles'. Some of the
important principles are as follows-
(a), Principle 1 states that the man has the fundamental right to adequate conditions of
life, in an environment of quality that permits a life of dignity and well-being, and bears a
responsibility to protect and improve the environment for present and future generations.
(b) Principle 2 states that the natural resources of the earth including the air, water, land,
flora and fauna and especially representative sample of natural ecosystems, must be
safeguarded for the benefit of present and future generations through careful planning and
management as appropriate.
(c) Principle 7 stipulates that States shall take all possible steps to prevent pollution of the
seas by substances that are liable to create hazards to human health, to harm living
resources and marine life, to damage amenities or to interfere with other legitimate uses
of the seas.
22. Rio declaration on environment and development
Principle 1: Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development they
are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature

21
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

Principle 13: State shall develop national law regarding liability and compensation for the
victims of pollution and other environmental damages [38]
23. B.L.Wadehra v. Union of India and others[39]. In this case the court said that the
resident of Delhi have a salutatory right to live in a clean city and hence the Municipal
Corporation of Delhi (MCD) and New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) are bind by
statutory law to maintain and provide a city free from waste generated by the health care
facilities.
The court went to an extend of saying that non availability of funds or insufficient
machinery cannot be an excuse for non-performance of their statutory obligations.
Case is also important because it also lays down directives for collection, handling and
disposal of bio medical waste.
Thirdly it ask the authorities to promote awareness through mass media platform about
their civic duties.
24. Almitra H. Patel v. Union of India[40] Supreme court compelled environmentalist,
administrators and lawyers to come up with a solution to the growing solid waste
management as a result of this the central government notified the Municipal Solid Waste
(Management and handling ) Rules 2000.
25. C.S. Prakash and others v. the HUDA and others (2001) In this case a PIL was filed in
which the petitioners ask for an issue of Mandamus writ against the respondent for not
taking any action as illegal and violative of Andhra Pradesh Urban areas (Development)
act and Article 14 & 21and directing other defendant to remove the illegal structure
(hospitals) situated in that area. The divisional bench of Andhra Pradesh High Court
stated that building a big hospitals in residential area is not an issue but the builders have
taken proper caution for the benefit of resident of the locality or not is a concern and
secondly whether the disposal of bio medical waste from the concerned authority has
taken or not. Prevention of ecology and health of the populace come within the purview
of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The A.P. Pollution Control Board must,

38
Dr .H.O. Agarwal ― international law and human rights ― 21st edition
39
AIR 1996 SC 2969 ILR (2001) AP 323, (328) (DB) Appeal No. 63 0f 2012
40
AIR 1980 S.C. 1622

22
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

therefore, strictly apply the laws governing the field, including the rules, regulations and
norms issued by it in this behalf.
Adequate protection for disposal of biomedical waste has be taken in terms of the Bio-
Medical Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 1998.
26. Haat Supreme Wastech Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. State of Haryana &Ors[41] the question
put forward in this case was that appellant was running units of bio medical waste
treatment faculty with all due authorization laid down in the Bio-Medical Waste
(Management & Handling) rules, 1998. Later on Respondent (Harayana State Pollution
Control Board) inspected and pointed out certain short comings because of which the
appellant was issued a notice and directed to deposit 5 lakhs rupees as a way of bank
Guarantee. Subsequently CPCB (Central Pollution Control Board) issued another notice
and asking the appellant to deposit a sum of Rupees 10 lakhs each and take steps to
remove the short comings. This second notice was brought in questioned in front of court.
The case become very important when the fundamental issues were raised about the
structure of the vicinity and the consent that were earlier given by the authorities so
before deciding upon the validity of notices the question raised about the by the tribunal
was whether they need environment clearance or not. Tribunal issued notices to as many
as nine Government run hospital for mishandling of bio-medical Waste.
The Tribunal observed: The purpose of the Application primarily is to achieve the object
of environmental protection. We are of the considered view that it may not be fruitful at
this stage to direct prosecution of the Director/Medical Superintendent of all the
respective hospitals, but we make it clear that remedial measures to remove the
shortcomings/deficiencies pointed out by the Committee should be taken without fail at
the earliest.
27. Ratlam Municipality case[42]:The main contention was regarding the section 123
Municipality Act of 1961. These obligations include many thing and sanitary facilities
and prevention of street contamination. The residents of the municipality were in problem
and combined went to the court against the lack of sanitary facilities under section 133 of
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C).

41
Appeal No. 63 of 2012
42
1980 AIR 1622, 1981 SCR (1) 97,1980 SCC (4) 162

23
 THE INTER – COLLEGIATE STATE LEVEL MOOT COURT COMPETITION (2022 – 2023)

India is among those countries who took the menace of Bio-medical waste seriously at
the very beginning and created a concrete legislative structure and tried to curb it.
But we should not forget the policy on paper which appeared to be perfect becomes
ineffective if they are not been monitored and checked properly therefore in such
circumstance the role of Judicial bodies become important and this have been proved
time and again by them in various judgment.
28. The immediate measures to Bio-Medical Waste Management that is:
 Segregation: According to the WHO report not all medical waste is hazardous it's
just the 20-25% of total waste. So we just have to identify this portion.
3Rs: Re- use/ Reduce/ Recycle: One of the simplest and easy to achieve steps which can
be a game changer. This calls for a change in attitude. The society in which we live is
where reusing or recycling things is seen as something of a low status. A change of
outlook is required and the people doing the real job should be respected and cooperated
with.
 CSR (Corporate social responsibility): We need to follow a carrot and stick
policy, When dealing with the corporate sector, we need to incentivize those who
are contributing to curb this menace and need to penalize all those who are
creating this menace. Regular compliance checks should also be made.
 Proper Disposal: Although not a technique but an essential procedure without
which nothing can be changed. We do not have to dispose of this waste
temporarily. We need to dispose of this waste in a proper manner, without leaving
it for the future generations to suffer with. All these steps are interlinked and need
go hand in hand in terms of implementation in order for us and our generations to
come, to be able to see and experience the difference and reap its benefits.

This measure are taken in emergency cases for abatements of bio-medical wastes which
affects Human as well as Environment.

29. Thus, it is submitted that the Biomedical Waste Disposal Regulations are fulfilling the
Constitutional mandates.

24
 PRAYER

Wherefore in the light of the issues raised, arguments advanced and authorities cited, it is
humbly prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to DECLARE that:

1. The Prohibition of Employment as Manual Scavenger and their Rehabilitation Act, 2013 is

constitutionally valid.

2. The Government has complied with its International Commitments.

3. The dependents of the deceased are not entitled to claim compensation.

4. The Bio-Medical Waste Disposal Regulations are fulfilling the Constitutional mandates and
dismiss the petition filed by petitioner.

AND PASS ANY SUCH OTHER ORDER OR DIRECTION THAT THIS HON’BLE COURT
MAY DEEM FIT AND PROPER IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES AND IN THE
INTERESTS OF JUSTICE, EQUITY AND GOOD CONSCIENCE.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS, THE RESPONDENT SHALL, AS IN DUTY BOUND
EVER PRAY.

ALL OF WHICH IS HUMBLY PRAYED,

-(R)

COUNSELS FOR THE RESPONDENT