Dealing With

A Moot
Proposition
Sumair Asif
19011624-090
What to do with the moot
proposition?
1. Get the moot proposition (commonly called ‘prop’) printed, including all
the rules and regulations. Every moot has different rules and regulations.
Do not treat any moot casually. Every moot is a learning experience and if
your first moot is, naturally, your own college’s moot, you should start off
with learning how to properly read the rules and regulations.
2. Check the format of the memorial that they want. Is it the Bluebook?
Your own college’s citation style? Check for requirements for the spacing,
the margins, the font, and the font size. Check the post on Researchers:
The Ones Working Behind The Scenes (coming soon) for more
information on this.
What to do with the moot
proposition?
3. Now that you know the rules and regulations of the moot and the
guidelines to make your memorial, it is time to read the problem.

4. Identify the type of law the problem falls under. The most common
laws used are Constitutional Law, International Law or Criminal Law.
It may be under any other category as well.
What to do with the moot
proposition?
3. Now that you know the rules and regulations of the moot and the guidelines to
make your memorial, it is time to read the problem.
4. Identify the type of law the problem falls under. The most common laws used
are Constitutional Law, International Law or Criminal Law. It may be under any
other category as well.
5. Now that the moot problem has been placed under a particular category, it is
time for
• Basic research
• Framing the issues to be raised
• Making your arguments advanced
What does basic research include?
Before framing the contentions, it is necessary to carry out a very basic research to
determine the material available for your moot problem. The research need not be extensive
but enough to frame questions to cover your moot problem.
When you get the prop, try to find the key points in it such as the Articles mentioned. Try to
find a similar case because some props are based on past judgments. The case given as an
example is based on the cases of Dr. Naresh Agarwal v. Union of India and Azeez Basha v.
Union of India.
This is a relatively easy moot problem where the most important issue to prove is if the
university is a minority institution. Proving or disproving that will make the other contentions
fall into place. However, there are certain moot problems which have two or three parallel
important issues to be proved.
Some props are made more complicated where you need more extensive research to
connect different precedents and frame your contentions.
 How to frame the issues to be raised?
The issues raised are assertions regarding an argument. To put it simply, you question the credibility of the
conclusion of the prop: questions which the other side is supposed to respond to, to win their argument. Issues
raised will be different for petitioners and respondents.
For example, regarding the provided moot prop, issues raised by the petitioner (the Mundu students) can be:
1. Whether the present writ petition is maintainable?
2. Whether the Hislim University is a minority institution entitled to protection under Article 30(1) of the
Constitution of Indicsthan?
3. Whether the Hislim University is entitled to reserve 50% of the total number of seats entirely for Hislim
candidates only?
Questions raised by the respondent (the Union of India because it is a writ petition) can be:
1. Whether the petitioners have any locus to maintain the writ petition?
2. Whether the Hislim University is a minority institution and is protected under Article 30 of the Constitution of
Indicsthan?
3. Whether the reservation of 50% of the total number of seats for Hislim candidates violates Articles 19 and
29(2) of the Constitution of Indicsthan?
 How to frame the issues to be raised?
Keep in mind that you are the petitioner while answering the first set of issues raised and the
respondent while answering the second set of issues.
Thus, the conducive answers by the petitioners to the first set of issues raised will be:
1. YES, the writ petition is maintainable for the petitioners to put their grievances forward.
2. NO, the Hislim University is not a minority institution as the petitioners need to show that the university
is unjustly trying to avail benefits given to the minorities in the country and thus, unlawfully denying
admission to the petitioners.
3. NO, the university is not entitled to reserve 50% of the seats because, as proved in the previous
contention, they are not a minority institution.
Similarly, the respondents to win the case, need to prove that:
1. NO, the petitioners do not have any locus to maintain the writ petition.
2. YES, the Hislim University is a minority institution which will make the argument of not giving the
petitioners seats in their university, valid.
3. NO, the reservation does not violate Articles 19 and 29(2) which is why not giving seats to the
petitioners is not unlawful.
How to frame the issues to be raised?
You cannot frame final and concrete contentions just after
preliminary research. You can just frame their skeletal structure.
The point of framing preliminary contentions is to aid you to
provide a base for doing further research. You will be able to
polish your contentions as you dig deeper into more and more
judgments, that is, research more.
What are “arguments advanced”?
For a basic description, arguments advanced are when you
explain your contentions in detail, citing appropriate case laws
and legal evidence to support your argument.
The issues you have raised as one of the parties, are to be made
concrete for winning the case and this can be successfully done
through thorough research.
 Conclusion
To sum up,
• Read your moot problem carefully, including the rules and regulations.
• Look for the keywords to determine your points of research.
• Do basic research to frame skeletal contentions or issues to be raised.
• Try to find as many legal cases as possible to substantiate your
arguments under every issue raised.
• Gradually, with further research, you will feel the need to modify your
contentions.
• Better research will give way to better arguments advanced.