1

GROUP CODE: I

3RD MOOT COURT ASSIGNMENT, 2021

SUBMITTED TO VES COLLEGE OF LAW, CHEMBUR

400 071

SUBMITTED BY:

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

SOHM AGARWAL Roll No- 02

NEHA GOEL Roll No- 24

PRITI GOHIL Roll No- 25

DEVANSH SHAH Roll No- 86

Law Land College …. Respondent

BHAVESH JOSHI Roll No- 36

Priyal Ruparelia Roll No- 77

Tanishq Dandona Roll No- 21

Dipti Chandra Roll No-17

 2

VES COLLEGE OF LAW

TY.LLB MOOT COURT EXAMINATION,2021

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

Petitioner
THROUGH
SOHM AGARWAL Roll No- 02/ NEHA GOEL Roll No- 24

PRITI GOHIL Roll No- 25/ DEVANSH SHAH Roll No- 86

STANDING COUNSELS FOR THE PETITIONER,

145, LAWYER’S CHAMBERS, FAMILY COURT
MUMBAI- 110 001.
ENO. SC/545/1995
TEL. 011- 25563564/ (M) 9588449922

MUMBAI
DATED: 14TH DAY OF April 2021.

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 3

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2021

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

INDEX

Sr No. Particulars Page No.

1. COVER PAGE

2. INDEX

3. Vakalatnama 3

4. Statement of Jurisdiction 4

5. Issues 6 -10

6. Petition 10-15

7. Affidavit in Support of Petition 16-17

8. Memorandum of Registered Address 18

9. Exhibit A- Application by Petitioner 19-20

10. Vakalatnama of Respondents 25-26

11. Reply on behalf of Respondents 27-29

 4

12. Issues of Respondents 30-35

 5

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

VAKALATNAMA

I, Ms. Baba Namdev, The founder of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) Petitioner
abovenamed, do hereby appoint and authorize Adv. SOHM AGARWAL, Adv. NEHA
GOEL, Adv. PRITI GOHIL, Adv. DEVANSH SHAH Advocates to appear, act and
plead for me in the above matter.

In witness whereof, we have set and subscribed our hand to this

writing at

Mumbai, Dated this 14TH DAY OF APRIL 2021

Accepted

Adv. SOHAM AGARWAL, Adv. NEHA GOEL,

Adv. PRITI GOHIL, Adv. DEVANSH SHAH

 6

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2021

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION

The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has the jurisdiction in this matter
under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India which reads as follows:

The Petitioners humbly submit this memorandum in response to the petition

filed before this Honourable Court, invokes its original jurisdiction under

Article 32 of the Constitution of India, read together with the infringement

of rights of a Citizen of india and discrimination thereof. The purpose of

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is to give the right to individuals to

move to the Supreme Court to seek justice when they feel that their right has

been ‘unduly deprived’. The apex court is given the authority to issue

directions or orders for the execution of any of the rights bestowed by the

constitution as it is considered ‘the protector and guarantor of Fundamental

Rights’. Under this Article, the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction to
 7

decide upon a matter of dispute between the Parties. The Petition sets forth

the facts and the laws on which the claims of the Petitioners are based.

Dr Ambedkar stated that:

“If I was asked to name any particular article in this Constitution as the most
important- an article without which this Constitution would be a nullity— I
could not refer to any other article except this one. It is the very soul of the
Constitution and the very heart of it and I am glad that the House has realized
its importance.”
 8

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

STATEMENT OF ISSUES

ISSUE I:

WHETHER THIS PETITION FILED BEFORE THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF

INDIA IS MAINTAINABLE OR NOT?

YES, This Petition Filed Before This Hon’ble Supreme Court Of India Is

Maintainable under Article 32 of the Constitution of India

Article 32 deals with the 'Right to Constitutional Remedies', or affirms the right

to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of

the rights conferred in Part III of the Constitution.

The purpose of Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is to give the right to

individuals to move to the Supreme Court to seek justice when they feel that

their right has been ‘unduly deprived’. The apex court is given the authority to

issue directions or orders for the execution of any of the rights bestowed by the

constitution as it is considered ‘the protector and guarantor of Fundamental

Rights’.
 9

ISSUE II:

WHETHER THE REFUSAL BY LAW LAND COLLEGE FOR LAWLAND COLLEGE

REGISTERED STUDENT ORGANIZATION (LCRSO) STATUS VIOLATED

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS OF FAITH OF BABA NAMDEV SOCIETY (FBNS)?

Yes, The Refusal By Law Land College For Law land College Registered Student

Organization (LCRSO) Status Violated Fundamental Rights Of Faith Of Baba

Namdev Society (FBNS) Such as freedom of speech and expression, freedom of

association, and right to freedom of religion.

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) our Founder is Baba Namdev, Baba Namdev

is a renowned yogi of India and he enjoys a great following throughout the country.

Baba Namdev’s teachings primarily urge Hindus to practice radical Hinduism and

targets the youth of India as a major support group he also enjoys a cult status

amongst young Hindu students.

Whereas Law land College Registered Student Organization (LCRSO) is offering offer

benefits to students on the condition that they surrender a portion of their right to

freedom of speech/association/religion which is totally unconstitutional and

unreasonable according to law.

ISSUE III:

WHETHER THE REJECTION OF FAITH OF BABA NAMDEV SOCIETY (FBNS)

APPLICATION BY LAW LAND COLLEGE (LCRSO) IS INVALID OR NOT?

 10

YES, to the utter shock of Petitioner, Respondent rejected Petitioner’s application

in June 2011 stating the reason that it does not comply with Respondent’s Policy.

The Rejection Of Faith Of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) Application By Law Land

College (LCRSO) Is Invalid And insufficient for rejection of application, Lawland

College have power to provide official recognition to certain groups of students

through mechanism known as Law land College Registered Student Organization

(LCRSO) but it is offering benefits to students on the condition that they surrender

a portion of their right to freedom of speech/association/religion. The above

condition is totally invalid and incorrect and violates fundamental rights of Faith

Of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS).

ISSUE IV:

WHETHER THE CONDITIONS IMPOSED BY (LSCRO) WAS

UNCONSTITUTIONAL, INVALID OR NOT?

YES, The Conditions Imposed By (Lscro) Was Unconstitutional, it violates

FBNS fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of

association, and right to freedom of religion. The unconstitutional

conditions doctrine arises from the Constitution’s prohibition against

penalizing an individual for the exercise of a constitutional right. The

doctrine holds that the government may not condition the availability of a
 11

government benefit on an individual’s agreement to forego the exercise of

such a right.
 12

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS )

Baba Namdev, Founder, )

Adult, Hindu Inhabitant, )

Having address at New- Delhi 400 055. )

(Mobile) 9588449922 ) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College )

University of Delhi, 7/25 Old colony )

New- Delhi 400 100. ) …. Respondent

PETITION Under Article 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ABOVENAMED:-

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. The Petitioner is Baba Namdev on behalf of Faith of Baba Namdev Society

(FBNS), he is Founder and creator of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS).

Baba Namdev’s is a renowned yogi of India and he enjoys a great following

throughout the country. Baba Namdev’s teachings primarily urge Hindus to

practice radical Hinduism and targets the youth of India as a major support
 13

group, Baba Namdev enjoys a cult status amongst young Hindu students who

have created Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) in several educational

institutions further for the sake of brevity to be referred as Petitioner.

2. The Respondent is Lawland College it is a preminent law school in Delhi

University. Lawland College provides official recognition to certain groups of

students. This mechanism is known as ‘Lawland College Registered Student

Organization’ (LCRSO) program, the Lawland College further for the sake of brevity

to be referred as Petitioner.

3. This official recognition and status by Respondent confers several benefits upon

the group of students like using official communication channels, financial

assistance, college facilities for meetings and office space, and most importantly

Lawland College’s name and logo.

4. Petitioner hereby submits that this official recognition and status by

Respondent in turn is granted when these student organizations abide by

certain conditions of Respondent. Student organizations have to comply with

Respondent Policies.

5. The Respondent has followed the practice for quite some time now of

comply with Respondent Policies and takes great pride in the fact that the
 14

officially recognized student groups allow other student to become a member

irrespective of their status or belief.

6. Petitioner enjoys a cult status amongst young Hindu students and also

created Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) in several educational

institutions. Further Petitioner submits that in May 2011, Petitioner

submitted its application for the coveted to the Respondent.

7. But to the utter shock of Petitioner, Respondent rejected Petitioner’s application

in June 2011 stating the reason that it does not comply with Respondent’s Policy

of Nondiscrimination which is totally invalid and insufficient to reject the

Application.

7. Petitioner was incensed by the refusal of Respondent’s official recognition and

status. Further Petitioner also consulted with some of his disciples who were

leading experts of Constitutional Law regarding this matter and refusal of

Application by Respondent.

8. In August 2011, Petitioner filed a writ petition before this hon’ble Supreme Court

of India contending that the refusal of LCRSO status violated Petitioner’s

 15

fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, freedom of association, and

right to freedom of religion.

9. In the present case, the petitioner has specifically the grounds of challenge

are taken without prejudice one another and Petitioners crave leave to add,

amend and / or modify the above grounds, as and when considered

necessary and appropriate.

10. The Petitioners state that the Respondent's stays at Delhi.

As such,this Hon'ble Court has jurisdiction to try, entertain and

decide the petition.

11. The Petitioners state that there is no alternate and efficacious

remedy but to approach this Hon'ble Court and to seek the reliefs as

prayed for in this Petition.

12. The Petitioner have approached this Hon'ble Court as expeditiously as

possible and Petitioner are not guilty of negligence or undue delay and, as

such, there is no delay in filing this Petition.

13. The Petitioner have paid Court fees as required.

14. The Petitioner state that she have not filed any other Petition

7.
 16

challenging the subject matter of the order in this Hon’ble Supreme Court

Of India.

PRAYER:-

The Petitioners, therefore, humbly PRAY that :-

1. Pending hearing and in the interest of justice, equity and conscience the

Petitioner humbly prays before this Hon'ble Court to issue necessary relief and

provide direction to Respondent.

2. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow application filed by the

Petitioner Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) to Law land college Delhi

University.

3. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow application filed by the

Petitioner Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) before this Hon’ble Court and

and provide appropriate orders in the case.

4. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any other and further relief

as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon' ble Court on the facts

and circumstances of the case.

5. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant the Cost; and any interim

relief or direction, as the Hon’ble Court may deem necessary.

6. To pass any other decree/order as this hon’ble court deems fit and proper.
 17

VERIFICATION

I, Ms. Baba Namdev, The founder of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS)
Petitioner abovenamed, Adult, Indian Inhabitant Residing at Delhi do hereby state on
solemn affirmation that whatever is stated in the foregoing paragraphs of the Petition
is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief which I believe the same to
be true.

Solemnly affirmed at Delhi )

On this 14th day April of 2021 )

Petitioner

Before me; Advocates for the Petitioner

 Memorial for Respondents

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF PETITION

I, Ms. Baba Namdev, The founder of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) Petitioner

abovenamed, Adult, Indian Inhabitant Residing at Delhi do hereby state on solemn

affirm and state on oath as under:

1. That we are the Petitioners in the above mentioned Writ Petition and as

such we are well conversant with the facts and circumstances of the case

hence, we are competent to swear this Affidavit.

2. That we have read, understood and gone through the contents of Petition

in its paragraph from 1 to 14, and in furtherance state that the contents

thereof are true and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief.

3. That we have not filed any other Petition against any of the Court Order.

4. That we have gone through the contents Petition and we state that the

contents thereof are true and correct.

5. That the Annexure is the true and correct typed copie of their original

application and nothing herein is false and no material has

been concealed.
 Memorial for Respondents

VERIFICATION

I, Ms. Baba Namdev, The founder of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS)

Petitioner abovenamed, Adult, Indian Inhabitant Residing at Delhi do hereby state on

solemn affirmation that whatever is stated in the foregoing paragraphs of the

Affidavit of Petition is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief which I

believe the same to be true.

Solemnly affirmed at Delhi )

On this 14th day April of 2021 )

Petitioner

Before me; Advocate for the Petitioner

 20

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

MEMORANDUM OF ADDRESSES OFTHE PETITIONERS

ADDRESS OF THE PETITIONER

New- Delhi 400 055, (Mobile) 9588449922

ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT

Law Land College, University of Delhi, 7/25 Old colony. New- Delhi 400 100.

PETITIONER
 21

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

EXHIBIT A - Application by Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS)

From,

The Secretary,

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS),

New- Delhi 400 055.

TEL. 011- 25563564/ (M) 9588449922

 22

To,

The Principal,

Law Land College,

University of Delhi, 7/25 Old colony,

New- Delhi 400 100.

Subject- Application for official recognition and LCRSO status.

Dear Sir,

I undersign Mr. Arun the Secretary of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) writes

this application on behalf of Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) our Founder is

Baba Namdev, Baba Namdev is a renowned yogi of India and he enjoys a great

following throughout the country. Baba Namdev’s teachings primarily urge Hindus

to practice radical Hinduism and targets the youth of India as a major support

group he also enjoys a cult status amongst young Hindu students.

The purpose of writing this Application is to request you for the official recognition

and Lawland College Registered Student Organization (LCRSO) status by you and

your college in your esteem organization.

Our friend from other educational institution introduced us about you who has

been your member for 2 years. We are really pleased with the overall facilities, status

and several benefits you provide upon the group like using official communication

channels, financial assistance, college facilities for meetings and office space, and

most importantly Lawland College’s name and logo.

 23

We have in depth understanding of the way youth behaves and the factors that affect

cognitive and psychological developments, we also believe homosexuality is a curable

disease. Thus homosexuals and non-Hindus were not eligible to seek membership in

our Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS).

Baba Namdev’s teachings primarily urge Hindus to practice radical Hinduism and

targets the youth of India as a major support group, He firmly believes that

homosexuals or those who tolerate homosexuality have no right to practice radical

Hinduism.

So hereby I request you to please accept my application for official recognition and

Lawland College Registered Student Organization (LCRSO) status on behalf of Faith

of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) for which we are ready to pay necessary charges.

Thanks for your consideration and looking forward for your response.

Mr Arun

Secretary (FBNS)
 24

BEFORE THE HON’BLE

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF

2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS)

…. Petitioner
Versus

Law Land College

…. Respondent

WRIT PETITION

On this 14th day April of 2021

 25

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College …. Respondent

VAKALATNAMA

we, Law Land College, Respondent abovenamed, do hereby appoint and authorize
Adv. BHAVESH JOSHI, Adv. PRIYAL RUPARELIA, Adv. TANISHQ DANDONA, Adv.
DIPTI CHANDRA Advocates to appear, act and plead for me in the above matter.

In witness whereof, we have set and subscribed our hand to this

writing at

Mumbai, Dated this 17TH DAY OF APRIL 2021

Accepted
 26

Adv. BHAVESH JOSHI, Adv. PRIYAL RUPARELIA,

Adv. TANISHQ DANDONA, Adv. DIPTI CHANDRA

 27

BEFORE THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 154 OF 2011

Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS )

Baba Namdev, Founder, )

Adult, Hindu Inhabitant, )

Having address at New- Delhi 400 055. )

(Mobile) 9588449922 ) …. Petitioner

Versus

Law Land College )

University of Delhi, 7/25 Old colony )

New- Delhi 400 100. ) …. Respondent

Reply on behalf of Respondents Under Article 32 OF THE

CONSTITUTION

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. It is submitted that, this suit is not maintainable either in law or on

facts, the same is liable to be dismissed with costs. All material
allegation made in plaint are false, fictitious and self-serving, besides
being untenable and impermissible as per law, I deny the pleadings
and plaintiff is hereby called upon strict and legal proof thereof with
authenticated documentary evidence if any.
 28

2. The It is submitted that I do not admit any allegation made in plaint,

expect save those that are specifically and expressly admitted herein
and put plaintiff to strict proof of same.

3. The para no 1,2,3,4,5 & 6 are descriptive part of petition, which needs
no reply

4. That the content of para 7 of the petition, except which are matter of
record are wrong and denied in toto.

5. In reply to para no 8 of the petition, Respondent states that the

averments made against him are totally false and baseless and it is
nothing but petitioner’s way of trying gimmicks and stunts to wriggle
out of ther legal obligations.

6. In reply to para no 9 to 14 of the petition, respondent states that the

averments made against him are totally false and baseless and it is
nothing but petitioner’s way of trying gimmicks and stunts to wriggle
out of her legal obligations.

PRAYER:-

The Respondents, therefore, humbly PRAY that :-

1. Pending hearing and in the interest of justice, equity and conscience the

Respondent humbly prays before this Hon'ble Court to issue necessary relief or

ad-interim relief.

2. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to Reject application filed by the

Petitioner Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) to Law land college Delhi

University.
 29

3. This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to Reject application filed by the

Petitioner Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) before this Hon’ble Court and

and provide appropriate orders in the case.

4. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue any other and further relief

as may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon' ble Court on the facts

and circumstances of the case.

5. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to grant the Cost; and any interim

relief or direction, as the Hon’ble Court may deem necessary.

6. To pass any other decree/order as this hon’ble court deems fit and proper.

VERIFICATION

we, The Law Land College, The Respondents abovenamed, having its existence as
esteemed College at Delhi do hereby state on solemn affirmation that whatever is
stated in the foregoing paragraphs of the Reply is true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief which we believe the same to be true.

Solemnly affirmed at Delhi )

On this 18th day April of 2021 )

Respondent

Before me; Advocates for the Respondent

 Memorial for Respondents

1. whether this petition filed before honourable Supreme Court of India is

maintainable or not ?
Article 19 of the constitution of India grants certain rights to its citizen which forms the basic
fundamentals of the constitution and any laws made in contradiction of it will be null and void.
Freedom of expression is stated in article 19(1) which states it as –

All citizens shall have the right

• to freedom of speech and expression;

• to assemble peaceably and without arms;
• to form associations or unions;
• to move freely throughout the territory of India;
• to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India; and omitted
• to practice any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business

EXCEPTIONS -
It is necessary to preserve this right as well as certain restrictions are to be imposed so as to
avoid social disturbance and outrage among the people. Hence, article 19(2) imposes certain
restrictions on the right to freedom of speech and expression which are stated and explained
below –

Decorum or Morality – The way people express or say something should not hurt the sentiments
or degrade the morality of the society catastrophically. Our constitution provides decency and
morality as the grounds for reasonable restriction under Sections 292 to 294 of the Indian Penal
Code

in our case FBNS have clearly cause grievous hurt to sentiments of people belonging to “LGBT”
community by making it criteria to sign “Condemn Homosexuality” Application for those who
wishes to join their group and also they are promoting Radical Hinduism which is discriminatory
and in clear violation of terms and condition levied by college on granting lcsro status.

As per article 32 of Indian Constitution Writ Petition can be filed in supreme only if there is
violation of any Fundamental Rights, and as explained above there was no violation of any
Fundamental rights by College and hence this writ petition is not maintainable in supreme court.

The FBNS should follow the due process of Law and file their Writ under Highcourt under article
226 of the Indian Constitution and if aggrieved by the same then they should approach Supreme
court in our given case FBNS failed to follow this due process.
 Memorial for Respondents

From the above submissions I contend that the writ petition filed by FBNS against law land is
in clear violation of articles of Indian Constitution and hence the same is not maintainable.

2. Whether refusal of LSCRO Status violated fundamental rights of FBNS .

The Lawland College is the preeminent law school which provides official recognition to certain
groups of students under name of ‘Lawland College Registered Student Organization’ (LCRSO)
program. Certain benefits which are conferred upon these groups such as financial assistance,
college facilities for meetings and office space, College’s name and logo. The College has build
up its reputation and strictly follows the Policy of Non Discrimination which prohibits
discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex/sexual orientation, place of birth, age,
disability, descent and residence as enriched under Article 15 of Constitution. The recognition
is granted when student organisations abide by these conditions.

In view of the same, LCSRO (hereinafter referred as Respondent) rejected the application of
FBNS (hereinafter referred as Appellant) as it did not Comply with Non-discriminatory Policy
which was a pre-requisite for getting the benefits of LCSRO Program. Such a refusal does not
amount to violation of fundamental rights as alleged by the Appellant.

Article 19 of the Constitution of India guarantees to the citizens of India six Fundamental
Freedoms
1) Freedom of Speech and Expression
2) Freedom of Assembly
3) Freedom to form associations,
4) Freedom of Movement,
5) Freedom to reside and to settle, and
6) Freedom of profession, occupation, trade, or business

The Right of freedom of Speech and Expression implies that every citizen has the rights to
express his views, opinions, belief, and convictions freely by mouth, writing, printing or through
any other methods.

Under Indian law, the freedom of speech and of the press does not confer an absolute right to
express one's thoughts freely. Clause (2) of Article 19 of the Indian constitution enables the
legislature to impose certain restrictions on free speech under following heads:

• Security of the State,

• Friendly relations with foreign States,
• Public order,
• Decency and morality,
• Contempt of court
• Defamation,
 Memorial for Respondents

• Incitement to an offence, and

• Sovereignty and integrity of India.

The Respondent rejected the application as it was against their Non-Discriminatory Policy.
Further Babanamdev critized Delhi HC judgement in Naz Foundation by stating it was a
challenge to radical Hinduism for which Delhi HC sentenced him to 10 days Simple
Imprisonment for Contempt of Court.

Freedom of Association

While working together in a group, or a club or in an association, an individual needs to assure

that harmony is maintained. It is also important to bear in mind that the discipline and order
existing in the society is preserved while discharging the respective functions as well as during
the execution of the different activities . These associations and groups should also motivate
their members to do better, come up with new ideas and also remain supportive of one another

Article 19(1) (c) of the Constitution of India guarantees to all its citizens the right “to form
associations, or unions or Co- Operative Societies.” Under clause (4) of the Article 19 , however
,the State may by law impose reasonable restrictions on this right in the interest of public order
or morality or the sovereignty and integrity of India.

Grounds on which freedom gets restricted :

1. Sovereignty and Integrity of India: To safeguard the sovereignty of the country the freedom
to form association can be restricted. This freedom will also be restricted if it causes any
disturbance or affects the oneness of the country .

2. Public Order: To maintain safety, public peace, order and tranquility of the country, the right
to form association can be restricted.

3. Morality: This freedom can be restricted if any of the individual’s activities involve indecency
or obscenity.

The Respondent had to place conditions on the conferral of LCRSO status in terms of the
Prohibition of Discrimination in Universities Act. With diverging Opinions of Appellant and
Respondent i.e Appellant discriminating Non Hindus & Homosexuals while Respondent being
pride of their Non-discriminatory practices, granting such membership would harm the public
peace and order of the Country.
 Memorial for Respondents

V Freedom of Religion in India (Art. 25)

Article 25 of the Constitution guarantees freedom of religion to all persons in India. It provides that
all persons in India, subject to public order, morality, health, and other provisions:
• Are equally entitled to freedom of conscience, and
• Have the right to freely profess, practice and propagate religion.
It further provides that this article shall not affect any existing law and shall not prevent the state
from making any law relating to:
• Regulation or restriction of any economic, financial, political, or any secular activity
associated with religious practice.
• Providing social welfare and reform.
• Opening of Hindu religious institutions of public character for all the classes and sections
of the Hindus.

Baba Namdev’s teachings primarily urge Hindus to practice radical Hinduism and targets
the youth of India as a major support group. Baba Namdev enjoys a cult status amongst
young Hindu students who have created Faith of Baba Namdev Society (FBNS) in
several educational institutions. Merely rejecting the application will not amount to
violation of fundamental right of freedom of religion.

3. Whether the conditions imposed by LSCRO is were reasonable ,valid or

not?

Article15 of the Indian Constitution

Article 15; prohibits discrimination by the state against any citizen on grounds 'only' of caste,
religion, sex, race, and place of birth. Fundamental rights are provided to every citizen of the
country without any discrimination.

That means state cannot make any discrimination against its own citizens on these grounds.
State has to treat every body equal before law. Article15 also state that no discrimination on
the use of wells, tanks, bathing hats, Roads and place of public resort maintained by state funds
when these are especially provided and maintained from the state fund. In short they are
dedicated to the use of the public in general.

Article15 restricts discrimination on the ground of:

1. Religion: It means no person should be discriminated on the basis of religion from

accessing any public place, or policy by the state or any group.
 Memorial for Respondents

2. Race: Ethnic origin should not form a basis of discrimination. For Eg: citizen of Afghan origin
should not be discriminated from those of an Indian origin.

3. Caste: Discrimination on the basis caste is also prohibited to prevent atrocities on the lower
caste by the upper caste.

4. Sex: Gender of an individual shall not be a valid ground for discrimination in any matter. Ex:
Discriminating transgender, female etc

5. Place of birth: A place where an individual is born should not become a reason for
discriminating other members of the society.

So discrimination is contrary to the principles of equality.

On the basis of the fundamental rights given in our constitution the law land college has not
imposed any such conditions which are contrary to the human rights and the fundamental rights
of the citizen of India.

To conclude here I would like to comment that the conditions imposed by the law land college
that is the policy of non-discrimination which prohibits discrimination on the grounds of religion,
caste, sex and sexual orientation, place of birth, disability ,descent and residence are VALID
AND REASONABLE. As college is a place were students come to learn and shape themselves
as a better human being it is necessary to teach them the basic human rights and freedom of
equality were anybody and everybody can freely express there religion sexual preference caste
.hence there is nothing wrong or illegal being practised by the law land college.

4. Whether Rejection Of FBNS Application by LSCRO Is Valid or Not ?

The Lawland College is the preeminent law school in Delhi which provides official recognition
to certain groups of students under name of ‘Lawland College Registered Student Organization’
(LCRSO) program. The College has build up its reputation and strictly follows the Policy of Non
Discrimination which prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex/sexual
orientation, place of birth, age, disability, descent and residence. The recognition is granted
when student organisations abide by these conditions. In the year 2011, FBNS submitted its
application for the coveted LCRSO status in Lawland College. The Lawland College rejected
FBNS’s application in June 2011 stating that it does not comply with Lawland College’s Policy
of Non discrimination

Article 19 of the Constitution of India guarantees to the citizens of India six Fundamental
Freedoms
1) Freedom of Speech and Expression
2) Freedom of Assembly
3) Freedom to form associations,
4) Freedom of Movement,
 Memorial for Respondents

5) Freedom to reside and to settle, and

6) Freedom of profession, occupation, trade, or business

It is necessary to preserve this right as well as certain restrictions are to be imposed so as to

avoid social disturbance and outrage among the people. Hence, article 19(2) imposes certain
restrictions on the right to freedom of speech and expression which are stated and explained
below on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub clause in the interests of the
sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States,
public order, decency or morality or in relation to contempt of court, defamation or incitement to
an offence

The LCRSO rejected the application as it does not abide the policy of Non Discrimination which
prohibits discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex/sexual orientation, place of birth,
age, disability, descent and residence. FBNS clearly stated that non hindu and homosexual
were not eligible to seek membership and a footnote to annexure specified that anyone who
wishes to become a member has to sign a document titled “Condemn Homosexuality” and they
are promoting Radical Hinduism which is discriminatory and in clear violation of terms and
condition levied by college on granting LCRSO status. Lawland College made it very clear
FBNS that adherence to the Non discrimination Policy is the utmost important for getting the
benefits of LCRSO program but it will not suppress its activities if it was going to operate outside
it. Further Babanamdev critized Delhi HC judgement in Naz Foundation by stating it was a
challenge to radical Hinduism for which Delhi HC sentenced him to 10 days Simple
Imprisonment for Contempt of Court in December 2009. In spite of all this Baba Namdev and
FBNS continued their zealous advocacy of radical Hinduism.