3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2021
March 19th – 21st, 2021

MARCH 19-21, 2021

1
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION

ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 2021
March 19th – 21st, 2021

2
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

TABLE OF CONTENTS

MOOT PROPOSITION ..................................................................................... 4

RULES OF THE COMPETITION ................................................................... 9

IMPORTANT DATES ..................................................................................... 19

3
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

MOOT PROPOSITION

1. “Mayura” is a democratic country with ancient history, tradition and culture consisting of 28
States and 8 union territories and having a total population of 1.25 Crore.
2. Mayura has a written constitution identical to the Constitution of India and the spirit of
socialism embodied in the preamble pervades the entire constitution. Social Justice,
Federalism, Independent Judiciary, Separation of powers are some of the other significant
features. The legislative powers are the same as in the seventh schedule of the Constitution
which consist of three lists namely, Union List, State List, and Concurrent list. The laws in
Mayura are the same as in India. The democratic socialism is acknowledged as the cherished
goal of the political system in Mayura since independence.
3. Agriculture has been the primary occupation of the people of Mayura and it approximately
contributes to 17% of GDP. After the independence of Mayura, the Mayura Union Party
(MUP) won the elections and formed the government. They prioritized the agricultural sector
which is the foundation of Mayura’s economy.
4. Nearly, 40 per cent of the farmers in Mayura own two and a half to five acres of land and
more than half own less than 20 acres. Only a small percentage qualify to be labelled as big
landlords.
5. MUP government introduced a slew of policies and investments in all facets from irrigation,
fertilizers to land reforms to achieve the goal of self-sufficiency in agriculture. The country's
main crops include rice, wheat and several vegetables and fruits.
6. In the successive years, MUP government focused on raising public investment in irrigation,
which was envisaged as the prime mover of farm growth and also strengthened the cooperative
credit structure. Further, to assure a remunerative and relatively stable price environment and
to increase production, an incentive price policy (Minimum Support Price) was adopted in the
year 1964. But not all farmers were happy with this policy measure.
7. Therefore, Dhahiya Farmers Association (DFA), a body protecting the rights and safeguarding
the welfare of the farmers, conducted a survey in different parts of Mayura to find the efficacy
of this policy measure.

4
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

8. The findings of the survey revealed that “the structure, conduct and performance of
agricultural marketing system in the country was ridden with inefficiencies. Not all the
agricultural produce have been accorded the MSP. Many segments of the agricultural sector,
particularly, the perishable commodities including fruits, vegetables, flowers, meat, fish and
livestock have not received the appropriate level of attention and treatment.”
9. The DFA appealed to the Union and State governments to take appropriate measures to
prevent distress sale by the farmers under the exploitation of creditors, traders and the
intermediaries.
10. An expert committee was constituted by the MUP government to review the situation in all
states. Based on the recommendations of the committee, a major reform towards the organized
agricultural marketing sector were ushered in with adoption of Agriculture Produce Markets
(Regulation) Acts and Agricultural Produce Market Committee by all the states and Union
Territories in 1960’s and 1970’s.
11. Even though APMR brought in a great improvement from the preceding trader-dominated
exploitative system, it failed to serve the objective of price discovery in a fair and transparent
manner.
12. In the year 2010, Deshbandhu, collector of Vidhule district was upset with the increasing
number of farmer’s suicide in his district and across the country. He started an NGO named
“Pavalan” to provide help to the small and marginal farmers who were at the mercy of the
traders and middleman. To relieve the farmers from the web of perpetual indebtedness,
“Pavalan” along with “DFA” held agitations all over of the country pressing for waiver of
farm loans and providing subsidies for agricultural inputs.
13. Meanwhile in 2014, Mayura People Party (MPP) with a thumping majority came to power
and formed the government by defeating MUP. On assuming power the newly elected
government as promised in their political manifesto brought many schemes and policies for
the upliftment of farmers through which more than 80 lakh of main and marginal farmers were
benefited.
14. The MPP government within two years of assuming power ordered the Department of
Agriculture, Cooperation and Farmers welfare to study and analyse the shortcomings of the
current agricultural market environment of the country. The findings of the study revealed the
prevalence of corruption and monopoly of traders and middleman in the markets. It brought
to light the poor state of infrastructure in these markets and also that they didn’t function in
the interest of the farmers.

5
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

15. Subsequently, there was an outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic which brought the entire world
to a standstill. All the governments of the world including “Mayura” imposed lockdown in an
effort to prevent the spread of COVID-19 virus. As a stimulus to the flagging economy,
different measures were taken by the government.

16. The Government with an aim to transform the agriculture and its allied sector introduced three
bills namely, 1. Farmers’ Produce Trade and Commerce (Promotion and Facilitation) Bill,
2020 2. Farmers (Empowerment and Protection) Agreement on Price Assurance and Farm
Services Bill, 2020 and 3. Essential Commodities (Amendment) Bill, 2020. These new
legislations are identical to the Indian ones. While introducing the bills, the minister
announced that all these measures would give effect to the neoliberal policy shift which is
essential for a welfare state. Further, he said these laws would bring farmers better
opportunities and usher in new technologies in agriculture and enable the farmers to sell their
products throughout the country without any barriers.
17. But this created uproar in the parliament as all the opposition members of the parliament were
against it and termed it as ‘anti-farm bills’. Despite this, the bills were passed through the
procedure of the voice-vote in the parliament, even though division was asked for in the Upper
House.
18. However, few members of the parliament who were a part of the ruling party resigned
protesting against the laws passed. They stated to the media that their resignation was an action
in the spirit of democracy.
19. There was chaos as farmers all over the country protested. The apprehension of the protestors
was that these enactments would result in the privatization of agriculture and would transform
agriculture into industry based sector.
20. The State Governments were also not in favour of the enactments. They declared that these
Acts passed by MPP Government as unconstitutional as it encroached upon the Entries in the
State List under the Seventh Schedule. Moreover, to cater to the demands of the farmers of
their respective States, several States passed amendments to the said Acts.
21. Also, more than a lakh of farmers from various states congregated in the capital to protest and
demonstrate their opposition to the farm laws through indefinite strike and dharna. The mass
strike by the farmers in the freezing cold without adequate food and basic amenities gained
the attention of the people across the world and the media around the world. On the 70th day
of the protest, a farmer named “Charan Das” aged 75 years, from the State of Jalampur

6
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

committed suicide leaving behind a suicide note which revealed his fear of loss of livelihood
due to these farm laws.
22. Next day, in an interview to a leading news channel, his son “Veer Prathap” accused the
government of its callous attitude in responding to the protests of the farmers. He alleged that
a major corporate group Vadhani had established a number of warehouses in his district and
across the country and these laws were passed to facilitate the corporate takeover of the
farming sector.
23. After this tragic incident, the MPP government took initiatives to resolve the crisis by inviting
the protesting farmers for talks. But even after multiple rounds of talks consensus could not
be reached. Meanwhile, the protesting farmers were asked to vacate from the place of dharna
and a petition was filed in the Apex Court of Mayura for their removal from the capital.
24. The opposing State Governments filed a petition under Article 131 challenging the legislative
competence in enacting these laws as it violates the fabric of federalism which is the basic
structure of the Indian Constitution. It also contended that the union government by these
enactments has relinquished its duties to protect and safeguard the farmers and consumers.
25. The Dhahiya Farmers Association has also filed a Public Interest Litigation under Article 32
of Constitution contending that these laws violated their Fundamental Rights.
26. ‘Pavalan’ the NGO filed a PIL seeking a stay to the implementation of the farm laws.
27. The Supreme Court after staying the implementation of the Act appointed a team of
Economists to negotiate with the agitating farmers even though the farmers and the
Government did not agree to the said course of action.
28. The Court has now fixed all the cases for hearing as to the correctness and propriety of the
above and also the validity of the legislations.

7
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

RULES OF THE COMPETITION

1. THEME AND DATE

The 3RD VITSOL National Moot Court Competition on Constitutional Law shall be
held from March 19, 2021 to March 21, 2021.

2. LANGUAGE
The Competition shall be conducted in English language only.

3. ELIGIBILITY
The Competition is open for students pursuing three or five-year LL.B Degree Course
from any recognized College/University/Law School subject to the fulfilment of
registration formalities.

4. TEAM COMPOSITION
4.1. Each Team shall consist of a minimum of two members and a maximum of three
members.
4.2. Every Team shall consist of two speakers and a maximum of one researcher.

5. REGISTRATION
5.1. Teams from each Participating Institution are requested to fill the Registration Form at
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSe6-
GeLczSEh3Jyd5adiRFUW7kzef76PAv-fS7-9SrreqtHyg/viewform?usp=sf_link in
order to confirm their participation.
5.2. The registration fees shall be Rs. 2500/- per team.

5.3. The amount shall not be refunded at any cause.

5.4. The registration fees of Rs. 2500/- shall be paid through the following link :
https://vitchennaievents.com/

5.5. Teams will be registered upon receipt of online payment of Rs. 2500/-

5.6. Teams which are registered according to Rule 5.5 will be provided with a Team Code,

8
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

which will be intimated to the official E-mail ID.

5.7. The details provided in the registration form shall be final for the purposes of
certificates and awards.
5.8. Team shall not be allowed to change the speakers and the researcher after registration

6. MEMORIAL EVALUATION AND QUALIFICATION

6.1. The Team must send a Soft Copy of their memorial for evaluation to
[email protected].
6.2. Late submission shall attract a penalty of one point per side (Applicant and
Respondent) for every 12-hour delay subject to a maximum delay of 2 days.
6.3. Memorial submitted as per Rules 6.1 and 6.2 will be considered for evaluation.

7. ORAL ROUNDS
7.1. The student counsels shall not state their names during Oral rounds, and must use
their Team Code assigned to the Team.
7.2. There shall be two preliminary rounds, a quarter final round, a semi-final round and
a final round. If the number of Teams participating is less than 12, there shall be no
quarter final round.
7.3. During the Oral Rounds:
7.3.1. Each Round will take place for a total of ninety (90) minutes. Applicant/s and
Respondent/s are each allotted forty-five (45) minutes.
7.3.2. The Team may not allocate more than twenty-five (25) minutes, including
rebuttal or surrebuttal, to either Oralist.
7.3.3. Time allocated but not used by one Oralist may not be used by another
Oralist, or in rebuttal or surrebutal.
7.3.4. Judges may, at their discretion, extend total Team argument beyond the forty-
five (45) minute allocation.
7.3.5. Each Team may reserve up to ten (10) minutes for rebuttal or surrebuttal.
7.3.6. The arguments should be confined to the issues presented in the memorial.
7.3.7. The Researcher needs to be present with the Oralists during the oral
arguments.

7.3.8. The Researcher is not allowed to pass notes to the Speaker during the Rounds.
Maximum scores for the Oral Rounds shall be 100 points per speaker.

9
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

7.3.9. The Oral Rounds shall be judged on the following criteria:

i. Knowledge of Law: 20 points
ii. Application of Law to Facts: 20 points
iii. Ingenuity and ability to answer questions: 20 points
iv. Style, Poise, Courtesy and Demeanor: 20 points
v. Time Management: 10 points
vi. Organization: 10 points
7.4. Only the Oral Communications described in Rule 7.3 are permitted. In particular, no
written communication or exhibits may be presented or delivered by any Team member to
any Judge or Court Officer during the oral rounds
7.5. Oral Courtroom Communication and Activity at the Counsel Table – Communication at
the Counsel Table between Team Members may only be in writing to prevent disruption.
Team and Team-affiliated spectators shall avoid all unnecessary noise, outbursts, or other
inappropriate behaviour which distracts the Court from the arguments in progress. Any
such incident, if reported by the presiding Judges, shall lead to disqualification.
7.6. Written Courtroom Communication – Written Communication during the Oral Rounds
shall be limited to the Team members sitting at the counsel table. No other written
communication may take place between any combination of the following parties: judges,
the oralist, Team Members sitting at the counsel table, or spectators (including Team
Members sitting in the audience). Violation of the Rule will lead to disqualification.

8. PRELIMINARY ROUNDS AND QUARTER FINAL ROUNDS

8.1. Fixtures will be announced during the orientation. The Exchange of Memorial will
take place through mail.
8.2. There will be two preliminary oral rounds per Team.
8.3. No two Teams shall face each other more than once in the Preliminary Rounds.
8.4. All efforts will be made to ensure that no Team faces the same Bench more than
once.

8.5. The Quarter Final Rounds shall be based on ranks obtained in the Preliminary
Round. The Top 8 Teams which have the highest aggregate Memorial Scores and
Preliminary Oral Rounds scores shall qualify for the Quarter Final Rounds.
8.6. In case of tie, in the Preliminary Oral Round the highest Oral Round score will be
the determinant factor to resolve the tie.

10
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

8.7. The Top 4 Teams which have the highest Quarterfinal Oral Round score will qualify
for the Semi-Finals. Memorial Scores will not be included while calculating the
Quarter Final scores except in case of Tie.

9. SEMI-FINAL AND FINAL

9.1. The Semi- Final shall be knock-out rounds.
9.2. Memorial Scores will not be added to the scores of Semi-Final and Final Rounds.

10. SCORING AND RESULTS

10.1. Each Judge will score each Memorial on a scale of fifty (50) points.
10.2. Each Judge will score each Oralist on a scale of hundred (100) points.
10.3. The Results will be announced after each Round.
10.4. The Result of the Final Round shall be announced at the Valedictory ceremony.

11. MEMORIALS
The following guidelines must be strictly followed for the memorials. Non-compliance
will entail penalties as provided below:
11.1. Teams have to prepare Memorial for both sides.
11.2. All soft copies must be entailed in .PDF (Portable Document Format) only. Any
other file extension will entail a penalty of 2 points. Attachments should be titled
as <Team Code> <A> for Petitioner side and as <Team Code> <R> for Respondent
side. E.g., 30A and 30R. The soft copies of the memorials must be emailed to
[email protected]. Each Team must ensure that the subject of the email
reads “Memorial Submission by Team Code ”.

11.3. Teams must not disclose the identity of their College/University anywhere in the
Memorial. Team Code assigned to each Team shall be mentioned at the top right
corner of the cover page of the memorial.
11.4. The Team shall not mention anywhere, their identity including the institution name
other than the Registration Form. Non-compliance with this Rule will entail
penalties which may extend to disqualification.
11.5. The memorials must contain the following sections:
i. Cover Page;
ii. Table of Contents;

11
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

iii. Index of Authorities;

iv. Statement of Jurisdiction;
v. Statement of Facts;
vi. Statement of Issues;
vii. Summary of Arguments;
viii. Arguments Advanced; and
ix. Prayer
Non-compliance with this Rule with respect to sections (i) to (vii) and (ix) will
result in a penalty of 1 point per missing section. Non-compliance of the Rule with
respect to section (viii) will result in the Memorial not being considered for
evaluation at all.
11.6. The Memorials must be in Times New Roman font, font size 12 with 1.5-line
spacing. All paragraphs must be justified aligned. The footnotes must be in Times
New Roman font, font size 10 with single line spacing. The arguments advanced
should not exceed 15 pages. The memorial as a whole should not exceed 30 pages
including the cover page. The memorials should have a margin measuring one
inch on all sides of each page. The numbering should be on the bottom and center
of each page. The Applicant memorial cover page shall be on blue color, and the
Respondent memorial on red color. A uniform style of citation according to
Bluebook 19th Edition should be followed throughout the memorial.Non-
compliance would result in a penalty of maximum of 10 points.

11.7. The maximum scores for the memorial shall be 100 points. The memorials shall
be evaluated on the following criteria:
i. Knowledge of Law and Facts; 25 points
ii. Proper and Articulate Analysis: 25 points
iii. Extent and use of Research: 20 points
iv. Clarity and Organization: 20 points
v. Grammar and Style: 10 points
11.8. Memorial Scores shall be added to the Oral Score only in the Preliminary Rounds.
In case of tie, the Oral Scores will be taken to determine the higher placed team.

12. JUDGES AND ELIGIBILITY TO JUDGE

12.1. The Chairman will determine the eligibility of persons to serve as Judges.

12
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

12.2. Unless expressly permitted or approved by the Chairman, Team Advisors, or others
directly affiliated with a Team, may not act as Judges in any Round until the Team
they advise has been eliminated from the Competition.
12.3. Affiliations which Do Not Constitute Conflict of Interest – The difference between
a mere Affiliation and a Conflict of Interest is the reasonable inference of partiality.
Absent additional facts.

13. ANONYMITY OF TEAMS

13.1. Judges should not attempt to ascertain the school of any Team during a competition.
However, in circumstances where the judge believes his or her evaluation of a
particular Memorial would be affected by knowledge of whether or not the primary
language used by the Team Members in their legal studies is English, the judge may
request VITSOL MCS Convener to reveal this information.

14. ORAL ROUND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

14.1. For the purpose of this Rule, the following definitions shall apply:

14.1.1. With respect to a given Oral Round, an “Affiliation” means a personal or

professional between a judge and a school, coach, or Team member that is
participating in the competition in which the judge is participating.
14.1.2. With respect to a given Oral Round, a “Conflict of Interest” means an
Affiliation which would, in the eyes if a reasonable observer, create an
inference that the affiliated judge would be unable to be impartial as to the
conduct or result of the Oral Round.
14.2. Prohibition and Mitigation of Conflict of Interest. The Convener should avoid
placing a judge into an Oral Round in which he or she has a Conflict of Interest. In
the event the Convener is unable to avoid a Conflict of Interest, the Convener
should take responsible steps to mitigate the effects of the conflict on the Oral
Round.
Such steps might include:
14.2.1. Obtaining a waiver from both Teams in the Oral Round
14.2.2. Informing the other members of the panel of the judge‟s affiliation
14.2.3. Adding to the panel a judge with a proportional Affiliation with the
opposing Team, and
13
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

14.2.4. Assigning a neutral official to observe the Oral Round and the
subsequent deliberations to determine whether the Conflict of Interest
affected the outcome of the Oral Round.
14.3. Waiver by Consent of Both Teams- Any Conflict of Interest shall be cured by the
express oral or written waiver, either before or after the Oral Round, of both Teams.
In this event, neither Team may later file an appeal or other complaint on the basis
of Conflict of Interest.
In Addition:
14.3.1. If a Team is aware of an Affiliation before the commencement of an Oral
Round and fails to report it, before the Oral Round begins, it shall be
deemed to have waived the Conflict of Interest.
14.3.2. If a Team becomes aware of an Affiliation after the completion of an Oral
Round and fails to report before the completion of the Tournament, it shall
be deemed to have waived the Conflict of Interest.

Prophylactic Avoidance of Conflicts- It is the duty of a judge to report any

Affiliations at the time he or she registers to judge or, subsequently, directly
to the Convener in advance of the Competition. The Convener shall
investigate any alleged Affiliation (whether self-reported by a judge or
otherwise) and shall determine whether such Affiliation constitutes a
Conflict of Interest.
14.4. Reporting Obligation of Teams- If a Team believes that an Affiliation exists which
may form the basis of a Conflict of Interest, it shall promptly inform the Convener.
The Convener shall take appropriate steps to investigate and, if he or she
determines that a Conflict of Interest exists, to eliminate or mitigate such Conflict
of Interest. The Team‟s failure to timely inform the Convener will constitute
a waiver under Rule 14.3.

15. SCOUTING
15.1. No member of any Team will be permitted to hear the arguments in any Court
Room in which that Team is not one of the contesting teams is whilst that Team
is still in the Competition. Scouting by any Team in any manner shall result in
instant disqualification.

14
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

16. AWARDS AND PRIZES

16.1. Winning Team Award: A trophy and a cash prize
16.2. Runners-up Team Award: A trophy and a cash prize
16.3. Best Memorial: A trophy and a cash prize
16.4. Best Speaker: A trophy and a certificate
16.5. Participation Certificates will be provided to the Team with the Second-Best
Memorial, Second Best Speaker.
16.6. Participation Certificates will be provided for all the participants

17. DECISION OF THE JUDGES SHALL BE FINAL

17.1. All Teams would be assisted by an Usher, who shall be the single point of contact
for the Team with regard to the Moot Court Competition.

18. CLARIFICATION REGARDING THE MOOT PROPOSITION

18.1. All queries relating to clarifications regarding the Moot Proposition should be sent
to [email protected].

19. AUDIO AND VIDEOTAPING

19.1. Audio and Videotaping of the Court Room proceedings is strictly prohibited.
Violation will entail a penalty of disqualification.

20. Rules for Online Platform

20.1. All participants shall ensure that they have a strong internet connection with good audio
and video facilities during oral rounds.
20.2. The competition shall be conducted using Zoom. The link for the Zoom Meeting will
be provided the previous day of the competition.
20.3. All Participants shall enter the Zoom meeting 30 minutes before the Round starts for
verification purpose. The time of the competition is specified in the schedule.
20.4. Participants shall enter the username while entering into the Zoom meeting as shown
below:
• For speaker 1= “Team Code-S1”
• For Speaker 2= “Team Code-S2”
• For researcher = “Team code-R”
15
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

For example: If you are belonging to team code VNMCI501 as a speaker 1 then you
shall mentions as VNMCI501-S.
20.5. Only PC or Laptops must be used for the oral rounds. The use of mobile phones is
strictly prohibited.
20.6. All participants shall keep their video on throughout the oral round. The PC or Laptop
shall be kept at a particular distance, to make sure that your hands are clearly visible.
20.7. The background of participants during their oral pleadings shall be plain and shall not
contain any symbols, representations, or any other material.
20.8. The participants shall ensure that any noise or audio shall not disturb other speakers
during their time of oral pleadings.
20.9. The teams shall ensure that they do not disclose their identity at any stage by any means
in the Competition.
20.10.At the time when one participant is speaking, others shall keep their microphones on
mute. However they shall not switch off the video.
20.11.Submission of compendium (if any) shall be made through [email protected]
20.12.Contacting the advocates who drafted the moot problem is strictly prohibited. Such an
action shall lead to disqualification of the concerned team(s).

21. CONTACT
21.1. In case of any queries or clarification regarding the Moot Court Competition,
contact:
i) Parvathi Suresh - +91- 7010023522
ii) Kishandhan - +91- 7010308348
iii) Dhikshana Subburaj - +91- 733902313
iv) Shivani Sree - +91- 7550171306
21.2. E-Mail ID: [email protected]. Mails would be replied within 24 hours
of receipt.
21.3. Queries Regarding Propositions should only be sent to the E-Mail Address of the
Moot Court Society. Phone calls will not be entertained.

16
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Address:
The Dean, VIT School of Law,
VIT Chennai Campus, VIT University,
Vandalur-Kelambakkam Road,
Chennai

17
 3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

IMPORTANT DATES

S. PARTICULARS DATE TIME

No. [in Indian Standard Time
(IST)]
1. Registration Link On or before 23 59 hours(11:59 PM)
https://vitchennaievents.com/
25th February 2021
To complete the registration please fill
the registration form
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FA
IpQLSe6-
GeLczSEh3Jyd5adiRFUW7kzef76PA
v-fS7-
9SrreqtHyg/viewform?gxids=7628

2. Moot Proposition Clarification On or Before -

4th March 2021

3. Soft Copy of Memorials On or Before 2359 hours (11:59 PM)

11th March 2021

4. Submission of Compendium On or Before 23 59 hours (11:59 PM)

15th March 2021

5. Competition 19th – 21st -

March 2021

18
3rd VITSOL NATIONAL MOOT COURT COMPETITION ON
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

19