In a landmark judgement, Uttarakhand high court declared Ganga and Yamuna rivers "living entities" on Monday, days after a similar order was passed in New Zealand.

The ruling raises hope that the process of cleaning these pollution-battered rivers will gain pace now.

"It's a beautiful order," says Supreme Court Advocate Nipun Saxena. "This judgment is a historic precedent because it uses the concept of legal person, which was only used for (religious) idols until now, and extends its application to rivers," says Saxena.

A similar move was made by New Zealand Parliament five days ago, making Whanganui River the first water body in the world to be granted 'living entity' status.

So what does this ruling mean for Ganga and Yamuna?

#1 Now that they are considered 'living entities', Ganga, Yamuna, and their tributaries hold the same legal rights as a person. Like you, they are not natural persons, but in the eyes of law, they will be seen as "a legal or juristic person".

"Juristic persons are made for the sake of convenience, so as to manage the assets. Say, for example, to manage the huge properties that are regularly dedicated to Tirupati Balaji. Therefore the law has recognized that an idol of the temple is a legal or juristic person," explains Nipun.

#2 The ruling means that Ganga and Yamuna are essentially like minors -- incapable of holding or using the property -- and need to be placed under the care of a manager and/or a guardian. These caretakers will be responsible for ensuring the rivers are not misused, abused or misappropriated for personal use.

In this case, the Advocate General has been appointed "to personally look into the affairs and manage the board which is to protect and preserve Ganga and Yamuna," says Saxena.

#3 Ganga and Yamuna will be represented by court appointed individuals, who will file and contest cases in the rivers' names. For example, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand have come under fire for not taking necessary steps for the protection and preservation of the sacred rivers. After this ruling, they can be sued on the rivers' behalf.

Which explains why the Director of the Namami Gange programme, the Uttarakhand Chief Secretary, and the Advocate-General of Uttarakhand have been appointed to serve as "parents" for Ganga and Yamuna. "These officers are bound to uphold the status of the rivers and also promote the health and well-being of them," according to the order.

#4 Another implication of the ruling is that case against polluters can be filed directly under the rivers' name (example: River Ganga through Advocate General versus XYZ) instead of those falling victim to the pollution. This can potentially make the case for cleaning Ganga and Yamuna stronger, and also lead to a spurt in the number of cases filed in the name of the two rivers.

#5 The granting of 'legal rights' to Ganga and Yamuna means that any endowed fund set up for the rivers' welfare can only be used by these chosen guardians, and can only be used in the best interests of the rivers.

#6 Based on the order, the Centre now has an eight-week-deadline, to constitute a Ganga Management Board. "The constitution of Ganga Management Board is necessary for the purpose of irrigation, rural and urban water supply, hydro power generation, navigation, industries," said the judges.

#7 In line with the ruling, "mining in river bed of Ganga and its highest flood plain area" has also been banned forthwith. The court has appointed the district magistrate and sub-divisional magistrate to ensure implementation of the order.

#8 Based on a PIL filed by Haridwar resident Mohammad Salim, the court has also ordered the Dehradun District Magistrate to remove encroachments along the Shakti canal of the Ganga within the next 72 hours. It ordered that the DM be suspended if he fails to comply with the directive.

A LANDMARK RULING

Both Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand have been widely criticised for failing to clean and maintain the rivers held sacred by thousands of Hindus. Which makes this ruling the first concrete step to ensure action and accountability.But it's not just this that makes the ruling exceptional. In the past, such rights have only be accorded to idols of deities to streamline the upkeep and maintenance of temple assets. According to Nipun, this judgment "aligns religious overtures with ecological balance".

"For the first time the Court has gone out of the four corners of a temple, and actually made a river, the idol," he says.