living Rivers

Both Yamuna and Ganges are termed as living persons by a high court in India which were declared as nonliving entities by the supreme court of India which invites an arguement that since India is a world's largest democracy, why shouldn't the government go for a public referendum or a plebiscite to 'decide' on the living status of the said rivers

Because there are better things to do. Considering a river a living, which is pointless (because they aim to protect it), how would you account for flooding? What about the taxes? Moreover, instead of a useless referendum, how about teaching people not to throw litter in open? What are judges for? They are well educated and experienced to make wise decisions. Not an average citizen.

It could force the state to make better provisions against flooding, as well as obliging the state to help those affected by disaster. Could have been a good thing.