At least one opportunity may be provided to son of aggrieved by High court

At least one opportunity may be provided to son of aggrieved to represent case instead of dismissing without looking into merit of the case in the name that no one of counsels came to press the case.
ठीक है अधिवक्ता के न उपस्थित होने पर केस ख़ारिज कर दिया गया किन्तु खुद  ब्यथित पुत्र को एक मौका दे 
श्री मान केस गिरने से अधिवक्ता का कोई नुकसान नही हुआ जो कुछ नुकसान हुआ है वह याचिकाकर्ता का हुआ है इसलिए न्यायहित पुत्र को एक मौका दिया जाय पक्ष रखने का जो की न्याय के नैसर्गिक सिद्धांत के अनुसार न्यायोचित है श्री मान जी को गुण दोष के अनुसार न्याय करने और तार्किक  निर्णय  सुनाने में कोई दिक्कत नही होगी | 
श्री मान जी केस को बिना गुण दोष की विवेचना किये DD/Non Prosec./Abated माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के न्याय मूर्ति महोदय ने  बर्खास्त कर दिया | सोचिये १३  वर्ष पुराना केस कोई अंतरिम आदेश नही माननीय न्यायाधीश महोदय ही बता दे साधारण वेतन मान का मतलब यदि उन्हें मालुम हो गया हो तो |  साधारण वेतनमान शब्द ही ८० हजार रुपये घुस जो की जो की शिक्षा निदेशक के कार्यालय द्वारा मागा गया ब्यथित द्वारा न देने की वजह से पैदा हुआ था जो की माननीय न्यायालय के आदेश का अवमानना था | मै खुद बहस के लिए तैयार हूँ पिता जी की ओर से लोअर कोर्ट में  अपने केसेस मै खुद देखता हूँ | यदि न्यायलय अवसर दे तो और माननीय अधिवक्ता महोदय को तो केस वर्खास्त होने के दो दिन पहले पिता जी दो हजार रुपये दे कर आये है वैसे पाच हजार माग रहे थे किन्तु उनके पास दो हजार रुपये ही थे उस समय बाद में देने का आश्वासन भी दिए थे | 
Sir, no interim order has been passed in the matter and petitioner is pursuing the case since 2006, attorney of the petitioner could not attend the case on 17-04-2019 because of illness and prayer of adjournment overlooked and 13 years old case being pursued by petitioner was arbitrarily dismissed without considering the merit of case. Whether canon of law allows such practices?
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that following judgment was delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on 17-April-2019 in the writ number-20121 year 2006. According to case status as follows, if the case is disposed, then litigant is curious to know the reason how the court reached on the conclusion to dismiss the case by overlooking the orders of the same court passed earlier in the matter. Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of the following notes / orders passed Hon’ble High court of judicature at Allahabad
High
Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Status : Search by Case Number
Case Status – WRIT – A ( WRIA ) – [ 20121/2006 ]
Filing No.
WRIA/20121/2006
Filing
Date : 10-04-2006
CNR
UPHC011291832006
Date
of Registration : 10-04-2006
Case Status
First
Hearing Date
08th
January 2018
Date
of Decision
17th
April 2019
Case
Status
Case
Disposed
Nature
of Disposal
Dismiss
other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated)
Stage
of Case
For
Admission
Coram
( Hon’ble Mr./Ms./Dr. Justice )
SUNEET
KUMAR ( 5038 )
Bench
Type
Single
Bench
Judicial
Branch
WRITS
Civil
Causelist
Type
State
UTTARPRADESH
District
MIRZAPUR
Petitioner/Respondent and their Advocate(s)
Petitioner
Respondent
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH
Advocate
– P.C. CHAUHAN, P.S.CHAUHAN , S.P. SINGH
STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
Advocate
– C.S.C.
Category Details
Category
WRIT
PETITIONS RELATING TO SECONDARY EDUCATION (NON TEACHING STAFF) (SINGLE BENCH)
( 15900 )
Sub Category
Salary
and allowances ( 5 )
IA Details
Application(s) Number
Party
Date of Filing
Next / Disposal Date
IA Status
IA/2/2006
( 76919/2006 ) Classification : Stay
Application Bench : 1007
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
10-04-2006
Pending
IA/3/2006
( 222357/2006 ) Classification : Listing
Application Bench : 5127
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
17-10-2006
19-10-2006
Disposed
IA/1/2006
( 265508/2007 ) Classification : Listing
Application Bench : 1007
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
06-11-2007
Pending
IA/4/2018 Classification : Suppl. Counter
Affidavit Bench : 4783
RAJENDRA
PRATAP SINGH Vs STATE
OF U.P. AND OTHERS
03-11-2018
13-11-2018
Pending
Last Listing Detail
Cause List Type
Hon’ble Mr./Ms./Dr. Justice
Last Listing Date
Stage of Listing
Last Short Order
Daily
Cause List
SUNEET
KUMAR ( Bench: 5038 )
17-04-2019
For
Admission
PREMPTORILY

Disclaimer: This is not an authentic/certified copy of
the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may
be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake,
if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD(Judicial)(Computer).
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Please Sir at least name be corrected.
1 message
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 3 December 2016 at 01:18
To: pahalchauhan@ymail.com
Most respected and revered advocate belonging to advocate fraternity of High court of judicature at Allahabad Mr. Pahal Singh Chauhan Ji ,please take a glance of status of case .
Case Status – Allahabad
Pending
Writ – A / 20121 / 2006 [Mirzapur]
Petitioner:
RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH
Respondent:
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
Counsel (Pet.):
P.C. CHAUHAN
Counsel (Res.):
C.S.C.
Category:
Service-Writ Petitions Relating To Secondary Education (non Teaching Staff) (single Bench)-Salary And Allowances
Date of Filing:
10/04/2006
Last Listed on:
25/11/2016 in Court No. 1
Next Listing Date:
To be listed on 02/08/2017
This is not an authentic/certified copy of the information regarding status of a case. Authentic/certified information may be obtained under Chapter VIII Rule 30 of Allahabad High Court Rules. Mistake, if any, may be brought to the notice of OSD (Computer
Hon’ble Sir whether name P. C. Chauhan has been corrected to P. S. Chauhan  if not why ?
Hon’ble Sir you had assured me till Wednessday name will be corrected but what outcome ,yourself guess it. 
Hon’ble Sir you  had asked us Rs.15000.00 fee and my father had paid you Rs.10000.00 and you HON’BLE Sir asked to pay Rs.500 to your Munsi and same was paid at same instant. 
You Hon’ble Sir had assured us so many but most surprising even name was not corrected. Hon’ble Sir what about credibility which is going down and relationship of faith between council and his client is not jolting .
                         Hon’ble Sir please help your client and his family as obligatory duty of a professional jurist if stick to ethics of noble profession.  For this your applicant shall ever pray you Hon’ble Sir.
                                                                 Yours  sincerely
                                                     Yogi M. P. Singh Mobile number-7379105911
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Whether साधारण वेतनमान can be explained by giving the explanation of वेतनमान a tool to frighten innocent and gullible people and promote corruption.
3 messages
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 15 April 2019 at 03:10
To: supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, hgovup@up.nic.in, csup@up.nic.in, uphrclko <uphrclko@yahoo.co.in>, lokayukta@hotmail.com
An application under article 32 of the constitution of the India.
To 
                                             Hon’ble Chief Justice of India/ companion judges
                                                     Apex court of Judicature in India.
                                                                New Delhi, India
Prayer-श्री मान जी क्या भारतीय न्याय व्यवस्था साधारण वेतनमान और वेतनमान दोनों का मतलब एक ही निकलता है |
श्री मान जी अनुपूरक काउंटर शपथ पत्र में जो की प्रत्यावेदन के साथ संलग्न है उसमे साधारण वेतनमान की व्याख्या विद्वान सरकारी अधिवक्ता द्वारा किया गया है |श्री मान जी अगर व्याख्या सिर्फ  वेतनमान की किया जाय तो क्या कुछ परिवर्तन हो सकता है अनुपूरक काउंटर शपथ पत्र में यदि नही तो माध्यमिक शिक्षा निदेशालय के विद्वान नौकरशाहों ने साधारण वेतनमान शब्द का प्रयोग करके लिपिक राजेंद्र प्रताप सिंह पुत्र देवराज सिंह को  मानसिक व शारीरिक प्रताड़ना क्यों दी|
Most revered Sir –Your applicant invites the kind attention of Hon’ble Sir with due respect to following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that  51A. Fundamental duties It shall be the duty of every citizen of India (a) to abide by the Constitution and respect its ideals and institutions, the National Flag and the National Anthem;(h) to develop the scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform;
(i) to safeguard public property and to abjure violence;

(j) to strive towards excellence in all spheres of individual and collective activity so that the nation constantly rises to higher levels of endeavour and achievement

 .
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that Hon’ble Sir-Plese take a glance of order of High Court at Allahabad dated 13.4.2006 in writ no.20121 of 2006 delivered by justice Tarun Agrawala as follows- Apparently , the impugned order dated. 1.2.2006 is against the teeth of the direction given by this court in its judgement dated 16.5.2005(it is 16/04/2004 order passed by Justice Jgadish Bhalla) .Standing Counsel appearing for respondent no.1 to 4 will file counter affidavit within three weeks explaining as to what the respondent mean by the words “Sadharan Vetanman“. List immediately thereafter. Sd/-Tarun Agarwala J. 13.4.2006 Respondents-1-Director secondary education Arth-1 Allahabad ( is the necessary party in the matter concerned) 2-Assistant deputy director secondary education working in the of director of secondary education .Allahabad. 3-D.D.R. Mirzapur.4-DIOS Mirzapur. 5-Committee of management R.I.C. Naugaon ,Mirzapur.

 

3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that According to delivered delivered judgement dated 16.4.2004 –“Accordingly,the impugned order of dismissal dated 1.8.90 is quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in the service forthwith and will be entitled to all the consequential benefits . However , he will be entitled to only 50% of emoluments of salary for the period of litigation up to the final order of this court.”श्री मान जी इस तरह याचिकाकर्ता को बिबादित बर्खास्तगी आदेश १.८.९० ख़ारिज करते हुए समस्त सेवा लाभ के साथ सेवा बहाल किया गया किन्तु बर्खास्तगी अवधि का ५० प्रतिशत emoluments of salary की पात्रता तय की |

 

 

4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that when the aforementioned order of the Hon’ble High court of judicature was not complied by the concerned staffs of secondary education government of the Uttar Pradesh, then aggrieved petitioner again took shelter in the High court of Judicature at Allahabad. Following order was passed by the Hon’ble court.
5It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that when aforementioned order passed by the Hon’ble High court of judicature at Allahabad was not complied by the concerned staffs, then aggrieved petitioner submitted contempt of court petition by making Joint director as the party by name.
6It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that contempt notice was served to the joint director but concerned instead of complying the order of the High court of Judicature were busy in physically and mentally torture to the petitioner Rajendra Pratap Singh and following impugned letter dated 01/02/2006 is one of those instruments.

श्री मान जी उपरोक्त से स्पष्ट है शिक्षा निदेशक उत्तर प्रदेश इलाहाबाद अर्थ -१ का पत्र सेवा समाप्ति अवधि का साधारण वेतनमान की बात कर रहा है और सभी जानते है की साधारण वेतनमान और वेतनमान में अंतर है |उस समय के तत्कालीन जिला विद्यालय निरीक्षक फरहाना सिद्धिकी द्वारा याचिकाकर्ता को जिला मुख्यालय पर तलब किया गया और साधारण वेतनमान के वेतन बिल प्रस्तुत करने के लिए कहा गया जब प्रार्थी द्वारा इनकार किया गया तब दूसरा बिल बना समय लाभ को काट दिया गया जिससे टालमटोल को छुपाया जा सके |इतनी बड़ी गड़बड़ी तब की गई जब न्यायालय अवमानना की तलवार सर पे लटक रही थी | श्री मान जी समय वेतनमान का लाभ न देने का कारण सेवा समाप्ति अवधि का सेवा संतोषजनक न होना | श्री मान जी जब सेवा ली ही नही गई तो संतोष जनक व असंतोष जनक कैसा | श्री मान जी माननीय उच्च न्यायालय के उस आदेश का क्या हुआ जिसके अनुसार समस्त सेवा लाभ के साथ बहाल किया गया था |

7It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that श्री मान जी विद्वान सरकारी अधिवक्ता ने कितनी चालाकी से साधारण वेतनमान को वेतनमान की व्याख्या से न्यायोचित ठहराया है और माध्यमिक शिक्षा के अधिकारिओं को who were acting like inscrutable face of sphinx were proved to be justified because of intelligence of the learned government council. Sir undoubtedly situation is precarious and going to be worse because of such cryptic approaches.
                                     This is a humble request of the applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that how can it be justified to withhold public services arbitrarily and promote anarchy, lawlessness, and chaos in an arbitrary manner by making the mockery of law of land? This is need of the hour to take harsh steps against the wrongdoer in order to win the confidence of citizenry and strengthen the democratic values for healthy and prosperous democracy. For this, your applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.                                                         

 

                                                                                                                             Yours sincerely

 

Date-15-04-2019              Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.
 

 

 

2 attachments
Sup Counter affidavit.docx
9691K
Sup Counter affidavit.pdf
3026K
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 16 April 2019 at 11:51
To: supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, hgovup@up.nic.in, csup@up.nic.in, uphrclko <uphrclko@yahoo.co.in>, lokayukta@hotmail.com
Hon’ble Sir-Plese take a glance of order of High Court at Allahabad dated 13.4.2006 in writ no.20121 of 2006 delivered by justice Tarun Agrawala as follows- Apparently , the impugned order dated. 1.2.2006 is against the teeth of the direction given by this court in its judgement dated 16.5.2005(it is 16/04/2004 order passed by Justice Jgadish Bhalla) .
According to submission 6 in the supplementary counter affidavit -Deponent most respectfully submits that the term “Sadharan Vetanman” used in the order 01/02/2006 passed by assistant deputy director of education refers to the initial pay scale of the feeding cadre in which employee was initially appointed. The petitioner was initially appointed on the post of clerk (group C post) in the pay scale of Rs.950-20-1150-EB-25-1500.
Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of the impugned order dated 01/02/2006 of Director secondary education Arth-1 conveyed through Assistant Deputy Director of Education to concerned subordinates in order to ratify.

 

3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that According to delivered delivered judgement dated 16.4.2004 –“Accordingly,the impugned order of dismissal dated 1.8.90 is quashed. The petitioner shall be reinstated in the service forthwith and will be entitled to all the consequential benefits . However , he will be entitled to only 50% of emoluments of salary for the period of litigation up to the final order of this court.”श्री मान जी इस तरह याचिकाकर्ता को बिबादित बर्खास्तगी आदेश १.८.९० ख़ारिज करते हुए समस्त सेवा लाभ के साथ सेवा बहाल किया गया किन्तु बर्खास्तगी अवधि का ५० प्रतिशत emoluments of salary की पात्रता तय की |

 Why Director secondary Education Arth-1 passed the cryptic order of Sadharan Vetanman dated-01/02/2006 by superseding the order of the High court of judicature dated-16-April-2004 and after too much procrastination and overlooking the subsequent Judgments/directions passed by High court of Judicature at Allahabad?

Now it seems that I should not had faith in judiciary but what can be done now. Even District Inspector of School at that time advised me that without commission they will not grant sanction but at that time I had full faith in the judiciary and its contempt but latter tragic incidences broken me gradually. Think about the fee of advocates and physical economical and other problems with mental trauma could be avoided if their illegal demand had been fulfilled. Pay bill was prepared under their advice so there was no such problem it created when they understood that I will never accept their unlawful demand and next writ then contempt petition was filled in the matter.
Sadharan Vetanman is a derogatory remark on the aforementioned order of the court and impugned order dated 01/02/2006 will setup bad precedent so liable to be quashed as such cryptic orders only promote corruption in the system. All consequential benefits and Sadharan Vetanman both are contrary words. At that time they told me that these funds are sanctioned when we pay commission to the government so how can I pay without taking commission? They were pressurizing writ petitioner to make the bill in the pay scale of Rs.950-20-1150-EB-25-1500 which is the real meaning of the Sadharan Vetanman but aggrieved petitioner did not do so. They were not talking of the subsequent modifications. First bill was prepared by the writ petitioner under the guidance of the office of district inspector of school Mirzapur. When writ petitioner denied then bill was made in the office of DIOS Mirzapur abruptly by summoning staff of the college concerned as joint director education had to appear before the High court of judicature at Allahabad with the compliance of the order.
                  This is a humble request of the applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that how can it be justified to withhold public services arbitrarily and promote anarchy, lawlessness, and chaos in an arbitrary manner by making the mockery of law of land? This is need of the hour to take harsh steps against the wrongdoer in order to win the confidence of citizenry and strengthen the democratic values for healthy and prosperous democracy. For this, your applicant shall ever pray you, Hon’ble Sir.                                                         
                                                        Yours sincerely
Date-16-04-2019              Yogi M. P. Singh, Mobile number-7379105911, Mohalla- Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road, District-Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh, Pin code-231001.

 

 

[Quoted text hidden]
Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com> 19 July 2019 at 21:34
To: supremecourt <supremecourt@nic.in>, pmosb <pmosb@pmo.nic.in>, presidentofindia@rb.nic.in, urgent-action <urgent-action@ohchr.org>, cmup <cmup@up.nic.in>, hgovup@up.nic.in, csup@up.nic.in, uphrclko <uphrclko@yahoo.co.in>, lokayukta@hotmail.com

aCourt No. – 28

 

Case :- WRIT – A No. – 20121 of 2006

 

Petitioner :- Rajendra Pratap Singh
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- P.C. Chauhan,P.S.Chauhan,S.P. Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon’ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents
No.2 to 4. This Court by order dated 13.4.2006 had directed the
respondents to explain the term “साधारण वेतनमान “. The counter
affidavit has not explained the aforesaid term. A supplementary
affidavit shall be filed by the respondents explaining the terms
“साधारण  वेतनमान “.
Put up this matter on 24.09.2018 in the additional cause list.
Prima facie, the order appears to be in violation of the orders
passed by this Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.1980 of
1991 (Rajendra Pratap Singh Vs. Committee of Management,
Smt. Ramwanti Devi Bench Madhav, Higher Secondary School,
Navgaon, District-Mirzapur and others on 16.9.2005. The Court
has accorded utmost urgency to the matter in view of the prima
facie violation of orders passed by this Court.
Order Date :- 11.9.2018
Ashish Tripathi
An application under article 32 of the constitution of the India.
To 
                                             Hon’ble Chief Justice of India/ companion judges
                                                     Apex court of Judicature in India.
                                                                New Delhi, India

Sir, no interim order has been passed in the matter and petitioner is pursuing the case since 2006, attorney of the petitioner could not attend the case on 17-04-2019 because of illness and prayer of adjournment overlooked and 13 years old case being pursued by petitioner was arbitrarily dismissed without considering the merit of case. Whether canon of law allows such practice?

 

1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that following judgment was delivered by the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad on 17-April-2019 in the writ number-20121 year 2006. According to case status as follows, if the case is disposed, then litigant is curious to know the reason how the court reached on the conclusion to dismiss the case by overlooking the orders of the same court passed earlier in the matter. Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of the following notes / orders passed Hon’ble High court of judicature at Allahabad

R.P. Singh3.PNG

 

2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that considerable portion of public exchequer is being spent on the judiciary so accountability of its members and transparency in its function must be ensured by the accountable public functionaries.
Dismiss other than merit(DD/Non Prosec./Abated) Dismiss in Default/Non procedural security/contrary to public policy
Right to reason is the indispensable part of sound judicial system.
 Hon’ble Sir please take a glance of historic judgement delivered by apex court of India. Accountability must be ensured in order to achieve good governance.
Even in respect of administrative orders Lord Denning M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engineering Union (1971 (1) All E.R. 1148) observed “The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration”. In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree (1974 LCR 120) it was observed: “Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice”. Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at”. Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the “inscrutable face of the sphinx”, it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out. The “inscrutable face of a sphinx” is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that What is being done by Advocate and Judge in the case only they know, party does not know but consequent will directly affect the party neither judge nor advocate in particular writ petitioner? What a joke faith of the common people is still alive in the court because he is not allowed to watch the court proceedings.
It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that gate pass can be only available  either through staffs of court if advocate may seek. Which implies that a petitioner can easily be deprived from attending the case proceedings which is his fundamental right. Most surprising is that same is being done by the chief justice High court of judicature at Allahabad.
It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that justice seeker is the essential component/pole of the case instituted in any court of law by him and deprive justice seeker from attending the case instituted by him which law of land justify it? Why High court of judicature interested in proceedings by not allowing petitioners or their credible relatives?
It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that to provide security to the judicial members ,Advocates and litigants itself is the obligatory duty of the state government under the monitoring of central government through His Excellency. It is unfortunate that by taking the recourse of issue of security , protectors of constitutional rights of citizens depriving the litigants from participating the court proceedings.
4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
Diary Number

Applicant Name
Petition date Diary No.
Year
/SCI/PIL(E)/
Diary No.-20477/SCI/PIL(E)/2019
Application Date-16-04-2019
Received On-29-04-2019
Applicant Name-YOGI MP SINGH
Address-SUREKAPURAM JABALPUR ROAD MIRZAPUR
State-UTTAR PRADESH
Action Taken
UNDER PROCESS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Quoted text hidden]

5 comments on At least one opportunity may be provided to son of aggrieved by High court

  1. मै खुद बहस के लिए तैयार हूँ पिता जी की ओर से लोअर कोर्ट में अपने केसेस मै खुद देखता हूँ | यदि न्यायलय अवसर दे तो और माननीय अधिवक्ता महोदय को तो केस वर्खास्त होने के दो दिन पहले पिता जी दो हजार रुपये दे कर आये है वैसे पाच हजार माग रहे थे किन्तु उनके पास दो हजार रुपये ही थे उस समय बाद में देने का आश्वासन भी दिए थे |

  2. श्री मान जी इस तरह याचिकाकर्ता को बिबादित बर्खास्तगी आदेश १.८.९० ख़ारिज करते हुए समस्त सेवा लाभ के साथ सेवा बहाल किया गया किन्तु बर्खास्तगी अवधि का ५० प्रतिशत emoluments of salary की पात्रता तय की |What is being done by Advocate and Judge in the case only they know, party does not know but consequent will directly affect the party neither judge nor advocate in particular writ petitioner? What a joke faith of the common people is still alive in the court because he is not allowed to watch the court proceedings.The human who asks for evidence in order to accept the existence of God, then how weaker and downtrodden section will have faith in the courts?

  3. Undoubtedly the demand is public spirited and they must consider it but it is confirmed that because of rampant it would be rejected by the corrupt people in the judiciary.
    At least one opportunity may be provided to son of aggrieved to represent case instead of dismissing without looking into merit of the case in the name that no one of counsels came to press the case.

  4. Here it is quite obvious from the judgement of the apex court of India that right to reason is the indispensable part of sound judicial system but in this context judge of the high court overlooked this judgement and he delivered the judgement without going into the merit of the case in the impartial manner which is travesty of Justice and such practices must be stopped. There is rampant corruption in our Judiciary which must be kept at any cost and must be curbed and they must be treated like public servants actually.

  5. Think what type of country is this where in order to comply the order of the high court of judicature director of the secondary education is asking 80000 as bribe when his demand was not fulfilled by the applicant then he superseded the order of the High court of judicature for the simple salary Sadharan vetanman which was against the spirit of the high court order passed by the high court of judicature at Allahabad but when the applicant took the shelter in the high court of judicature at Allahabad again he could not manage to get the justice whether it is not mockery of the laws of. The land where openly bribes are taken and even courts order are not complied without the bribery.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: