Sir we have losing faith in our judiciary if an offence ,then please initiate contempt of court proceedings

Sir we have losing faith in our judiciary if this is an offence ,then please initiate contempt of court proceedings against your applicant through High court of judicature at Allahabad. Your applicant is ready to face it like other cases.

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh yogimpsingh@gmail.com

Attachments2:25 PM (17 minutes ago)

to pmosbsupremecourturgent-actionhgovupcmupcsup
Undoubtedly our judiciary in the state is tottering  because of lack of judges ,it may be one of the causes of poor delivery of justice but several other factors which are affecting the performance of judiciary like tyranny ,procrastination ,non accountability ,arbitrariness and most of the important factor is no regard of orders passed by higher judiciary  ,apex court of India ,rules made by legislatures.
14 March 2016
12:33
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that a judge is a public servant in this largest democracy in the world and most of the judges advocates independence of judiciary and government has provided this right to a judge but what is the mandatory duty of  judiciary itself ? If outer interference affects the efficiency of a judge ,then what steps are taken by judiciary itself in order to curb growing tyranny in the judiciary . If a right is guaranteed to some one ,then efforts are made to curb its abuses.
Subramanium Sethuraman vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 17 September, 2004
Author: S Hegde
Bench: N. Santosh Hegde, S.B.Sinha, Tarun Chatterjee
           CASE NO.:
Appeal (crl.)  1253 of 2002
PETITIONER:
Subramanium Sethuraman
RESPONDENT:
State of Maharashtra & Anr.
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/09/2004
BENCH:
N. Santosh Hegde, S.B.Sinha & Tarun Chatterjee
Therefore, in our opinion the High Court was correct in coming to the conclusion once the plea of the accused is recorded under Section 252 of the Code the procedure contemplated under Chapter XX has to be followed which is to take the trial to its logical conclusion. The copy of judgement is already submitted before the court with representation dated 06/03/2015.
Whether this order is not binding on subordinate courts but why they are not complying this order even when they are requested to do so.
2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that we have entered in 21st century but a judge deny to accept a submission of party of litigation  merely on the ground that language of prayer was in English not in Hindi. According to Judge ,he doesn’t know English so application be made before him in Hindi not in English .
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that bar association calls upon strike latter but Judges in the lower courts don’t sit on the chair since morning because they know that today bar association will call upon strike. When my case is fixed for hearing your  applicant always requests for hearing but in the name of strike of bar association ,prayer of your applicant is rejected and in this 10 years long span of trial only two days of hearing on the date of strike could be feasible.
4-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that during the trial of a case which never last in due time only next date is given and submissions are overlooks in the name of procedural lacunae. Your applicant has deep experience of longer struggle in the court of law where strikes called upon by bar association have mute consent of judges.
5-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that where is the accountability of judges in regard to disposal of cases by them? Whether the administrative head of lower judiciary has the record of number of cases submitted before a judge and how many of those disposed within a specific time ? Your applicant wants that such information be made public under section 4(1) (b) of Right to Information Act 2005. 
 6-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
 CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION 2nd Floor, ‘B’ Wing, August Kranti Bhavan,  Bhikaji Cama Place, NEW DELHI­110 066 TEL: 011­26717355 
                          Appeal No. CIC/CC/A/2014/001147/VS
Appellant: Shri Yogi M.P. Singh,           Mohalla­Surekapuram,     Jabalpur Road,         Distt. Mirzapur, U.P.   
Respondent:                    Central Public Information Officer, Allahabad High Court,           Allahabad.                                                                  
   Date of Hearing:      26.10.2015      
Date of Decision:   4.11.2015
                                                              O R D E R
RTI application: 1.The   appellant   filed   an   RTI   application   dated   18.3.2014   seeking   information regarding copy of counter affidavit submitted by Director Secondary Education Arth­1 Allahabad.   The PIO responded  on 27.3.2014.     The  appellant  filed first  appeal  dated 31.3.2014 with the first appellate authority.  The FAA responded on 5.5.2014. The appellant filed second appeal on 24.9.2014 with the Commission.
Hearing: 2. The appellant participated in the hearing through audio.   The respondent did not participate in the hearing. 
3. The appellant referred his RTI application dated 18.3.2014 and reiterated the points mentioned in the RTI application.  The appellant stated that he wanted to know whether the Director Secondary Education has filed counter affidavit in writ petition No. 20121 of 2006 or not.  The appellant further stated that if the Director Secondary Education has filed the counter affidavit, then a copy of counter affidavit should be provided 
Decision: 4. The respondent is directed to provide the appellant, within 30 days of this order, information sought in the RTI application.  The appeal is disposed of.  Copy of decision be given free of cost to the parties. (Vijai Sharma) Chief Information Commissioner   Authenticated true copy
7-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that repeated representations made before the CPIO ,High court of judicature at Allahabad by your applicant but aforesaid direction passed by Hon’ble chief information commissioner of India on 04/11/2015 was not complied by central public information officer of High court of Judicature at Allahabad. Whether it is justified on the part of public authority ,High court of judicature at Allahabad. Hon’ble Sir may be pleased to take a glance of attached documents with this representation.
8-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that whether the act of the central public information officer ,High court of judicature at Allahabad is not lowering the dignity of courts in India. Whether such act on the part CPIO is not tantamount to assault on set up high standard norm ,ethical values and impeccable integrity of temple of justice. To whom CPIO wants to shield by not revealing the sought information ? In view of your applicant ,working style in judiciary must be crystal clear instead of such inscrutable sphinx.
This is humble request of your applicant to you Hon’ble Sir that It can never be justified to overlook  the rights of citizenry by delivering services in arbitrary manner by floating all set up norms. This is sheer mismanagement which is encouraging wrongdoers to reap benefit of loopholes in system and depriving poor citizens from right to justice. Therefore it is need of hour to take concrete steps in order to curb grown anarchy in the system. 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 .
Sent from Mail for Windows 10

2 comments on Sir we have losing faith in our judiciary if an offence ,then please initiate contempt of court proceedings

  1. Undoubtedly our judiciary in the state is tottering because of lack of judges ,it may be one of the causes of poor delivery of justice but several other factors which are affecting the performance of judiciary like tyranny ,procrastination ,non accountability ,arbitrariness and most of the important factor is no regard of orders passed by higher judiciary ,apex court of India ,rules made by legislatures.

  2. Why the following information is not made available to information seeker even after the directions of chief information commissioner of India? The appellant referred his RTI application dated 18.3.2014 and reiterated the points mentioned in the RTI application. The appellant stated that he wanted to know whether the Director Secondary Education has filed counter affidavit in writ petition No. 20121 of 2006 or not. The appellant further stated that if the Director Secondary Education has filed the counter affidavit, then a copy of counter affidavit should be provided

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: