Whether a layman can get justice in this dilapidated judiciary where fundamental rights are crushed

Whether a layman can get justice in this dilapidated judiciary where fundamental rights are crushed in the name of independence of judiciary. If independence of judiciary instead of promoting transparency and accountability actually promoting arbitrariness and tyranny ,then consequences may be terrific which will lead massive lawlessness culminating into anarchy. Who are accountable for this anarchy ?

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).

 EU577659005IN
DELIVERED
·        
Nov 29, 2016
03:18 pm
Item DeliveredIndia Post Domestic
Allahabad High Court S.O(211017):
·        
Nov 29, 2016
11:01 am
Item RecievedIndia Post Domestic
Allahabad High Court S.O
·        
Nov 28, 2016
04:41 pm
Item BaggedIndia Post Domestic
NSH ALLAHABAD
·        
Nov 28, 2016
09:34 am
Item RecievedIndia Post Domestic
NSH ALLAHABAD
·        
Nov 28, 2016
01:25 am
Item BaggedIndia Post Domestic
ICH MIRZAPUR
·        
Nov 27, 2016
08:14 pm

An application under subsection 1 of section 6 of Right to
Information Act 2005.
To
                           
CPIO/
Registrar
(Accounts)
                           High Court OF
judicature at Allahabad
                               Mob. Number-8004904900
Subject-Provide
sought information within stipulated time as prescribed under subsection 1 of
section 7 of Right to Information Act 2005.
Hon’ble
Sir,
AT 10.00 A.M. date:
                    COURT NO. 1
                    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN
SINHA
 Fresh and listed: (i) Service writs relating
to educational institutions from 1
 -January 2016; (ii) Listed service
writs(except service writs relating employees
– of High Court and District Judiciary)
from 1 January 2001 to 31 December, 2010
           
for orders, admission and hearing including bunch cases.
                                      For
Admission
                             Please provide
information point wise as sought by your applicant in regard to following
points.
1-Please made available number of cases listed by Registry of
High court Allahabad for hearing on
25/11/2016 in Court No. 1 in
the High Court of judicature at Allahabad.
2-Please made available number of cases heard by Hon’ble
aforesaid court out of aforementioned sought listed cases.
3-Please made available the name and designation of public
servant under whose supervision aforementioned sought listed cases were listed
for hearing on
25/11/2016 in Court No. 1 in the High Court of judicature at
Allahabad.
4-Please made available the basic criteria to list a case before
Hon’ble court by the registry of High court of judicature at Allahabad.
5-Please made available the fate of non heard cases by the court
in regard to their processing for next listing by the registry of
High
Court of judicature at Allahabad.
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
         
                                           Mahesh Pratap
Singh /Yogi M. P. Singh
     
                                                        Mobile
number-7379105911
Mohalla-Surekapuram, Jabalpur Road
District-Mirzapur , Uttar Pradesh ,India
Note-R.T.I. Fee payment through
demand draft paid to Registrar General ,High Court, Allahabad, details as
enclosure with this R.T.I. Communique.
Total three pages including R.T.I.
Communique and all pages signed by your applicant.
 Whether it is justified that independence of judiciary may encroach/crush the fundamental rights of citizenry ipso facto obvious .

Receipts/Yogi M P Singh
x

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

Attachments26 Nov (5 days ago)

to supremecourtsecy-cicpmosbpresidentofind.urgent-action, bcc: cmup, bcc: hgovup, bcc: csup
Hon’ble Sir Justice delayed is Justice denied and transparency and accountability is the characteristics of good governance but what is going on in this democracy is transcendental. Hon’ble Sir 102 cases fixed for hearing in the court number 1 in the High court of judicature at Allahabad as obvious from the copy of listing and only 12 cases could be taken up as told by the advocate. Whether such practice is the reflection of healthy democracy in which transparency and accountability is well maintained.
26 November 2016
12:36
With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
  1. 1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that following matter is concerned with my father who earlier filed four writ petitions in order to seek justice and following is the fifth writ petition filed in High court of judicature at Allahabad. Initially  writ petition was filed by S.P. Singh and latter since 2009 ,he commenced practice in the apex court of India ,my father hired P.S. Chauhan as the subsequent advocate by paying his fee. Case is still not disposed but fees of two advocates have been paid. Whether justice is really available to common citizenry in this largest democracy in the world.
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:
There is no further orders of listing.
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).

2-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that how much surprising  that  those obliged to establish the rule of law itself great violators of the law of land.  Why the order passed by central information commission was not complied by CPIO High court of judicature at Allahabad. Whether this is reflection of rule of law in the country.
Whether every one is alike before the law in this largest democracy in the world really.
1 message
1 November 2016 at 20:24
    Please take a glance of  Date of Decision:   4.11.2015 passed by Hon’ble chief information commissioner of India but not complied by CPIO High court of judicature at Allahabad .
    Why CPIO High court at Allahabad didn’t comply the order passed by central
    information commission.
    Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
      • 9:01 PM (1 minute ago)
    1. to pmosb, supremecourt, cj, urgent-action, secy-cic, dhirendra.k, hgovup, cmup, csup 
    Whether independence of judiciary means tyranny and lack of transparency and accountability if not so then why public authority High court of judicature at Allahabad took under teeth the order passed by constitutional functionary central information commission. In ancient India ,Kings used to hang bell at the door of palace so that no justice seeker may be deprived from right to justice but here no justice is available to common citizenry unto death. It seems that honesty has been out of context otherwise no such serious issues concerned with mockery of provisions of constitution may arise before us.
    01 February 2016
    19:29
        
    With due respect your applicant wants to draw the kind attention of the Hon’ble Sir to the following submissions as follows.
    1. 1-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that 
                                       CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSION2nd 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
    1. 2-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.
    2. 3-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.
    Please take a glance of attached documents with this representation.
     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 Windows Mail
    Mokery of Right to Information Act 2005 by High court itself.pdf
    560K
3-It is submitted before the Hon’ble Sir that
                                     AT 10.00 A.M.
                    COURT NO. 1
                    HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SINHA
 Fresh and listed: (i) Service writs relating to educational institutions from 1
 -January 2016; (ii) Listed service writs(except service writs relating employees
– of High Court and District Judiciary) from 1 January 2001 to 31 December, 2010
            for orders, admission and hearing including bunch cases.
                                      For Admission
 Senior Citizen
 WRIT – A                               
   1. NCL   21832/2003 RAM SURAT GUPTA                 VIKRAM D. CHAOHAN       
                                                       ASHOK KHARE
                                                       V.D.CHAUHAN
                                                       SIDDHARTH KHARE
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
   2. NCL   18095/2007 DEVI SHANKER PANDEY             RAJESH KUMAR DUBEY      
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       B.A.KHAN
   3. NCL   25202/2008 GAJADHAR PANDEY                 S.P.K. TRIPATHI         
                                                       ARUN KUMAR SHUKLA
                                                       R.N.TRIPATHI
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU’ HOME S  C.S.C.                  
                       -ECY. & OTHERS
   4. PO    30694/2009 SMT. ASHOK KUMARI & OTHERS      VIVEK SARAN             
                                                       S.K. MISHRA
                                                       SIDDHARTH KHARE
                                                       ASHOK KHARE
                                                       PANKAJ KUMAR TYAGI
                                                       ARCHANA TYAGI
                                                       P.K. TRIPATHI
                                                       C.K. MISHRA
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS      C.S.C.                  
                                                       D.S.PANDEY
   5. PO    34923/2009 MANTOO RAM YADAV                HIMKANYA SRIVASTAVA     
                                                       UDAY KARAN SAXENA
                                                       H.K. SRIVASTAVA
                                                       MOHD. ISA KHAN
                       Vs. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS     A.S.G.I.                
                                                       C.S.C./2009/30534
   6. WA    37086/2009 SMT. SURSARI DEVI               RAJESH KUMAR BIND       
                                                       VINAY KUMAR SINGH
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       K.S. KUSHWAHA
                                                       NISHEETH YADAV
 WITH WRIA- 21722/2008 SMT. SUR SARI DEVI              RAJESH KUMAR BIND       
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU’ PRINCI  C.S.C.                  
                       -PAL SECY. & OTHERS             K.S. KUSHWAHA
   7. PO    38237/2009 RAJENDRA PRASAD TYAGI           ASHOK KUMAR RAI         
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS      C.S.C.                  
 WITH WRIA- 22998/2007 SHANKAR LAL GUPTA               ASHOK KUMAR RAI         
                                                       A. KHARE
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       H.R.BIST
 WITH WRIA- 38293/2009 HEAD CONST. 158 VEER PAL SINGH
 Decided on 28/11/2014
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS
                                        For Orders
 CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION        
   8. TU    18504/2016 PANCHAM                         ANIL KUMAR SHARMA       
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
 WITH BAIL- 39293/2013 PANCHAM
 Decided on 01/03/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
   9. TU    21668/2016 CHANDAN GUPTA                   GHANENDRA SINGH CHAUHAN 
                                                       AJAY BHANOT
                                                       MANISH TIWARI
                                                       ASHWANI KUMAR AWASTHI
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
                                                       AMIT DAGA
 WITH BAIL- 32240/2014 CHANDAN GUPTA (HUSBAND)
 Decided on 18/02/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
  10. TU    26687/2016 BHOLA                           ATUL KUMAR              
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
 WITH BAIL- 15072/2016 BHOLA
 Decided on 10/05/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
  11. TU    28788/2016 MOHIT VERMA                     ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY      
                                                       YASHWANT SINGH
                                                       DINESH KUMAR PANDEY
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
                                                       ANSAR AHMAD
 WITH BAIL- 13664/2016 MOHIT VERMA
 Decided on 20/05/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
 WITH BAIL- 10898/2016 MOHIT VERMA
 Decided on 07/04/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
 WITH BAIL- 38036/2015 MOHIT VERMA
 Decided on 29/01/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
  12. TU    28902/2016 OM VEER                         SOM VEER                
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
 WITH BAIL- 7548/2016  OM VEER
 Decided on 29/03/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
  13. TU    29742/2016 SHAMMA @ GULZAR                 RAGHUVANSH MISRA        
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
 WITH BAIL- 5743/2016  SHAMMA @ GULZAR
 Decided on 25/04/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
  14. TU    33065/2016 SUHAIL @ BILAL                  GAURAV SHARMA           
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P.               G.A.                    
 WITH BAIL- 3208/2016  SUHAIL @ BILAL
 Decided on 20/05/2016
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P.
                                      For Admission
 WRIT – A                               
  15. PREM  9154/2016  BHARTI SINGH AND 2 OTHERS       RAMJI SINGH PATEL       
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND 4 OTHERS  C.S.C.                  
                                                       DEO DAYAL
                                                       MANGLA PRASAD RAI
  16. PO    6084/2001  PRAKASH CHANDRA MISHRA          K.C.SINHA               
                                                       DILEEP KUMAR MISHRA
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS      C.S.C.                  
                                                       C.B. YADAV
  17. PO    26094/2001 RAM NATH                        SHYAM KUMAR SRIVASTAVA  
                       Vs. MANAGING DIRECTOR, U.P. JA  SC                      
                       -L NIGAM & OTHERS               K.B. MATHUR
                                                       S.J. YADAV
  18. NCL   26976/2001 LAXMAN PRASAD TIWARI            L.K. DWIVEDI            
                                                       S.N.PANDEY
                                                       ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY
                                                       PRADEEP CHANDRA
                       Vs. U.P. CO-OPERATIVE SPINNING  R.K. OJHA               
                       – MILL LTD. & OTHERS            K.MURARI
                                                       S.C.
                                                       DHANJAI AWASTHI
 WITH WRIA- 17493/1990 L.P. TIWARI                     PRADEEP CHANDRA         
                       Vs. SECY.G.M.,U.P.S.K.M.,FARRU  R.K. OJHA               
                       -KHABAD                         S.C.
  19. PO    28729/2001 MAHENDRA KUMAR SINGH & ANOTHER  GAUTAM BAGHEL           
                       Vs. NATIONAL SUGAR INSTITUTE T  S.C.                    
                       -HROUGH ITS DIRECTOR  & OTHERS  N.C.TRIPATHI
                                                       P.K.SINGH
                                                       R.K. SINGH
                                                       SANJEEV SINGH
  20. NCL   28745/2001 AMAR PRAKASH CHANDRA  & OTHERS  PRAKASH PADIA           
                       Vs. ASSTT. DIRECTOR OF EDUCATI  C.S.C.                  
                       -ON (BASIC) & OTHERS            B.P. SINGH
                                                       S.N.SRIVASTAVA
                                                       SHERE ALI
  21. WA    33987/2001 SURENDRA SINGH                  VIJAY GAUTAM            
                                                       ASHOK PANDEY
                                                       S.K.DUBEY
                                                       KUNWAR DIGVIJAI SINGH
                                                       M.C. SINGH
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
  22. NCL   44804/2001 KRISHNA GOPAL SHUKLA            LALJI PANDEY            
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. THROUGH SECY  C.S.C.                  
                       -. SECNDARY EDUCATION & OTHERS
  23. NCL   2764/2002  DEO SARAN SINGH                 S.K. MISHRA             
                                                       SIYA RAM VERMA
                                                       BIRENDRA SINGH
                                                       ARVIND KUMAR VERMA
                       Vs. BASIC SHIKSHA PARISHAD ALL  R.K. TRIPATHI           
                       -D. THRU’ SECY. & OTHERS        SC
                                                       VIKRAM BAHADUR SINGH
  24. PO    15074/2002 SMT. PRATIBHA RANI              BRAHM SINGH             
                                                       S.L. MISHRA
                                                       P.C.SRIVASTAVA
                                                       RAHUL JAIN
                                                       RAJ KUMAR JAIN
                                                       SIDDHARTH KHARE
                                                       RAJ KUMAR
                       Vs. JOINT DIRECTOR OF EDUCATIO  C.S.C.                  
                       -N & ORS.                       R.P.DUBEY
                                                       YOGENDRA KUMAR YADAV
 WITH WRIA- 38032/2006 KESHAV PRASAD                   L.P. SINGH              
                                                       RAJESH SINGH
                                                       B. SINGH
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       MOHAN YADAV
                                                       RAM KRISHNA GUPTA
 WITH WRIA- 1409/2012  UMESH NISHAD
 Decided on 10/01/2012
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS
 WITH WRIA- 56317/2003 LALTA PRASAD SINGH
 Decided on 10/09/2007
                       Vs.STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
  25. WA    19021/2002 JAGJEEVAN LAL SONKER            BHOOPENDRA NATH SINGH   
                                                       S.R. GUPTA
                                                       A.R. GUPTA
                                                       ANIL KUMAR MISHRA
                                                       RAM KUMAR PAL
                       Vs. U.P. STATE CONSTRUCTION CO  VIVEK SARAN             
                       -RPN. LTD. THRU’ M.D. & ORS.    SC
  26. NCL   54402/2002 ANAND KUMAR UPADHYAYA & ANOTHE  SHYAMAL NARAIN          
                       -R                              P.K. RAI
                                                       J.B.SINGH
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. & OTHERS      C.S.C.                  
  27. NCL   10017/2003 CHANDRA PRAKASH YADAV           ANIL TIWARI             
                                                       AJEET KUMAR BARANWAL
                                                       RASHTRAPATI KHARE
                       Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA THRU’   VIPIN SINHA             
                       -ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER AND  K.S. SHUKLA
                                                       S.C.
                                                       V.SINHA
                                                       JAYANT BANERJI
  28. NCL   37877/2003 JAGDISH PRASAD                  VIVEK SARAN             
                                                       RAM SAJIVAN
                                                       JAGDISH BAHADUR SINGH
                                                       B.D.SHARMA
                       Vs. DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL O  C.S.C.                  
                       -F POLICE AGRA RANGE AGRA & ORS
  29. PO    40436/2003 DAYA RAM SINGH                  M.V. VERMA              
                                                       V.K. SINGH
                       Vs. VITT. NIYANTRAK EVAM MUKHY  C.S.C.                  
                       -A LEKHA ADHIKARI(PENSION SEC)&
  30. NCL   53228/2003 AYODHYA AND OTHERS              A.R. DUBE               
                       Vs. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,  C.S.C.                  
                       – RENUKOOT, SONEBHADRA AND OTHE
  31. NCL   3811/2004  RAJIV CHOLA                     RAJIV SHARMA            
                                                       M.BAJPAI
                                                       NAMIT KUMAR SHARMA
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    VIPIN SINHA             
                                                       S.C.
                                                       SATISH CHATURVEDI
  32. PO    26343/2004 KRISHNA MOHAN PRASAD SAXENA     NEERAJ SRIVASTAVA       
                                                       H.M. SRIVASTAVA
                                                       VISHNU SAHAI
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       R.K.RATHORE
  33. NCL   5981/2005  RAM DAS                         R.S. KUSHWAHA           
                                                       S.P. VERMA
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
                                                       V.K.SINGH
                                                       G.K.SINGH
                                                       M.N. SINGH
                                                       ANMOL RANJAN
                                                       P.D. TRIPATHI
                                                       P.P.TRIPATHI
  34. PO    11518/2005 CHANDRA SHEKHAR                 SANTOSH SHUKLA          
                                                       DEEPAK JAISWAL
                                                       A.K. SRIVASTAVA
                                                       A.K. PRAJAPATI
                                                       RAM RAJ
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. THRU’ SECY.   C.S.C.                  
                       -BASIC EDUCATION & OTHERS       V.K. SINGH
                                                       UMESH CHANDRA MISHRA
  35. NCL   27326/2005 VIJAY KUMAR                     A.K. SRIVASTAVA         
                                                       NEERAJ KANTA VERMA
                       Vs. ZONAL MANAGER (N) FOOD COR  S.K. VARMA              
                       -PN. & ORS.                     N.P.SINGH
                                                       S.C.
                                                       SATYA PRAKASH SRIVASTAVA
  36. NCL   7464/2006  SHAHIN AKHTAR                   AMIT SRIVASTAVA         
                                                       ASHOK KHARE
                                                       S.KHARE
                                                       SHAILENDRA KUMAR PATHAK
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.                  
  37. PO    20121/2006 RAJENDRA PRATAP SINGH           P.C. CHAUHAN            
                                                       S.P. SINGH
                       Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS    C.S.C.   

2 comments on Whether a layman can get justice in this dilapidated judiciary where fundamental rights are crushed

  1. Hon'ble Sir following matter is concerned with my father who earlier filed four writ petitions in order to seek justice and following is the fifth writ petition filed in High court of judicature at Allahabad. Initially writ petition was filed by S.P. Singh and latter since 2009 ,he commenced practice in the apex court of India ,my father hired P.S. Chauhan as the subsequent advocate by paying his fee. Case is still not disposed but fees of two advocates have been paid. Whether justice is really available to common citizenry in this largest democracy in the world.

  2. 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). They didn't hear the case and now such a long span of time of the next date of hearing.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: