Why not some of us get together and make presentation to SC ? This problem of criminal type "judges" will eventually crush the nation itself.
--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 1/27/15, Veeresh Malik <veereshmalik@gmail.com> wrote:
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] Court pendency behind India's low global ranking:World Bank
To: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net" <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Cc: "capt beniwal" <trident142@yahoo.co.in>, "Pankaj Rai" <raipankaj@yahoo.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 27, 2015, 9:56 AM
http://swarajyamag.com/columns/how-neta-babu-nexus-crushes-aspiring-sportsmen/
On 27 January 2015 at
11:19, Holiday Bash International <lidder.hbi@gmail.com>
wrote:
WE
are the witness to injustice by High Court Judge . He just
did not hear us Infact on the day of argument he gave his
order before even our lawyer opened his mouth which means it
was pre deceided the judgment .If there was a viedio
clipping it would have been easy for us to prove in SC that
our constitutional right has been violated .
Any
way we will still try getting justice from SC
Amarjit
Pune
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015
at 4:30 PM, SURESHAN P <sureshandelhi@gmail.com>
wrote:
Not only in SC, this kind of thing happens in all
courts. I have witnessed many such frauds by judges. It is
surprising that later many such judges had been promoted or
got post retirel positions. In re- video recording of court
proceedings are concerned there is an international national
commitment from the country and help offered from outside.
ADR may have more information About this. Let some body from
their side explain it. Purposefully our judiciary and
politicians keeps silent about this commitment. If video
recording of every proceedings takes place and a mechanism
is made in place to deal with erring judicial officers, much
problems can easily be solved.
On Jan 26, 2015 3:07
PM, "capt beniwal" <trident142@yahoo.co.in>
wrote:
Sir, I have been
requesting to President and CJI to start live telecast of SC
proceedings. when we can see live how a Law is made in
parliament, then we want to see how that law is applied.
if a lower court commit an error it can
be corrected by higher court but if the SC commit error ,
deliberately or otherwise, it can not be corrected and the
litigant suffer for life.
i personally saw in SC , when an ex
military men pension case was heard, there was No ASG in
court during hearing but in SC order, came few days
later, it was stated the ASG made the statement (
thats another point that quoted statement itself is
incorrect misleading) which became the basis of the
order and that ex fauji suffer, beside hundreds of
similarly placed men. ASG got the case
settled in chambers.
Had there been recording/live telecast
the two ex-judges would have dared to act dishonestly. soon
after Both got next better appointments.
Today is age of e- governance.
Crores are spend on it.
If there is Rule of Law then Judges
can not be allowed to behave like dictators.
To stop that attitude - Live
telecast/recording is the answer.
rgds. beniwal
On Saturday, 24 January 2015
10:21 PM, Pankaj Rai <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
wrote:
Your Lordship,
As a party in person who
has argued a number of cases in High Court, I fail to
understand two things. Admittedly, the number of Judges in
India is much lower as compared to other countries in the
West. However, what are the reasons whereby the Judiciary is
reluctant in taking action against a litigant if he files
false affidavits and tampered documents even in High Courts?
Why don't High Courts start dismissing cases if people
make dishonest pleadings and award exemplary costs? Will it
not reduce the number of cases significantly if zero
tolerance is shown to fraud? Why are orders not passed on
applications of perjury?
The second question is
whether the existing legal system will inspire confidence
unless the Judiciary is made accountable and there is a
mandatory recording of court proceedings especially in High
Courts/Supreme Courts?
Kind regards,
Pankaj
Maj Pankaj Rai
(Retd),
Cell: +91 99163 57115
On Saturday, 24 January 2015
11:59 AM, Dinesh Verma <dcverma06@gmail.com>
wrote:
Dear All,I
do not hold brief for Judges nor I wish to defend the
incompetent Judges.Exceptions are everywhere.I just wish to
bring certain facts,as reported, to the notice of the
readers.It may be known to many.In America on
every 10 Lakh citizens 125 Judges are available where as in
India on 10 Lakh Citizens only 09 Judges are appointed.This
figure shows that insufficiency of judges is
one of the reason for delay in disposal of
cases. In
2011 the High Court of Bombay notified to fill 100 vacancies
but could fill up only 41.In 2012 out of 159 vacancies only
55 could be filled up.This means even if sanctioned strength
is increased ,desired number of quality officers may not be
available.Still effort is to be made.
D.C.Verma
Former Judge
On Thu,
Jan 22, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Ravindran P M <raviforjustice@gmail.com>
wrote:
Mr Verma,
Any
increase in the number of judges without enforcing
accountability and transparency will only be wastage of
taxpayers' money. The ground reality is that our
judiciary is a 10000 pc failure by the basic rule that
justice delayed is justice denied. And is justice denied
only through delay? Abs NOT! And why the delay and denial of
justice? Incompetence, ignorance and arrogance of
judges!
Amoung
the three organs of our Constitution the law-makers are
controlled by the people, bureaucracy (yes, bureaucracy,
because without the active support of the bureaucracy no
politician can do any wrong!) and finally the judiciary; the
law-enforcers are also controlled by the law-makers and the
judiciary. And then there are the ears and eyes of the
people- the media waiting to sensationalise every news
involving the misdemeanour of these authorities. Inspite of
such strict supervision and control all that we can hear
these days are about politician-bureaucrat-underworld nexus
even though the fact remains that none, worth the name, from
this unholy nexus have ever been punished by the
holier-than-thou judiciary.
So now think how bad a system can be
which is not only NOT subject to supervision but also kept
beyond critical observation. Well isn't our judiciary
is just that? And do I need to recapitulate that quip: power
corrupts and absolute power corrupts
absolutely?
Please read my blogs:
REFORMING OUR JUSTICE DELIVERY
SYSTEM at http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/02/reforming-our-justice-delivery-system.html
Who will judge the judges?
athttp://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/03/who-will-judge-judges.html
Report of the NCRWC- a Citizens
Review athttp://raviforjustice.blogspot.in/2011/03/report-of-ncrwc-citizens-review.html
Lokpal or not- the judiciary
needs to be disciplined first at http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/05/lokpal-or-not-judiciary-needs-to-be.html
Indian judiciary-who said what
at-http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/05/indian-judiciary-who-said-what.html
Judges! no sermons please
at-http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com/2011/06/judges-no-sermons-please.html
ravi
On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Dinesh
Verma <dcverma06@gmail.com>
wrote:
For reform in judicial system Committee after
Committee were formed but, except few ,in general,
recommendations were not implemented.It is well known
that vacancies, from top court ,ie Supreme Court to lower
subordinate courts ,are not filled up.Cases are piling
up.
Sanctioned strength of Judges is
proportionately insufficient for the cases already
pending or to meet the new institutions.Even sanctioned
strength is not filled up.This also leads to delay in
decision.
Increase in legislation ,increase in
population,increase in peoples awareness for their
rights,increase in strikes by members of the Bar,increase in
seeking adjournments on various avoidable grounds are other
reasons for increase in litigation.
The sanctioned
strength of Judges at all the levels is desired to be
increased by four times with simultaneous increase in
infrastructure.
It is for the authorities & for
policy makers to consider and take an early
action.D.C.VermaFormer
Judge
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 10:30 PM, Dipak
Shah <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
wrote:
I
can give you
as many as more than 20 of my cases. How they are rattled by
Justices .
Are they taking oath for such doing business. Without having
filed
Affidavit in reply by Respondents , having served the
notice, dismissed
the cases taking own intuition of the subject
matter.!!!!!Relevance of the cases not
related to the case under study!!!!Recently
Gujarat High Court has made a rule that Party In Person
cannot appear
in his case unless Special Committee takes interview and
passes him to
appear and competent to appear in the case. Otherwise he has
to engage
Advocate in his case. This is against fundamental rights of
a person
under Constitution.
I
had seen one Advocate of one Justice loitering in the courts
to canvass for doing favorable judgment !!!!In
one case Justice G T Nanavati and other Justice made
order immediately
after abolition of Controller of Capital Issues office by
Manmoihan
Singh in Fianance Bill. in 1992. C C I Office was afraud and
cash
counter to Grant hefty premiums over the share public
issue.
Since
the office is abolished the petition is dismissed. No
Affidavit filed
by Controller of Capital Issues!!! How the flow of water
gate flows!!!!
To fight with this I had to appeal to Supreme Court of India
by spending
lacs of rupees!!!!
One case may be seen , very minutely.
Attached Document, See also relevance of the names and
Google Search all and every thing.How the Cases are being handled. There is no
supervisor !! Appeal and Appeal and Appeal till you
die.Shah D J
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015
8:25 AM, Dipak Shah <djshah1944@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I
can give you as many as more than 20 of my cases. How they
are rattled by Justices . Are they taking oath for such
doing business. Without having filed Affidavit in reply by
Respondents , having served the notice, dismissed the cases
taking own intuition of the subject matter.!!!!!Relevance of the cases not related to the case
under study!!!!Recently Gujarat High
Court has made a rule that Party In Person cannot appear in
his case unless Special Committee takes interview and passes
him to appear and competent to appear in the case. Otherwise
he has to engage Advocate in his case. This is against
fundamental rights of a person under Constitution.
I had seen one Advocate of
one Justice loitering in the courts to canvass for doing
favorable judgment !!!!In one case
Justice G T Nanavati and other Justice made order
immediately after abolition of Controller of Capital Issues
office by Manmoihan Singh in Fianance Bill. in 1992. C C I
Office was afraud and cash counter to Grant hefty premiums
over the share public issue.
Since the office is abolished the petition is
dismissed. No Affidavit filed by Controller of Capital
Issues!!! How the flow of water gate flows!!!! To fight with
this I had to appeal to Supreme Court of India by spending
lacs of rupees!!!!
One case may be seen , very minutely.
Attached Documents, See also relevance of the names and
Google Search all and every thing.How the Cases are being handled. There is no
supervisor !! Appeal and Appeal and Appeal till you
die.Shah D J
On Wednesday, 21 January 2015
1:07 AM, Manohar Sharma <mspropertyresource@gmail.com>
wrote:
I and in my circle has EXPERIENCED how petitions r
NEGLECTED and time PASSED to get DEATH of CAUSE of PETITIONS
4 example one see WP @ M-HC/8508/2003.
On Wed, Jan 21, 2015 at 7:46 AM, sonico
sharma sharma <sharmakrishna27@hotmail.com>
wrote:
This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (sharmakrishna27@hotmail.com)
Add
cleanup rule
| More
info
sir,
justice delayed is
justice denied
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 12:51:50
+0530
From: janhitmanch@gmail.com
To:
Subject: [IAC#RG] Court
pendency behind India's low global ranking: World
Bank
Date
: 17-01-2015
SPEED
POST
BHAGVANJI
RAIYANI
I
AM ASHAMED OF OUR JUDICIARY
I
AM ASHAMED OF OUR GOVERNMENT
I
AM ASHAMED OF OUR PARLIAMENT
To,
1.
Hon'ble Shri Pranab Mukherjee
The
President of India,
2.
Dr.Hamid Ansari
Hon'ble
Vice President of India,
3.
Mrs.Sumitra Mahajan
Hon'ble
Speaker, Loksabha
4.
Hon'ble Shri Narendra Modi,
The
Prime Minister of India
5.
Hon'ble Justice H.L.Dattu
The
Chief Justice of India
6.
Hon'ble Smt.Sushma Swaraj
Minister
for External Affair
7.
Hon'ble Shri D.V.Sadananda Gowda
Minister
for Law & Justice
Please
read The Times of India report dated 17-1-2015 as hereunder,
captioned 'Court pendency behind India's low global
ranking: World
Bank finding: 'Ease of Doing Business'. India was
ranked 142 among
189 countries last year. The World Bank suggested that there
was an
urgent need for reforms in the system of performance
appraisal of
judicial reforms.
We
go on urging for your appointments to discuss judicial
reforms but
you never care to reply. Now we will be more aggressive
(Gandhian
ways) an pursuing the mission justice. We will take the
issue before
the UN and the comity of nations.
I
dare you all to sue me if you feel I have defamed
institutions or the
dignitaries.
(Bhagvanji
Raiyani)
Chairman
& Managing Trustee
Forum
For Fast Justice
09820403912
Kuber
Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle (West), Mumbai – 400
056.
The
Times of India report:
Court
pendency behind India's low global ranking: World
Bank.
NEW DELHI: Large pendency of
cases in Indian courts and non-implementation of judicial
reforms
have been cited by the World Bank as one of the key reasons
for
India's low rank on the Bank's Index of 'Ease of
Doing Business'.
India was ranked 142 among 189 countries last
year.
In a
memorandum to the
department of industrial policy and promotion (DIPP) under
the
commerce ministry, the World Bank suggested linking
judges' appraisal
with reduction of pendency in courts. Sources said the
matter was
discussed at a meeting organized by the DIPP recently to
refine the
performance evaluation system of judges to link their
performance to
the resolution of specific bottlenecks as suggested by the
World
Bank.
The DIPP is
also
coordinating implementation of the 'Make in India'
campaign of the
Modi government.
Interestingly,
the
World Bank suggested that there was an urgent need for
reforms in the
system of performance appraisal of judicial officers in the
country
to bring about uniformity and infuse objectivity and
standardization.
The Bank cited
an
example from Malaysia where implementation of a reform index
for
judges improved case disposal rates and reduced backlog by
50% in
less than three years. Another example was cited from the
United Arab
Emirates, where rewards were instituted for the best
performers.
According to
the
memorandum, the liberal grant of adjournments was an often
cited
reason for delays in court proceedings in India. It
recommended
monitoring the number of times judges granted adjournments
and the
reasons for granting them. "This can be done through
case
management systems and linked to performance management
evaluations,"
it said.
It asked the
government
to ensure that adjournments were not indefinite by setting a
time
limit.
Just a few
weeks ago,
the Modi government had written to chief justices of all 24
high
courts to ensure speedier settlement of commercial and other
disputes
for creating a conducive investment climate and success of
'Make in
India' campaign.
"One of
the
reforms introduced by Malaysia between 2009 and 2011 during
the
overhaul of the judicial system was the implementation of a
reform
index for judges," the Bank said, citing how this
index, fixed
by the judges themselves, was aimed at allowing them to
assess and
monitor their performance. As a result of this and other
measures,
case disposal rates in Malaysian courts improved and backlog
was
reduced by 50% in less than three years, it
said.
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
--
Veteran Major P M
Ravindran
http://raviforjustice.blogspot.com
You may also like to visit:
'Judiciary Watch' at www.vigilonline.com
http://www.judicialreforms.org/
http://www.roguepolice.com
http://milapchoraria.tripod.com
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit: "https://lists.riseup.net/www/signoff/indiaresists"
Help: https://help.riseup.net/en/list-user
WWW : http://indiaagainstcorruption.net.in
Post: "indiaresists@lists.riseup.net"
Exit: "indiaresists-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net"
Quit:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment