ARE THEY OPERATING IN THE INTEREST OF POLITICAL FRIENDS/ EX CLIENTS?
TRIED TO BARGAINING IN COURT TO WITHDRAW ALL 25 PILs
 |
| MEETING EDUCATION MINISTER VINOD TAWDE WITH GREETING |
4 July 2019 Mumbai: Bombay High Court Chief Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Justice Nitin M Jamdar bench was hearing a petition of RTI activists Son for admission in vacant RTE 25 % quota . Chief justice asked petitioner/party in person that How Many PIL's You have Filed? Then Petitioner said approx 25 and in different subjected . Then CJ said that you are filing RTI and getting information after that you are filing PILs ,its all blackmailing. Later he said if you withdraw all PILs then only we will hear your writ petition for your son admission. When Petitioner said he can not withdraw PILs because it is for public cause then CJ dismissed his writ petition for filing PIL's at High Court. In Between Justice NM Jamdar was sharing comment with CJ.
As Per Justice Jamdar Profile from High Court Website
"Born in the family of lawyers, being fourth generation in the legal field. Graduated from University of Mumbai. Practiced in the Bombay High Court in almost all jurisdictions. Was also Standing Counsel for several public bodies. Represented Bombay High Court, Bar Council of India, Municipal Corporations, Zilla Parishads, Municipal Councils, Universities, Public trusts, Banks, Co-operative societies. Special Counsel for the Union of India.
Elevated as a Judge of the Bombay High court on 23 January 2012."
Being served for Municipal Corporations , banks.and other how a person can pass adverse order in PILs against their ex clients. Its conflict of interest to listen PILs against their client. Due to this reason the are hitting messengers as Blackmailer because their friends are in trouble due to irregularities.
I am not on merit. The Hon'ble Court also has not decided on merit. But, the term of the court while dismissing the petition does not apparently seem to be correct.
ReplyDeleteIt should have been decided on merit. Full facts and judgement order are required to be seen for better appreciation.
Beware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
Deleteplease read my comment for details.
At a glance I believe it is very much right on the part of CJ to dismiss such nuisance PIL filed by NGO or RTI activists. These people are aiming nothing but a free mileage and positively some hidden financial gain. So the system of PIL must be abolished.
ReplyDeleteBeware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
DeletePlease read my comment for details.
Reasoning is like a 🦘 court (Khap). The Khap is a better option.
ReplyDeleteBeware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
DeletePlease read my comment for details.
The Chief Justice should have decided the case on the merit instead of commenting on the activist. How did he come to know that the activist was blackmailer?PILs have rendered yeoman's service to the society and it should be encouraged in genuine cases.
ReplyDeleteBeware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
DeletePlease read my comment for details.
A person filing 25 PILs to show that he is very concerned for society by doing it and has NO MONEY?
ReplyDeleteIf he so concerned about hissons study he should have done some extra labour to earn more money for his studies rather than exposing his ill mind to the whole world.
I personally appreciate the CJ for dismissing his so called PIL now know as 'Private' Interest Litigation.
The NGOs and these Activits should be dealt severely to pass the message loud and clear that No Nonsense will be entertained in the judiciary.
SV
Beware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
DeletePlease read my comment for details.
ReplyDeleteBeware of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, a former “Judge” of Delhi High Court and the present “Chief Justice” of Bombay High Court, who recklessly and unabashedly manufactures and propagates pathological and explicit lies through his “Judgments”………a serial liar.
Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has thereby disgraced the values of judicial life, acted in a manner unbecoming of a judge, lowered the dignity, majesty and credibility of his office, irretrievably tarnished the image of the judiciary, and, acted in breach of his oath of office!
Let me illustrate this unfortunate and unpalatable fact through "Judgment" dated 14.12.2010, authored by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 916 of 2007, titled Vijay Kumar Agarwal, IAS versus Union of India and another, which he authored when he was a “Judge” of Delhi High Court. (Coram: Pradeep Nandrajog and Mool Chand Garg, JJ.)
The Facts
ReplyDeleteThe brief facts are that O.A. No. 1714 of 2003 was filed in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (CAT, for short) by the petitioner on 7.7.2003.
Thereafter, it was decided on 18.11.2003 and an amount of Rs. 6,82,290/- was paid to him on 14.5.2004 (in pursuance of the said decision of CAT dated 18.11.2003) by Respondent No. 2 (State of Maharashtra).
The False Allegations
However, the said "Judgment" dated 14.12.2010 has, in paras 19 and 27, falsely alleged that the petitioner in the said O.A. No. 1714 of 2003 had concealed from CAT that he had received the said amount of Rs. 6,82,290/- from Respondent No. 2 (State of Maharashtra).
Further, the said "Judgment" dated 14.12.2010 has, in paras 19 and 27, falsely alleged that it is unfortunate that the Tribunal did not even bother to note
that the State of Maharashtra had tendered the said amount of Rs. 6,82,290/- to the petitioner.
In the false, ominous and dark words of the said "Judgment" dated 14.12.2010:
“19…..Relevant would it be to note that by the time petitioner filed
the original application he had received Rs. 6,82,290/-………..
He DID NOT DISCLOSE to the Tribunal that….he had received full
salary for the period 1.5.1988 till 13.5.1996.”
“27. ................ full pay and allowances for the
period he remained under suspension.............we note had
already been paid to him when he went to the Tribunal.
It is unfortunate that the Tribunal did not even bother to note
that……the State had tendered Rs. 6,82,290/- to the petitioner
towards full salary for the period 1.5.1988 till 13.5.1996……"
The Truth
The truth, however, is that, as submitted above, the said O.A. No. 1714 of 2003 was filed on 7.7.2003 and decided on 18.11.2003 and the said amount of Rs. 6,82,290/- was paid to the petitioner on 14.5.2004 (in pursuance of the said decision of CAT dated 18.11.2003).
Therefore, it was humanly impossible for the petitioner to indulge in the said “concealment”.
In other words, as the said payment was made on 14.5.2004, the petitioner could not possibly have “concealed” it on 7.7.2003.
Still in other words, as the said payment was made on 14.5.2004, there was no occasion on 7.7.2003 for the petitioner to indulge in the said “concealment”.
Therefore, the said false allegation contained in the said paras 19 and 27 of the said "Judgment" dated 14.12.2010 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 916 of 2007, authored by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, stands completely belied.
Irreparable harms caused by the said false allegation against the petitioner leveled by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
The said false and wild allegation suddenly fell upon the petitioner like a bolt from the blue and has ruined the tranquility of his mind and the dignity, reputation and quality of his life ever since because it amounts to defaming and shaming him in the eyes of the public at large.
His entire family life has also been ruined.
Specifically, due to the said false allegation, the petitioner has not been given salary since 13.5.1996……not even a single penny has been paid to him, as submitted infra.
Silence is not an option when things are ill done.
Extraordinary situations require extraordinary remedies.
Hideous mischief:
ReplyDeleteFirstly, in the said false paras 19 and 27, the said relevant dates, namely, 7.7.2003 and 14.5.2004, have intentionally, deliberately, consciously, cleverly, mischievously and cunningly been concealed by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
The said dates 7.7.2003 and 14.5.2004 are conspicuous by their absence in the said false paras 19 and 27.
The evil intention behind concealing the said dates 7.7.2003 and 14.5.2004 seems to be to lend a specious and childish plausibility or a semblance of righteousness to the said false allegation against the petitioner.
Secondly, had the petitioner indulged in the said “concealment”, the respondents would certainly have made the said allegation in their counter-affidavits. But, they have neither made any such allegation against the petitioner, nor could they have made it.
Therefore, the said false allegation is only a figment of perverse imagination of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog. It is pure fiction.
No pleadings. No arguments. Only a fantasy. Transcendental Meditation?
Thirdly, this is not a solitary example of intentional and deliberate falsehood manufactured and propagated by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
There is a syndrome of grave lies which shall be exposed in parts 2 onwards of this letter.
Fourthly, why did Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog invent and manufacture the said false allegation?
ReplyDeleteBecause, presumably, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog wanted to run an errand for the respondents, and, therefore, wanted to wriggle out of the relief granted to the petitioner by CAT on 18.11.2003, and, therefore, wanted to scapegoat the petitioner----schoolboyishly and unconscionably.
What was the relief granted to the petitioner by CAT on 18.11.2003 which seems to have impelled Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog to manufacture and propagate lies?
In O.A. No. 1714 of 2003, CAT, vide order dated 18.11.2003, had quashed and set aside the order dated 13.5.1996 issued by Respondent No. 2 (State of Maharashtra)
The said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003 has attained finality because R-2 has failed to challenge it.
Consequently, the entire edifice of illegal and unconstitutional orders, with particular reference to orders of R-2 dated 7.6.1996, 4.5.1998 and order of R-1 dated 2.4.2007, stands knocked out and has collapsed.
As Lord Denning said in a reported Judgment which he authored in 1961:
“You cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stay there, it will collapse.”
Sublato fundamento, cadit opus.
Foundation being removed, structure falls to the ground automatically.
Turtles all the way down.
Apparently, this is what impelled Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog to perversely come to the rescue of the respondents and he unseemly and ungracefully attempted to wriggle out of the said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003 by manufacturing and propagating the said lies.
Indeed, for the said illegal, nefarious and ungraceful attempt to wriggle out of the said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has resorted to a multi-cornered mendacity and a smorgasbord of deliberate deceptions.
Fifthly, a question can legitimately be asked as to why the petitioner challenged the said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003. The answer is that the petitioner did not challenge it. The petitioner only partly challenged the said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003. The petitioner had challenged only that part of the said Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003 which had declined to grant relief of consequential benefits on the alleged ground that the petitioner had prayed for multiple reliefs.
Therefore, the only legal and valid question that arose before Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog was whether or not the petitioner had prayed for multiple reliefs in the CAT.
Instead of dealing with and deciding the said short question, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog reopened the settled issue of the said quashment and setting aside of the said order of R-2 dated 13.5.1996 by CAT on 18.11.2003, and, through falsehood and other distortions obfuscated the said short and simple question.
The said re-opening of the said order of CAT dated 18.11.2003 is also in violation of the general principle of res judicata and the Rule of Law.
Consequently, the petitioner has not been paid salary since 13.5.1996, even though the said order of R-2 dated 13.5.1996 stands quashed and set aside by CAT on 18.11.2003, as submitted above.
To perpetuate the said injustice of illegal deprivation of salary since 13.5.1996 till date, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog resorted to the said multi-cornered mendacity and a smorgasbord of deliberate deceptions.
Sixthly, the said grave, false and wild allegation has been leveled against the petitioner without giving him an opportunity of being heard and without any opportunity to rebut the same.
Hence, the said bald, grave, false and wild allegation is in VIOLATION OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE.
The upshot is that in the guise of being a “Judge” of the High Court of Delhi, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has unnecessarily and unwarrantedly attempted to criminalise the society and has manufactured crime and produced a “criminal”, though he himself is a criminal, as submitted above.
Seventhly, an application was filed for correction of the said “Judgment” dated 14.12.2010, but, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog kept on adjourning the matter till March 2017 when he was elevated as CJ of Rajasthan HC.
ReplyDeleteIt is, therefore, manifest that the said false allegation against the petitioner is the result of a mischief committed by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
Eighthly, the said judicial misconduct of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog is within the mischief pointed out by Alan M. Dershowtiz, Harvard Professor of Law, vide "Introduction" to his book "The Best Defense", as follows:
“One working title for this book was ‘Black Robes, White Lies’. That
would have been appropriate, because lying, distortion, and other forms
of intellectual dishonesty are endemic among judges….Beneath the
robes of many judges, I have seen corruption, incompetence, bias,
laziness, meanness of spirit, and plain ordinary stupidity. I know of
numerous instances where judges have made false claims about what
they read, distorted the records, and engaged in other deceptions. Why
judges are permitted to get away with – and indeed are often praised for
-- this kind of intellectual dishonesty is an important and largely
unanswered question confronting the American legal system.”
And, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India:
"One cannot but say that the adjudication by the Division Bench tantamounts to a state as if they dragged themselves to the realm of 'willing suspension of disbelief'. Possibly, they assumed that they could do what they intended to do. A Judge cannot think in terms of 'what pleases the Prince has the force of law'. Frankly speaking, the law does not allow so, for law has to be observed by requisite respect for the law. In this context, we may note the eloquent statement of Benjamin Cardozo who said: 'The judge is not a knight errant, roaming at will in pursuit of his own ideal of beauty and goodness'."
It is, therefore, manifest that the said false allegation against the petitioner is the result of a mischief committed by Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
There is sufficient substance in the preceding allegations against Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog and the aberrations are serious enough to call for initiation of proceedings for his removal.
QUIZ: IS YOUR LAWYER OR JUDGE A PSYCHOPATH?
ReplyDelete“He” can also mean “she”, and for each question, score two points for “yes,”
one point for “somewhat” or “maybe,” and zero points for “no.”
[1] Is he glib and superficially charming?
Is he a likable personality and a terrific talker — entertaining, persuasive, but
maybe a bit too smooth and slick? Can he pass himself off as a supposed
expert in legal matters even though he really doesn’t seem to know or care
much about the topic? Is he a flatterer? Seductive, but insincere? Does he
sign his emails or letters “warmly”, when he is anythng but? Does he tell
amusing but unlikely anecdotes celebrating his own past? Can he support a
certain position this week — and then argue with equal conviction and
persuasiveness for the opposite position next week? Can he appear on TV
and somehow get away without answering the interviewer’s direct questions
or saying anything truly substantive?
SCORE__
[2] Does he have a grandiose sense of self-worth?
Does he brag? Is he arrogant? Superior? Domineering? Does he feel he’s
above the rules that apply to “little people” such as “pro pers and pro
ses”? Does he act as though everything revolves around him?
SCORE__
[3] Is he a pathological liar?
Has he reinvented his own past in a more positive light — for example,
claiming that he rose from a tough, poor background even though he really
grew up middle class? Does he lie habitually even though he can easily be
found out? When he’s exposed, does he still act unconcerned because he
thinks he can weasel out of it? Does he enjoy lying? Is he proud of his
knack for deceit? Is it hard to tell whether he knows he’s a liar or whether
he deceives himself and believes his own b/s?
SCORE__
[4] Is he a con artist or master manipulator?
ReplyDeleteDoes he use his skill at lying to cheat or manipulate other people in his
quest for money, power, status, and sex? Does he “use” people brilliantly?
Does he engage in dishonest schemes such as cooking the books by
making unsupported claims of billable hours?
SCORE__
[5] When he harms other people, does he feel a lack of remorse or guilt?
Is he concerned about himself rather than the wreckage he inflicts on
others or society at large? Does he say he feels bad but acts as though he
really doesn’t? Even if he has had a complaint filed at his law society, does
he accept blame for what he did? Does he blame others for the trouble he
causes? Does he have a conflict of interest, and did he try to conceal it?
When you found out, did he deal with it in a professional manner, such as
by offering to give up the brief or recusing himself?
SCORE__
[6] Does he have a shallow affect?
Is he cold and detached? Does he make brief, dramatic displays of emotion
that are nothing more than putting on a theatrical mask and play-acting for
effect? Does he claim to be your friend but rarely or never ask about the
details of your life or your emotional state? Is he one of those tough-guy
lawyers who brag about how emotions are for whiners and losers?
SCORE__
[7] Is he callous and lacking in empathy?
Does he not give a damn about the feelings or well-being of other people?
Is he profoundly selfish? Does he cruelly mock others? Is he emotionally
or verbally abusive toward courtroom or office employees? Can he make
rulings without concern for how they’ll get by in their new life? Can he
profit from the unfair taking of funds by overcharging clients without
concern for the harm he’s doing to them or their children and other family
members, or their retirement lives?
SCORE__
[8] Does he fail to accept responsibility for his own actions?
Does he always cook up some excuse? Does he blame others for what he’s
done? If he’s under investigation by his law society, or the Commission on
Judicial Ethics, will he tell you? Does he refuse to acknowledge
wrongdoing even when there is hard rebuttable evidence not allowed in?
Does he say “The Appeals Court will take care of it.”
SCORE__
Total____
If your judgement scores:
1-4 | Be frustrated
5-7 | Be cautious
8-12 | Be afraid
13-16 | Be very afraid
Finally, if you have completed this test, you might want to apply it to others
(O.K., other than your unfavorite politician) that you know through personal
contact, whether in your profession (your agent, your manager, your press
agent, your accountant, your director, your producer, your star), your personal
life (your spouse, your partner, your children, your boss, your friends)
or last, but not least, YOURSELF!!
ANDHER NAGARI, CHAUPAT RAJA
ReplyDeleteSodom and Gomorrah
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine…….”
The Dance of Death (Danse Macabre)
More than “art,” this was a practice, part of a genre known as “The Dance of Death” (Danse macabre). “Danse macabre wasn’t just a generalized response to mortality,” says Elizabeth Welch, a curator at the Blanton Museum, “but instead specifically a performative social leveling that could be used...to think about mortality and the inevitability of physical decay.”
This is why the skeleton is grinning. The symbolism is dark but it’s also absurd. Like life, and death. We are born...to die. It can come and take us at any time, for the most ridiculous of reasons. Just look to Chrysippus, the famous Stoic, who died because he laughed too hard at a donkey eating figs in his front yard.
Delusive Pied Piper
It is, therefore, further manifest that Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog is abysmally low and short on morals, facts and law, and, long on technicalities and downright falsehood.
The above-noted facts completely belie the rhetoric farewell speech of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog by the Chief Justice of DHC: “impeccable character as a crusader of justice”.
Like Mahatma Gandhi, let us tear apart the present regime of falsehood and distortion!
Because things have really gone too far.
Natwar Lal
Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies. Propagate lies.
Rogue Judge, Rogue Justice. Scoundrel Grade Judge
The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. (R.L. Stevenson)
Hyde is actually the original, authentic nature of man, which has been repressed but not destroyed by the accumulated weight of civilization, conscience, and societal norms. Perhaps man doesn’t have two natures but rather a single, primitive, amoral one that remains just barely constrained by the bonds of civilization. Moreover, the novel suggests that once those bonds are broken, it becomes impossible to reestablish them; the genie cannot be put back into the bottle, and eventually Hyde will permanently replace Jekyll—as he finally does. Even in Victorian England—which considered itself the height of Western civilization—Stevenson suggests that the dark, instinctual side of man remains strong enough to devour anyone who, like Jekyll, proves foolish enough to unleash it.
John Scales Avery: Human being is a mosaic of animal and angel
Looking at human nature, both from the standpoint of evolution and from that of everyday experience, we see the two faces of Janus: one face shines radiantly; the other is dark and menacing. Two souls occupy the human breast, one warm and friendly, the other, murderous. Humans have developed a genius for cooperation, the basis for culture and civilization; but they are also capable of genocide; they were capable of massacres during the Crusades, capable of genocidal wars against the Amerinds, capable of the Holocaust, of Hiroshima, of the killing-fields of Cambodia, of Rwanda, and of Darfur.
Narcissistic personality disorder? Psychopath? Sociopath?
Down with rape of justice.
Down with rape of humanity.
DOWN WITH FORENSIC TERRORISM.
Shame.......Shame.......Shame........Shame.
Jhooth bolna/likhna crime ki duniya ki pehli seedhee hai.
Therefore, my head hangs in shame when I realise that I am living in a country where a Judge of HC, namely, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog, has manufactured and propagated lies in his "Judgments".
ReplyDeleteAccording to a write-up in FIRSTPOST, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog is the son of a former Judge of Delhi High Court, namely, Mr. Prithvi Raj. His real brother, namely, Mr. Sudhir Nandrajog, is a senior advocate in Delhi High Court. He has studied in the best schools and colleges of Shimla and Delhi.
Still, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has resorted to the shameless culture of perjury and, has, thus, propagated the evil of hypocrisy.
.
Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has manufactured and propagated that which he ought to condemn and punish as a Judge.
Folie Lucide
Moral insanity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Moral insanity referred to a type of mental disorder consisting of abnormal emotions and behaviours in the apparent absence of intellectual impairments, delusions, or hallucinations. It was an accepted diagnosis in Europe and America through the second half of the 19th century.
The physician James Cowles Prichard first used the phrase to describe a mental disorder in 1835 in his Treatise on insanity and other disorders affecting the mind.[1] He defined moral insanity as: "madness consisting in a morbid perversion of the natural feelings, affections, inclinations, temper, habits, moral dispositions, and natural impulses, without any remarkable disorder or defect of the interest or knowing and reasoning faculties, and particularly without any insane illusion or hallucinations."[2][3][4]
The concept of moral insanity was indebted to the work of physician Philippe Pinel, which was acknowledged by Prichard. Pinel had described mental diseases of only partial, affective, insanity. His concept Manie sans délire (Latin – mania sine delirio; French – folie raisonnante or folie lucide raisonnante, monomanie affective; German – Moralisches Irresein[5]) referred to insanity without delusion. That is, the sufferer was thought to be mad in one area only and thus the personality of the individual might be distorted but his or her intellectual faculties were unimpaired.[6]
The term 'moral', at that time and taken originally from French, could mean emotional rather than necessarily referring to ethics.
Psychiatric evaluation and treatment of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog
As a Judge, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog is supposed to be the repository of rectitude. But his judicial misconduct is so serious that it apparently shows that he is a psychopath and needs psychiatric evaluation and treatment, vide, inter alia, world-renowned Dr. Robert D. Hare’s Psychopathy Checklist.
Alas! look at the perverse ways of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog.
And, look at the multiplier effect of perversity of his ways.
Therefore, civilization and democracy are bound to perish in this country.
William Shakespeare must be turning in his grave:
“But man, proud man,
Dress'd in a little brief authority,
Most ignorant of what he's most assur'd—
His glassy essence—like an angry ape
Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven
As makes the angels weep; who, with our spleens,
Would all themselves laugh mortal.” (Measure for Measure)
What a tyranny! What a narcissism! What a nihilism! What a megalomania!
And, what a slavery!
Let there be another struggle for independence!
The said judicial misconduct of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog is all the more reprehensible and despicable because, inter alia, the value of truth is taught even to kids and the students of the primary schools in India:
Gitanjali 35
ReplyDeleteBY RABINDRANATH TAGORE
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening thought and action
Into that heaven of freedom, my Father, let my country awake.
The importance and value of truth in the Judgments of the Courts cannot be overemphasized:
(a) S.P. Changalvaraya Naidu v Jagannath, AIR 1994 SC 853, Paras 5-8
(b) Moti Lal Sangara v Prem Prakash @Pappu (SC, 16.5.2013), Para 18
(c) Abdul Rahman v Prasony Bai, 2003 (1) SCC 488
(d) National Council for Teacher Education v Venus Public Education
Society (SC, 1.11.2012), Para 5
(e) Shanmugoom v Ariya Kshatriya Rajakulavamsathu Maadalaya
Nandhavanapaupalani Sngam (SC, 27.4.2012), Paras 37-42, 22-36
(f) Maria Margadia v Erasmo (SC, 21.3.2012), Paras 61-79, 31-52
(g) Bhaskar Laxman Jadhav v Karamveer (SC, 11.12.2012), Paras 46-49
(h) Meghmala v G. Narasimha Reddy (SC, 16.8.2010), Paras 20-28
(i) Oswal Fats and Oils Ltd. v Addl. Commissioner, Bareilly Division (SC,
1.4.2010)
(j) Deepa Katre v Principal, AIR 2007 SC Supp (1) 22
(k) Ramjas Foundation v UOI, 2010 (14) SCC 38
(l) Hamza Haji v State of Kerala (SC, 18.8.2006), Para 13
(m) United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v Rajendra Singh (SC, 14.3.2000)
It may also be mentioned that apart from the said favourable Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003, there are two more favourable Judgments of SC dated 30.8.1988 and 29.1.2014, and, in the said Judgment dated 30.8.1988, SC has held that the qualities attributed to the petitioner by the respondents themselves (UOI and State of Maharashtra) “are indeed the best qualities of any officer”.
However, despite the said favourable Order of CAT dated 18.11.2003 and the said two favourable Judgments of SC dated 30.8.1988 and 29.1.2014, the petitioner is on the road for the last more than 30 years and Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog has made the petitioner a scapegoat by taking undue advantage of his vulnerability.
The man who lies to the world, is the world’s slave from then on:
“People think that a liar gains a victory over his victim. What I’ve learned is that a lie is an act of self-abdication, because one surrenders one’s reality to the person to whom one lies, making that person one’s master, condemning oneself from then on to faking the sort of reality that person’s view requires to be faked…The man who lies to the world, is the world’s slave from then on…There are no white lies, there is only the blackest of destruction, and a white lie is the blackest of all.” ― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
WOE UNTO YOU, MR. PRADEEP NANDRAJOG!
Therefore, Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog may be shown the door through impeachment or otherwise.
Are you listening Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishen Kaul, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kailash Gambhir (Retd.), Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice A.P.Shah (Retd.), Mr. Prashant Bhushan, Mr. Dushyant Dave, Mr. Manan Kumar Mishra, and other misguided supporters, lobbyists and backers of Mr. Pradeep Nandrajog?
Ab tumhare hawale vatan sathio!
(Now, I hand over the reins of this country to my compatriots!)
Jai Hind.
MORAL RE-ARMAMENT CENTRE
(Honesty, Purity, Unselfishness, Love)
VIJAY KUMAR AGARWAL, Ex-IAS.
Phone: 011-22485508. Mobile: 9560172716. vijay.kumar.agarwal.ias@gmail.com