#comment-form

A glaring instance of manipulating the functioning by rank tresspasser of the Hon’ble High Court during Summer Vacation by the Hon’ble Single Judge (Hon. A.P. Sahi, J) exercising the power of the Division Bench in the urgent matters having the finality and trapping of the judgement in the 4th Writ Petition and thereby daring raid on the administration of justice.
The first writ petition bearing writ petition no. 34447 of 1994 (Dr. Harish Kumar Vs. C/M K.G.K. P.G. College Moradabad), an affiliated college to M.J.P. Rohilkhand University, Bareilly was sought for issuance of the direction to send the papers of the petitioner for regularization of his services alleging himself to have been given appointment in the vacancy caused due to the retirement of R.M. Mathur on 30.6.1987, which was published on 28.5.1988 as Dr. Harish Kumar manipulated a forged certificate issued from the Principal of the college on 21.7.1987 to get himself being inducted in the leave vacancy of Dr. Mamta Bhatnagar, for which the said advertisement published on 28.5.1988 was purported to have been made. In this regard the Principal of the said institution issued a certificate that Dr. Harish Kumar (Tomar) did never worked in the department of Geography of K.G.K. P.G. College Moradabad. Any certificate purported to have been issued is a forged certificate and as such the Division Bench dismissed the said writ petition on 18.1.1999.
The second writ petition no. 26167 of 2000 (Dr. Harish Kumar VS. U.P. Higher Education Service Commission and others) was again filed by concealment of the facts of dismissal of writ Petition no. 34447 of 1994 and Dr. Harish Kumar challenged the order dated 30.1.1999 forwarding the name of one Sanjay Kumar recommended by the Director of Higher Education in the vacancy caused on account of retirement of Dr. P.K. Gupta on 30.6.1997. The following order was obtained on 25.5.2000, which is reproduced as under :-
Hon’ble Markandey Katju, J
Hon’ble S.K. Jain, J
“In the meantime the petitioner shall be permitted to continue functioning as ad hoc lecturer in the institution in question.”
Dt/- 25.5.2000 Sd/- M. Katju, J
Sd/- S.K. Jain, J
Thereafter the third writ petition no. 901 (S/B) of 2002 Dr. Harish Kumar Vs. State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary Higher Education Lucknow was filed seeking relief that the representation of the petitioner may be considered and disposed of. In the said writ petition Hon’ble Justice Jagdish Bhalla and Hon’ble B.K. Rathi passed the following order :-
“In the meantime, representation of the petitioner will be considered and disposed of.
Dt/- 13.6.2002 Sd/- Jagdish Bhalla, J
Sd/- B.K. Rathi, J
The fourth writ petition was filed during the summer vacation and the following order was obtained by the petitioner on 21.6.2005.
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 46045 of 2005
Dr. Harish Kumar Vs. Director of Education (Higher) Alld and others
Hon’ble A.P. Sahi, J
Heard Sri P.S. Baghel, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 3.
Issue notice to the respondent no.2 returnable at an early date. Steps be taken within a period of one week. All the respondents are granted three weeks time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit, if, any, may be filed within a period of three weeks thereafter.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has cited the decision of the writ petition no. 19683 of 2004 decided on 27.10.2004. Taking note of the provisions as applicable to the controversy at hand, the Court issued directions for appointing the petitioner in that writ petition on substantive basis explaining the provisions of Section 31-C of U.P. Higher Education Services Act, 1980.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied on the order passed in writ petition no. 35403 of 2005 a copy of which has been appended as annexure no.4 to the writ petition, where in similar circumstances, directions were issued to the respondent- Director of Higher Education to examine the facts and pass appropriate orders with regard to the claim of the petitioner. Accordingly the respondent no.1 is directed to examine the claim of the petitioner in the light of what has been stated hereinabove and pass a speaking and reasoned order within a period of one month. The respondent no.1 shall also consider the grant of such consequential benefits, which the petitioner is entitled in case, he is entitled for regularization on the post in question. The matter shall be listed after expiry of six weeks.
Dt/- 21.6.2005 Sd/- A.P. Sahi, J
Thereafter on the strength of said order the services of Dr. Harish Kumar has been shown regularized on 30.6.2005 in the vacancy caused on account of retirement of Dr. P.K. Gupta. The manager of the institution by his letter issued on 8.7.2005, in pursuance of the direction contained in the letter dated 30.6.2005 issued by Director of Higher Education Allahabad in compliance of the interim order passed on 21.6.2005 issued the appointment letter to Dr. Harish Kumar only on the said date i.e. on 8.7.2005 solely on the basis of the directions contained in the letter dated 30.6.2005. However, the management after considering the fact that Dr. Harish Kumar was not appointed in the institution at any point of time and in case if the orders were passed then the same will be implemented from the date of his appointment and the approval of the same by the managing committee and the officials empowered and it was made clear that Dr. Harish Kumar will not claim any arrears of the salary from the State Government, however, if any, information was found to have been concealed the appointment of Dr. Harish Kumar shall be declared as void. The situation which has been merged on account of the issuance of the said appointment letter on 8.7.2005 having the appointment given to Dr. Harish Kumar in the vacancy caused on account of the retirement of Dr. P.K. Gupta from the post of Head of the department on 30.6.1997 that the individual having being appointed in the said institution in pursuance of the vacancy advertised on 28.5.1988 namely the applicant forwarding this complaint to the higher authority and also for the perusal of the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India and to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India that the situation faced by number of lecturers posted in the Department of Geography namely Dr. Brijbala Arora, Dr. Yogendra Singh, Dr. P.M. Kala and Dr. D.P.S. Rawat, who were given appointment in the institution in furtherance of the recommendation of the Selection Committee and the approval was given by Director of Higher Education to all of them in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the statutory provisions, whether the Hon’ble High Court entertaining the writ petition during the summer vacation only in the urgent matter may pass such order which has got an effect of finality of the judgement. The other lecturers posted in the Department of Geography have requested the authority to maintain the seriatim of the long standing seniority, but in pursuance of the clear cut direction issued to the Director of Higher Education, directing him to consider the claim of the petitioner for appointment, regularization in furtherance of the provisions of Section 31-C of U.P. Higher Education Service Act, 1980 with all such consequential benefits and as such there was no other option left before the authorities to comply such direction.
Kindly circulate this letter to the majesty of the Hon’ble Court, if any body may show desire to protect the right of the other persons guaranteed under Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India as there has been number of the authorities of the Hon’ble Supreme Court including the authority in case of Sarguja Transport Authority 1987 (1) S.C.C. Page 5, which clearly demonstrates “invito veneficiun non datur” as the applicant working in the institution w.e.f. 3.10.1988 having been regularized on 26.6.1992 by the order of Director of Higher Education has been superseded in the list of seniority by Dr. Harish Kumar who had never worked as a Lecturer in the Department of Geography till 30.6.2005 and thereafter got an appointment letter on 8.7.2005 on the strength of the interim order obtained by him during the summer vacation.
Dt/- 10.12.2008 Applicant
Dr. D.P.S. Rawat, s/o Late R.D.S. Rawat,
R/0 1-B/425, Budhi Vihar Awas Vikas,
Majholla, Moradabad.

yogeshsaxena: JUSTIFYING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BABARI MASHJID BY D...

yogeshsaxena: JUSTIFYING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BABARI MASHJID BY D...: "ADVOCATES , PARTICIPATING IN THE CRUSADE OF THE PEACE EARLIER PRIOR TO JUDGEMENT IN ANTICIPATION OF JUSTIFYING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BABARI M..."

JUSTIFYING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BABARI MASHJID BY DESTRUCTION OF THE LORD RAM TEMPLE

ADVOCATES , PARTICIPATING IN THE CRUSADE OF THE PEACE EARLIER PRIOR TO JUDGEMENT IN ANTICIPATION OF  JUSTIFYING THE CONSTRUCTION OF BABARI MASHJID BY DESTRUCTION OF THE LORD RAM TEMPLE HOLDING HIGH POST IN JUDICIAL POLITICAL LINK SET UP IN FAVOUR OF MUSLIMS VOTE POLITICS, WHO WERE CONDUCTING THE CASES OF PAKISTANI CITIZENS FOR USURPATION OF THE PROPERTY OF ANTI NATIONALISTS PAKISTANI’S BY TAKING THE LOCUNA OF THE ACT LIKE WAKF ACT, 1995 AND ENEMY PROPERTY ACT, 1968 HAS SAID THAT JUDGEMENT IS NOT ACCORDING TO LAW MADE BY THE BRITISHERS ON THE LINE OF ANGLO SAXON JURISPRUDENCE, WHICH HAS BEEN MADE FOR MISUSED BY THYE INVADERS BY PROVOKING VOILENCE IN THE RECITALS OF THEIR HOLI BOOK  OF TERROR BY SAYING THAT THEIR SENTIMENTS ARE PROVOKED AS THE TEMPLE CONSTRUCTED BY RUINING THE TEMPLE OF MARYADA PURUSHOTTAM RAM, TO WHOM NO ARTIFICIALLY PROJECTIFYING PROPHET CAN EVER REACH TO THE HIGHT OF HIS SACRIFICES THESE ADVOCATE CALLED THEMSELVES AS LEGAL EXPERTS, BUT THEY HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO STAY IN INDIA AFTER PARTITION , SIMPLY ON ACCOUNT OF RECEPTIVITY OF GREAT HINDUS AND SINCE PAKISTAN WAS DECLARED MUSLIM NATION AFTER PARTITION, THESE PEOPLE HAVE NEVER DARED TO REPRESENT HARD CORE CRIMINALS, THE PAKISTANI TERRORISTS AND THE KASHMIRI SEPERATISTS IN THE NATION  Let them not disturb the national equilibrium by fanning rank communalism in the garb of rotten secularism the outburst of some old and outdated rigid Muslims who are spitting out their ego and emotions.It is expected.Even in a family property dispute settled by a court or through lok adalat parties are never happy.Every one feels short changed.There is no end to lust for women,land and wealth.These are basic three vices created by Allah for attack on human virtues and preventing people from going to jannat.It is satan's force vis vis allah's. By these devilish writings they have stooped lower than the communal Urdu press that sells on the strength of its ability to use abusive language against the patriotic Indians. The Muslim community knows Mulayam Singh inside out and is not likely to be swayed by his new colours. After all he is a turncoat.  The realm of Mulayam Singh Yadav. hell broke loose in loves to swim in political waters more than tending to his religious duties IMAM AND POLITICS  religion, law and politics that they would not say or do anything to incite the ignorant masses to resort to violence torrents of unbridled pronouncements made by the Imam of Jama Masjid of Delhi, said “ Hamein yeh judgement manzoor nahin hai”. (we do not accept this judgement) 1. Move on and accept that barbaric acts were done by their ancestors in past and temples were desecrated and occupied.These are being done even today.2.Not miss this historic opportunity to show world that Indian Muslims in particular are not only secular but modern and tolerant and practice true tenets of Islam.They cant miss this life time opportunity to slap on face of fraudulent secularists and world muslim haters by their big hearted act.It is too valuable to miss for just a piece of land amid graveyards in a non important place like Ayodhya for Muslims.Their inspiration is in Mecca not Ayodhya. 3.Join hands with Hindus to build temple and also a mosque if they want it to be in ayodhya 4.Demonstrate communal harmony and spirit of sacrifice and give and take like Mohammad sahib did. 5.Go to supreme court and continue bitterness in Indian society.6.Whether land belongs to waqf borad or akhara this is for religious use only so leave the matter of ownership aside and talk of best utilisation of space. 6.Confront hindu majority and do more damage to Muslims' image and status in India. Muslims in india should not forget that until a few decade back the mosque was called by muslims and hindus both janamsthani masjid and not babri masjid.  This was the unkindest cut of all because the Indian Judiciary has maintained the rule of law. Unfortunately the Muslim leaders have been pampered by the government leaders unnecessarily. “Muslims have the first right on the use of national resources” was an uncalled for statement by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh that emboldened the rabble rousers like the Imam of Jama Masjid and the likes of him to cast aspersions on the highest temple of justice, the Supreme Court,it  is the need to lead the ignorant crowd of Muslims to the hellish fire of agitation that might lead to acts of violence  and some journalists of the bygone era who had almost faded into oblivion, irrespective of the tilt in the  this way or that the sane elements in the society had made appeals to all Indians. Najeeb Jung that the nation must not let go the present opportunity to settle the issue that has been vexing all communities for more than five centuries. Mir Baqi was not specifically told by Babur to demolish a Hindu temple and build a mosque using its rubble Najeeb Jung, vice-chancellor of Jamia Millia university, has shown a progressive attitude by writing an article in a prominent daily newspaper by saying that here is a chance for Hindus and Muslims” to forge new ties”. Many progressive Muslims see no harm in shifting the location of the mosque to a new place. My advise to both hindus and muslims is to be wary of corrupt congress and types of Mulayam and not get instigated by hardliner mullahs and saffron clad jerks and move on into history making strong and united India redeeming image of Islam.There is too much at stake for generations to come.