lokesh batra | 1 May 19:10 2008
Picon

DD News : Red tapism shadows RTI Act Implementation in UP

 
 
 
DD News
01 May 2008
 
 
Red tapism shadows RTI Act Implementation in UP
 

It is a sorry state of affairs in Uttar Pradesh on the Right to Information (RTI) front, with close to half of the over 9,000 appeals and complaints made in a year yet to be disposed.
 
 
Between April 2006 and March 2007, the total number of appeals and complaints made under the transparency law stood at 9,946.

 
And of these, a total number of 4,088 appeals and complaints were pending disposal.

 
The information was given in a reply to an application fi led by RTI activist Retired Commodore Lokesh K Batra to the Uttar Pradesh State Information Commission (UPSIC).

 
Batra had originally filed an RTI application with the UPSIC under Section 25 of the Act, which makes it mandatory for all State Information Commissions and the Central Information Commission to furnish reports on the implementation of law.

 
But he did not get the desired information even after filing the same RTI for two consecutive years.

 
In 2007, the UPSIC replied that the required information could not be provided as the report of the Commission for the last year had not been prepared.

 
"Due to acute paucity of staff, no such statement could be prepared by the Commission as desired by you so far nor it is still in such a position as to prepare and provide the same in near future," was the reply the RTI activist got.

 
Not ready to give up, Batra filed another RTI plea to know the monthly disposal of appeals and complaints with the UPSIC.AN>
 
 
"The results were surprising. Cases accumulated despite the state having the highest number of information commissioners, which is the opposite of what should have happened," he said.

 
"If this is the state in one year, then imagine the number of cases pending now (since the implementation of the RTI act)," Batra asked.
 
 
A comparison of the website of the UPSIC (www.upsic.up.nic.in) and the CIC (cic.gov.in) clearly indicates poor implementation of Section 4 of the Act, which makes it mandatory for the Commission to keep its website updated on the progress made on the complaints.

 
" The UPSIC has failed to maintain the required data in the website in compliance of the Act," he said.

 
When contacted, Chief Commissioner, UPSIC, Justice M A Khan accepted paucity of staff as a reason for not maintaining documentation of the information and not updating the website.

 
He said "We do not have either proper infrastructure or manpower. We have ten information commissioners and we work on a rotational basis. We get lots of cases, but then we do not have basic staff like data operator or web designer."

 
"Seeing the poor state of the SIC, the IAS officers are reluctant to continue working with us," Khan said.

 
Batra said "If this lackadaisical attitude comes from the State Information Commission, who are the highest authorities for taking to task the public authority, there will be no check on the public authorities and the administration of the state too," Batra said.

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

Quick file sharing

Send up to 1GB of

files in an IM.

Give Things.

Get Things.

It's free and it's

good for the planet.

.

__,_._,___
urvashi sharma | 2 May 21:03 2008
Picon

Threat by social welfare uttar pradesh officials for use of RTI act 2005


Respected sir,

Please refer to case no. s-1/1814(c) /2007 of uttar pradesh state information commission & letter no su.aa. - 8 /26-1-2008 -6(41) / 2007 lucknow dated 25th april 2008 of uttar pradesh government , social welfare section - 1sent under the signature of sri ram ganesh , joint secretary and the pio of the department to my husband sri sanjay sharma .As my husband has asked for informations which the department shall never be able to furnish as major irregularities of the department shall get exposed so officials of the social welfare department of uttar pradesh have directly threatened my husband so that he should not pursue the cases in the SIC uttar pradesh.

Letter of section 6 of the abovementioned case was sent on 11-04-07 . the information , which should have been furnished in 30 days as per the RTI act , has not been furnished even after eight hearings and more than 385 days.

The officials of social welfare department , uttar pradesh government were indirectly getting my husband harassed by my husband's immediate boss sri a.. k. bajpai. Pls institute an enquiry to expose the nexus between sri a. k. bajpai and the section officier of section -1 sri vijay prakash tripathi who is hand in gloves in all irregular and unlawful deeds of sri a. k. bajpai on account of which huge public money is being drained out , And now the officials are directly and officially threatening my husband . instead of providing the information , they are beating about the bush and supressing the facts to hide the irregularities of previous officials of the department.. Sri vijay prakash tripathi is blindly shielding sri a. k. bajpai by supressing all enquiries against sri a. k. bajpai .pl ease institute an open enquiry in this matter.

I want to ask you as to what is the use of the act when no one is serious to implement it. Use of this act is fundamental right of every citizen of india but the officials of social welfare department of uttar pradesh are so deeply engrossed in irregular activities that they can do anything but to provide the information required by the information seeker. If selection in I.A.S. or P.C.S. gives one person a licence to openly indulge in irregularities and then take benefit of red-tapism and go scot-free ? I want to share one view with your goodself that the day our army becomes like our bureaucracy , india shall not remain independent for long. I may be moved by emotions but I can't help it. Please do something before everything is lost.

Please institute a high level independent enquiry in this matter to punish the culprits.

Thanks

Urvashi sharma
f-2108 , rajajipuram
lucknow-226017
uttar pradesh
india

urvashi sharma

Explore your hobbies and interests. Go to http://in.promos.yahoo.com/groups/

__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Best of Y! Groups

Discover groups

that are the best

of their class.

Yahoo! Groups

Special K Challenge

Join others who

are losing pounds.

.

__,_._,___
lokesh batra | 4 May 10:24 2008
Picon

TOI : UP House threatens info panel with contempt

 
 
Times of India
New Delhi
04 May 2008
 
UP House threatens info panel with contempt
4 May 2008, 0420 hrs IST,Arvind Singh Bis ht,TNN

LUCKNOW: Amid a raging national debate over the Right to Information Act, the UP assembly has triggered a new controversy by seeking to initiate contempt of the House proceedings against the State Information Commission (SIC) and peti tioners who sought information.

Speaker Sukhdeo Rajbhar took a decision to this effect recently after an all-party meeting. CM Mayawati also attended the meeting. The issue was raised in the assembly on February 15, 2008. In fact, Rajbhar has only ratified his predecessor Mata Prasad Pandey’s decision. The row is set to give a new dimension to the issue, after Parliament and the judiciary took conflicting stands on the subject.

The assembly has crossed swords with the commission for the issuance of its notices to furnish information sought by a couple of petitioners under the RTI Act. While one petitioner, Romesh Tiwari, had sought to know — (a) Whether an MLA could bid for a contract? (b) What are the provisions for this? and (c) Whether an MLA becomes liable to lose his or her membership on the basis of the profit earned through the contract? Another petitioner, Motilal had sought information about the proceedings of the Petition Committee of the 13th assembly.

When no information was furnished, the petitioners approached the SIC which issued summons to the assembly. The assembly took a serious exception of the Commission’s notice. It has been argued that Rule 84 of the procedure and conduct of business for the assembly lays down that "no legal proceedings within the precincts of the House will be served without the prior permission of the Speaker". Its violation would attract provisions of the contempt of the House, senior Vidhan Sabha official said.

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

Quick file sharing

Send up to 1GB of

files in an IM.

Yahoo! Groups

Find balance

between nutrition,

activity & well-being.

.

__,_._,___
lokesh batra | 5 May 18:20 2008
Picon

Re: TOI : UP House threatens info panel with contempt

Dear all,
 
Pls read TOI report below.
 
It seems that all political parties have got togather to gag RTI.
 
This issue require discussions.
 
May be we can write to President of India, PM, U.P.Governor and also Heads of all political parties and also UPA Chairperson.
 
rgds,
Lokesh


lokesh batra <batra_lokesh <at> yahoo.com> wrote:
 
 
Times of India
New Delhi
04 May 2008
 
UP House threatens info panel with contempt
4 May 2008, 0420 hrs IST,Arvind Singh Bisht,TNN

LUCKNOW: Amid a raging national debate over the Right to Information Act, the UP assembly has triggered a new controversy by seeking to initiate contempt of the House proceedings against the State Information Commission (SIC) and petitioners who sought information.

Speaker Sukhdeo Rajbhar took a decision to this effect recently af ter an all-party meeting. CM Mayawati also attended the meeting. The issue was raised in the assembly on February 15, 2008. In fact, Rajbhar has only ratified his predecessor Mata Prasad Pandey’s decision. The row is set to give a new dimension to the issue, after Parliament and the judiciary took conflicting stands on the subject.

The assembly has crossed swords with the commission for the issuance of its notices to furnish information sought by a couple of petitioners under the RTI Act. While one petitioner, Romesh Tiwari, had sought to know — (a) Whether an MLA could bid for a contract? (b) What are the provisions for this? and (c) Whether an MLA becomes liable to lose his or her membership on the basis of the profit earned through the contract? Another petitioner, Motilal had sought information about the proceedings of the Petition Committee of the 13th assembly.

When no information was furnished, the petitioners approached the SIC which issued summons to the assembly. The assembly took a serious exception of the Commission’s notice. It has been argued that Rule 84 of the procedure and conduct of business for the assembly lays down that "no legal proceedings within the precincts of the House will be served without the prior permission of the Speaker". Its violation would attract provisions of the contempt of the House, senior Vidhan Sabha official said.
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

All together now

Host a free online

conference on IM.

Yahoo! Groups

w/ John McEnroe

Join the All-Bran

Day 10 Club.

.

__,_._,___
lokesh batra | 6 May 13:47 2008
Picon

TOI : I am a public servant: CJI

Will the following statement of CJI make any difference in his views about applicability of RTI on CJI?
 
 
 
 
 
Times of India
New Delhi
06 May 2008
 
 
 I am a public servant: CJI
6 May 2008, 0229 hrs IST,Dhananjay Mahapatra,TNN
 
NEW DELHI: "I am a public servant," declared Chief Justice of India K G Balakrishanan settling the dust that had arisen over whether or not judges of the Supreme Court and high courts were public servants or not.

His remarks at the conclusion of the annual conference of Chief Justices of the high courts and the chief ministers had opened a big debate over the status of the judges of the higher and superior judiciary.

The clarification from the CJI came on the day when the judiciary took the historic first step to allow TV cameras to videograph the “people's court” proceedings held inside the SC's court rooms, which are always out of bound for cameras.

Speaking to The Times of India, Justice Balakrishnan laughed away the question whether judges of the SC and the HCs were public servants or not.

“How can any judge argue that he is not a public servant?” he counter questioned. It is a well settled position of law, as laid down in the five-judge constitution bench judgment of the Supreme Court in the Veeraswamy case, that judges of the high courts and the Supreme Court were public servants, he said.

( dhananjay.mahapatra <at> timesgroup.com )

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Yahoo! Groups

Everyday Wellness Zone

Check out featured

healthy living groups.

Change your life

with Yahoo! Groups

balance nutrition,

activity & well-being.

.

__,_._,___
lokesh batra | 6 May 14:09 2008
Picon

HT : Jurists want judges to be role models

 

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

All together now

Host a free online

conference on IM.

Give Things.

Get Things.

It's free and it's

good for the planet.

.

__,_._,___
lokesh batra | 7 May 08:36 2008
Picon

HT : Demand for open judiciary grows

 
Hindustan Times
New Delhi
07 May 2008
 
Demand for open judiciary grows
 
Satya Prakash
New Delhi, May 6
 
THE FIGHT for citizens' right to know about the details of judges' wealth, appointments and complaints of misconduct against them reached the Supreme Court on Tuesday with a petition demanding implementation of the Right to Information Act in the judiciary.
 
The People's Union for Civil Liberties filed a PIL seeking an order "requesting" CJI K.G. Balakrishnan to give directions to the Supreme Court Secretary General and registrar generals of all high courts to provide information sought by the public under the RTI Act, 2005.
 
Contending that judicial independence and judicial accountability were not contradictory to each other, PUCL national president and senior advocate K.G. Kannabiran sought an order "requesting" the CJI to ensure enforcement of people's right to elicit information, unless withholding of it was necessary for security reasons.
 
Of late, civil rights activists, top jurists and bar leaders have stepped up the pressure on the judiciary to act in a more transparent manner They have criticised the judiciary's stand on declaration of assets by judges and implementation of the RTI.
 
In his petition, the noted human rights activist said: "The stand taken by the Chief Justice of India recently (on the issue of RTI and declaration of assets) has created a discontent amongst various sections of Civil Society, and various Constitu- tional functionaries."
 
Citing the CJI's recent statement that Constitutional functionaries were not covered under the RTI and the judge s of the Supreme Court and high courts were not bound to declare their wealth, Kannabiran pointed out that top jurists like for- mer CJIs J.S. Verma and V.N. Khare have disapproved it. He also drew attention to the reaction of Lok Sabha Speaker Somnath Chatterjee on the CJI's views. Chatterjee had said: "Nothing should be held back from the people."
 
Kannabiran said the definition of "Public Authority" and "Competent Authority" under the RTI Act "left no doubt that the judges of the Surepeme Court and high courts being public authority under the Act are amenable to the jurisdiction of the RTI."
 
He sought to emphasise that citizens' right to know was a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution and the RTI Act only provided a mechanism for its enforcement.
 
"The view of the CJI that Constitutional ftmetionaries were not obliged to give information amounts to denial of the right of the citizen under Article 19(1)(a) was also contrary to the oath of office of judges," the PUCL President contended.
 
Maintaining that courts were also a part of the democratic process, Kannabiran said: "Judicial independence does not give judges the power to withhold informatio n or to keep things secret which are required to be made public."
 
                                                      satya.prakash <at> hindustantimes.com
 
 
 

Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Featured Y! Groups

and category pages.

There is something

for everyone.

Yahoo! Groups

Join a program

to help you find

balance in your life.

.

__,_._,___
Vinita Vishwas Deshmukh | 7 May 12:25 2008
Picon

Pune cops get RTI Act-ive

Please check this out, send to as many and join my google group on RTI, cheers and warm rgds vinita
 
Click on http://groups.google.co.in/group/rti-forum-for-instant-information-/web/pune-cops-get-rti-act-ive;
or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that does not
work.
 
__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

Group get-together

Host a free online

conference on IM.

Healthy Living

Learn to live life

to the fullest

on Yahoo! Groups.

.

__,_._,___
nityanand jayaraman | 7 May 14:21 2008
Picon

Re: Pune cops get RTI Act-ive

excellent stuff, vinita and other friends in Pune.
ciao, nity

On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 3:25 AM, Vinita Vishwas Deshmukh <vinitapune <at> gmail.com> wrote:

Please check this out, send to as many and join my google group on RTI, cheers and warm rgds vinita
 
Click on http://groups.google.co.in/group/rti-forum-for-instant-information-/web/pune-cops-get-rti-act-ive;
or copy & paste it into your browser's address bar if that does not
work.
 

__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Y! Messenger

Instant hello

Chat over IM with

group members.

Special K Group

on Yahoo! Groups

Join the challenge

and lose weight.

.

__,_._,___
Nagaraj Mysore Raghupathi | 7 May 18:10 2008
Picon

CORRUPTION IN INDIAN JUDICIARY & POLICE

e - Voice Of Human Rights Watch - e-news weekly

Spreading the light of humanity & freedom

Editor: Nagaraj.M.R....vol.4 . issue.18......03/05/2008

<a href="http://www.amnesty.org"><img border="0" alt="Support Amnesty
International" title="Support Amnesty International"
src="http://www.amnesty.org/images/banners/banner2-red/banner2-468x60-eng.jpg"/></a>

Editorial : INDIAN JUDICIARY UNDER RTI PURVIEW

The corrupt among public servants always give a ruse , reason to
escape from accountability. Recently government of Karnataka under
president's rule has enacted a rule limiting the number of
informations sought in RTI application to 3 . already bureaucrats are
successful in exempting official file notings from RTI purview. These
file notings are the basis on which official decisions are taken by
superiors , so if one wants to know the intention behind an official
decision it is imperative to know all the notings.

Police apply 3rd degree torture on accussed , ask questions for hours
in the name of extracting truth , the same police are afraid to
answer questions lest the truth come out.

In the courts of law , numerous questions are asked , cross
examination done to extract truth . if one remains silent it amounts
to confession / agreeing to all charges leveled. In courts of law ,
during cross examination one must give straight forward answers , one
cann't give vague answers nor state excuses for not answering a
question. If one doesn't give straight forward answers that also is
considered as agrreing to the charges levelled. The courts go to any
length to extract answers to it's questions , take for example rape
cases in the backdrop of our Indian tradition. In the courts of law ,
the rape victim - woman who has already suffered injustice , shame is
made to depose before male judges , lawyers who are total strangers
and made to repeatedly explain how the crime of rape was committed. So
once again the victim is made to suffer more shame in the society. For
the courts answers to questions , cross examination , legal
procedures is more important than honour of woman. The very same
judges are afraid to answer questions , cross examination under one
pretext or the other lest the truth come out.

Even our people's representatives – MPs , MLAs , etc are afraid to
speak out truth , to honour RTI act citing legal privileges , etc. in
India , during appointment of persons to government service back
ground check & clearance by police is mandatory & during appointment
into sensitive defense , space , atomic energy establishments , etc
apart from police verification , investigation by intelligence
agencies is a must. No such thing for our MLAs , MPs . However now
criminalization of politics is almost in India , some of the accussed
are drafting laws like IPC , Indian defense rules , police code ,
purviews of judiciary , etc. they are drafting laws to legalise their
crimes. The election commission of India is not properly verifying the
affidavits of candidates , also the vigilance authorities ,
lokayukthas are not properly verifying the affidavits of sitting MLAs
, MPs , etc.

More than RTI ACT , to seek information is part of every Indian
citizen's fundamental rights & human rights , RTI ACT is just
fulfilling that right partly & fixing a time frame. Nobody , no
constitutional functionary is higher than Indian citizens , nobody's
privileges or any laws prevailing over the fundamental rights &
duties of Indian citizens is constitutional , just or legal . The
shame is that even after 60 years of independence , FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
& DUTIES OF INDIAN CITIZENS is observed more in breach than
implementation , by our public servants including the judiciary .

Hereby , we urge all the public servants – judges , police , people's
representatives to honour RTI ACT , to honour Indian citizen's
fundamental & human rights and to facilitate them to perform their
fundamental duties. The silence of public servants to the questions
asked or vague answers , ruses by public servants amounts to
confessions , agreeing to the questions , charges leveled & crimes
committed .

Let the TRUTH prevail. Jai hind. Vande mataram.

Your's sincerely,

Nagaraj.M.R.

Judiciary under RTI Act, says parliamentary panel

New Delhi, April 29
A parliamentary committee today held that judiciary comes under the
purview of the Right to Information law with regard to all activities
of administration except "judicial decision making." "Except the
judicial decision making, all other activities of administration and
the persons included in it (judiciary) are subject to RTI Act," said
the report of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Law
and Justice.

The opinion of the committee headed by E.M. Sudarsana Natchiappanan
comes against the backdrop of a raging controversy over whether the
judiciary comes under the RTI purview. Chief Justice of India K.G.
Balakrishnan had recently said the CJI is a constitutional authority
and does not come within the purview of the RTI Act.

The committee, which went into the demands of grants for the personnel
ministry and discussed the interpretation of Section 2 (h) of the RTI
Act, that is, definition of public authority, said the provision is
very clear that all constitutional authorities come under the
definition of public authority. The committee had examined in detail
every clause of the RTI Act, 2004 and was conscious of the fact that
all wings of the state, executive, legislature and judiciary, are
fully covered under this Act since all organs of the state are
accountable to the citizens of India in a democratic state. "It is
more so since the judiciary is having a dual role as (i)
administrative function and (ii) judicial decision making.

AN APPEAL TO HONOURABLE CENTRAL INFORMATION COMMISSIONER , NEW DELHI &
STATE INFOR MATION COMMISSIONER , BANGALORE.

We at e-voice of human rights watch has requested for following
information ( ANSWERS TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS ) from honourable
CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA , SUPREME COURT OF INDIA , NEW DELHI , UNION
HOME SECRETARY , GOI , NEW DELHI , DG&IG OF POLICE , GOK , BANGALORE
, COMMISSIONER , BANGALORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , BANGALORE &
COMMISSIONER , MYSORE URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY , MYSORE , as per
RTI Act . All of them have failed to provide complete truthful
information to us.

Full Case details are given at following web page,

RTI APPEAL TO HONOURABLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA , SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

http://crosscji.blogspot.com/ ,
http://crossexamofchiefjustice.blogspot.com/ ,

http://crimesofsupremecourt.wordpress.com/ ,
http://crosscji.wordpress.com/ ,

http://crossexamofchiefjustice.wordpress.com/ ,

RTI APPEAL TO UNION HOME SECRETARY , GOI , NEW DELHI

http://crosscji.blogspot.com/ ,
http://crossexamofchiefjustice.blogspot.com/ ,

http://crimesofsupremecourt.wordpress.com/ ,
http://crosscji.wordpress.com/ ,

http://crossexamofchiefjustice.wordpress.com/ ,

RTI APPEAL TO DG&IG OF POLICE , GOK , BANGALORE

http://crosscji.blogspot.com/ ,
http://crossexamofchiefjustice.blogspot.com/ ,

http://crimesofsupremecourt.wordpress.com/ ,
http://crosscji.wordpress.com/ ,

http://crossexamofchiefjustice.wordpress.com/ ,

RTI APPEAL BDA COMMISSIONER , MUDA , MYSORE

http://crimesofmuda.blogspot.com/ , http://manivannanmuda.blogspot.com/ ,

http://crimesatmudamysore.wordpress.com/ ,

RTI APPEAL TO BDA COMMISSIONER , BDA , BANGALORE

http://crimesofbda.blogspot.com/ , http://bdacrimes.wordpress.com/ ,

Hereby , we do once again request you to order the said public
servants - to comply with RTI Act & to provide the full information
to us at the earliest. JAI HIND. VANDE MATARAM.

Your's sincerely,

Nagaraj.M.R.

INDIAN JUDICIAL & LEGAL SYSTEM INDIRECTLY IN THE CLUTCHES OF MAFIA

In India , justice , equality & democracy an illusion . all those
words are only there is in statuette books , but not in practice . the
rich & mighty crooks are committing gravest crimes & escaping from the
hands of law by manipulating evidences , by bribing the public
servants to create favourable government reports , records. Poor
people who have suffered injustices are not getting justice due to
lack of evidences & government reports , records to prove their case.

CORRUPTION IS THERE RIGHT FROM GOVERNMENT MATERNITY HOSPITAL UPTO
GRAVEYARD , THROUGHT THE WALK OF ONE'S LIFE.

The corrupt public servants are more cruel , damaging criminals than
our previous british oppressors or dawood ibrahim & other under world
dons. The gravest threat , damages to india's security & national
integrity is more from these corrupt public servants than Pakistan or
china or other terrorist outfits. These corrupt public servants can
stoop to any level in their greed for money. The present state affairs
is a shame to our political & legal system and a barometer , indicator
to their efficiency.

Recently , we have seen in the media , how people of bihar meated out
mob justice to a criminal , that will be the fate of corrupt police ,
doctors , other officials in the future. But the violence is not the
answer , that will only lead towards anarchy. We must establish true
democracy of bapuji's dreams , true freedom , equality for all in
practice for which so many of our fore fathers , freedom fighters
sacrificed their life for.

THE ANSWER LIES IN ACCOUNTABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVANTS , ALL
CONSTITUTIONAL FUNCTIONARIES INCLUDING JUDGES , TO THEIR PAY MASTERS
- MONARCHS OF DEMOCRACY ie CITIZENS OF DEMOCRATIC INDIA. Hope this
will dawn on our public servants that they are PUBLIC SERVANTS NOT
PUBLIC MASTERS.

Failure of RTI Act in India

- In the clutches of corrupt public servants mafia

In the courts of law , every statement to be valid must be supported
by evidences. That too, the statements of public servants / government
officials & their reports in government records are considered as
sacrosanct , the ultimate gospel truth by courts of law.

The corruption has spread it's tentacles far & wide in the public
service. The bribe booty is shared by lower to higher officials. If an
official is complained against , his higher official conducts a formal
investigation & reports in the record that lower official is not guilty.

The vigilance authorities / Karnataka lokayukta has recently raided on
police , tax officials & seized illegal wealth amounting to crores of
rupees. Take the recent case where in senior IPS officer ,
superintendent of police chamarajanagar , mr.srikantappa was arrested
by Karnataka lokayukta. The victims spoke to media that he used to
threaten them with false cases. In this way , how many victims /
innocents were arrested & tortured by his arrest warrants ? how many
innocents suffered in false cases ? how many rich criminals got scot
free , by srikantappa's filing of B reports leading to closure of cases ?

In the past how many suffered by srikantappa's actions ? has the court
subjected to review all the previous actions of srikantappa throught
his corrupt career ? if not , why ?

The courts of law has taken the official reports , records of
mr.srikantappa as gospel truth & indirectly aided rich criminals &
harmed innocents. It is the same case with respect to reports of all
government officials � police , labour , tax , etc. the rich
criminals buy out government officials & make them write favourable
report about themselves. Whereas the poor , innocents suffer from
adverse reports & injustices. The courts of law takes the government
records at it's face value & meat out injustices to the poor ,
innocents while aiding the rich criminals.

When a commoner requests for information as per RTI Act , the
government officials either give incomplete information , false
information or decline to give information under one pretext or the
other. The officials are damn sure that the truthful information will
be detrimental to themselves & will be taken as evidence against
themselves in the courts of law. So information , truth is not given.
Even information commissions are failing here. Thereby, the public are
denied to seek justice in the courts of law , by lack of evidences.

The courts of law before accepting the records of government officials
, must subject it to a "test of truth". When a government report is
contested against , a fact finding team comprising members of public ,
complainant , respondent & the court , must check it out at the ground
level. Orelse when a complainant says that the report of a government
official � police , labour , tax , etc as false that government
official must be subjected to lie detector test , narco-analysis, ertc
by court of law. The questionnaire ie the questions to be asked during
the scientific test are to be prepared with feedback from both
complainant & respondent's side. In that way , impartially truth can
be found out. After all , the objective of courts of law is "Quest for
Truth", not just giving out judgements based on reports of corrupt
officials.

Nowadays , we are even seeing reports of corruption among the
judiciary itself. If a complaint against a judge is made out that a
level ground is not provided to put up one's case in the court or
cross examination of one party is not allowed or lie detector test /
narco analysis of one party is not allowed ( in turn taking the lies
of that party as truth ), the judge making a varied interpretation of
law, the judge not safe guarding the health & life of the complainant
in the custody of police leading to 3rd degree torture of complainant
by police , etc, in all such cases the supreme court of India must
change the presiding judge of such cases , the cases must be
thoroughly reviewed & the guilty judge must be subjected to
narco-analysis , lie detector test , etc & legally prosecuted. In this
back drop , accountability of police & judges to the public ie
citizens of India � kings of democracy , is a must. After all , the
kings of democracy / citizens of India / taxpayers are the paymasters
of all public servants.

We at e � voice of human rights of watch have utmost respect for the
judiciary & all government institutions. It is the corrupt few in
those institutions who are themselves bringing disgrace to the august
institutions they occupy , by their corrupt deeds. The saving grace is
that still honest few are left in public service & it is an appeal to
them , to legally prosecute their corrupt colleagues.

In India , the private enterprises are the wealth creators of our
economy. However , some private enterprises are violating labour laws
, tax laws , human rights & fundamental rights of people. In turn
harming the public , looting the tax dues. This is creating black
money causing various social evils in the society. These huge private
enterprises take loans from public sector banks ie take public's money
as loans , collect money from public in the form of shares ,
debentures , sell their product to the public. Still , they are not
covered by RTI Act, they don't give truthful information to the public
nor allow public inspection of their sites , why ? they buy out
concerned government officials & gets them to write favourable report
about themselves. There are wide differences between the ground
reality & these government reports. If the aggrieved person , victim
of injustices meated out by these private enterprises , tries to
legally seek justice, these criminal private enterprises buy out
police , concerned officials & fixes up the victim in false cases. The
police in total disregard to law violates the human rights &
fundamental rights of the victim in custody , subjects the victim to
3rd degree torture in custody. The presiding judge of the case doesn't
safe guard the rights , health , life of victims in custody. The judge
doesn't check out the truthfulness of government reports & passes on
judgement making varied interpretation of just remember the case of
"local citizens vs coca cola company" in plachimada , kerala.

Is it not right & just in such cases , to subject the presiding judge
, police , concerned government officialds & most importantly key
officials of that criminal private enterprise to lie detector , narco-
analysis tests , to know the truth ? is it not right to conduct the
inspection of alleged site , review of all company's records , by a
team comprising of members from public , court , complainant &
respondent ?

Some of these criminal enterprises threaten to finish off the poor
victims . as these company's have money power they can buy out rowdies
, police & capable of doing anything. In such cases , if anything
untoward happens to the victim or his family , are not the officials
of such criminal enterprise liable to pay compensation to the
victims's family or survivors ?

In India , do we truly have democracy & freedom ? is this corrupt
India � what our freedom fighters dreamt of & fought for ?

History of Corruption in Indian Judiciary since Independence: 1947 - 2003

1949: Mr. Justice Sinha only Judge impeached; courtesy Good Judges &
Constitution Framers: Our Fore-Fathers represented by Constituent
Assembly of India framers of Constitution of India then in 1949 (year
before Consitution came into existence) impeached Mr. Justice Sinha;
finding him "guilty of improper exercise of Judicial functions, the
cumulative effect of which was to lower the dignity of his office and
undermine the confidence of the public in the administration of
justice…" [008.07].
Such/ similar acts/ behaviours by whom-so-ever including Judges is
since 1971 is covered as an act of Criminal Contempt of Court [041.05
]. Not a single Judge is either Impeached or hauled-up for Contempt
till 1991.
Peoples' Inner Hope Courts to maintain their Majesty & Dignity will
prosecute 1000 Judges in context, who have tarnished & undermined the
Fair image of Judiciary.
Let Judges relish Jail for months if not years ; to asses personally
the convinences-N-comforts provided even to innocent citizens or
persons who were not having Rs. 100 to give as Bail. Then they will be
in better position to Transform Jails into Reformation Centres.
Jailing corrupt Judges by Judges , we hope will instill confidence of
people in Courts & law. Who-is-who of India then only will scare to
get into any scam nor Criminals will think of becoming Legislators.

1979 : Chief Justice Mr. K. Veeraswami ; Chief Justice of India
permitted Central Bureau of India to file case of Dis-proportionate of
Income / wealth against Chief Justice Madras High Court Mr. K.
Veeraswami ( father-in-law of Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami ). 30 years
elaped. Sheltered by Courts' easy-go-tactic. [049.04] [059.05 ]

1991-93: Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami ( son-in-law of Chief Justice Mr. K.
Veeraswami [049.04 ] ) : SAWANT COMMITTEE REPORT had held he is guilty
of several charges. Supreme Court of India also upheld guilty of 3-4
charges ; & recommended to Parliament for further action.
Parliamentarians failed in their Duty to Impeach the Sitting Judge of
Supreme Court Mr. Justice V. Ramaswami ; not rising to the Heights of
Eminent Constitution makers ; but chose to have unholy alliance with
Corruption in Judiciary vis-a-vis Legislature & Government.[008.00 ].
Supreme Court which upheld Charges of Mis-Behaviour also , we opine ,
failed to prosecute him under Contempt of Court Act & relevant Laws .
It also failed " To Do Complete Justice" by invoking Article142 .
Criminal Judge was allowed to go scot-free; both by Parliament &
Supreme Court !
Good precedent for other Judges ? If so What kind of message to
we-innocent-Citizens ? For almost complete proceedings in SC &
Parliament: [008.00 ]

1995 A.M. BHATTACHARJEE: The chief justice of the Bombay High
Court was forced to resign in 1995 after it was found that he had
received Rs.70 lakh as book advance from a publishing firm known to
have links with the underworld.

1996 AJIT SENGUPTA: The Calcutta High Court judge made it a
routine to issue ex parte, ad interim stay orders on anticipatory bail
pleas from smugglers having links with the Mumbai underworld. He was
arrested in 1996 for FERA violations after retirement

1994 to 1997: A.M. AHMADI: When he was Chief Justice of India
(October 1994-March 1997), his daughter, a lawyer in the Delhi High
Court, caused eyebrows to be raised for getting "special" treatment
from certain judges. When some members of the bar sought a resolution
banning lawyer relatives of judges from staying in the same house, the
CJI got members to defeat the motion.

2000 A.S. ANAND: As Chief Justice of India. (a) He was accused of
using his position to get the subordinate judiciary to rule in favour
of his wife and mother-in-law in a suit that had been barred by
limitation for two decades.For more: [049.05] [049.05A] [049.05B]
[049.05C] [049.05D] [049.05E ] called as TANGLED PLOT. Also read Ram
Jethmalani's " BIG EGOS, small men ". (b) Supreme Court , while he
was CJI,directed a CBI probe after a dispute arose over his age in
2000. The investigation report was not made public.This arose due to
scan copy published in Ram Jethmalani's " BIG EGOS, small men ".

2002: SEX FOR ACQUITTAL
In November 2002, Sunita Malviya, a Jodhpur-based doctor, alleged that
a deputy registrar of the Rajasthan High Court had sought sexual
favours for himself and for Justice Arun Madan to "fix" a case in her
favour. Justice Mr.· Arun Madan . Case of Lady Sunita Malviya.STATUS:
A committee set up by former CJI G.B. Pattanaik found prima facie
evidence against Madan, who does not attend court anymore. Judge Resigned

CASH-FOR-JOB :Three judges of the Punjab and Haryana High Court sought
the help of disgraced PPSC chief R.P. Sidhu to ensure that their
daughters and other kin topped examinations conducted by the
commission . Judges are M.L. Singh , Mehtab Sing Gill & Amarbir Singh
STATUS: Two inquiry panels indicted the judges. Gill and Amarbir Singh
have resigned M.L. Singh continues, though no work is allotted to him.

2002-03: 3 Judges Mysore Sex Scandal ( alleged ) : On Sunday, November
3, 2002, three judges of the Karnataka High Court, along with two
women advocates, allegedly got involved in a brawl with a woman guest
at a resort. The police arrived but reportedly didn't take action.
Judges are N.S. Veerabhadraiah , V. Gopalagowda &· Chandrashekaraiah
.STATUS: The three-judge inquiry committee appointed by the CJI filed
its report. Gave clean chit.

March 2003 - Delhi High Court Judge resigns: Suspected of collusion
with Property Developers. Raids by CBI on corrupt higher officials in
Delhi Development Authority (DDA), found Draft Judgement-N-Court Records

E(I)nquiry-in-camera or In-House Inquiry was & is contrary to Law . Is
ultra vires Article 14 of Constitution of India: " The State shall not
deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of
the laws within the territory of India"
Following Questions / Issues, inter alia , arise

( a ) Enquiry in-camera was held contrary to the observations made by,
Constituent Assembly of India in 1949. In its' Impeachment Order had
held thus:"While we are alive to the desirability, in the interests of
the public, of investigating charges against a Judge in open court, we
held the Enquiry in-camera in view of the allegation made in the
affidavits and the circumstances of the case. This mode of proceeding
should not, however, be regarded as a precedent." [008.07 ].
( b) In the case of similar In-House Inquiry held under the Orders of
Chief Justice of India in Jusice V. Ramaswami's case , Justice
Ramaswami had held that " Inquiring Committee" as well as " Inquiry"
have no basis & force of law. It is reflected in the Report , which
was read-out by CJI to Advocates & publicised , submitted by 3 Judges
Committee thus" Indeed Justice Ramaswami had made it clear to the
Chief Justice that he did not recognise any such Jurisdiction in any
body or authority."
(c) It will not be out-of place to mention here that Two of "Three
Judges Committee " appointed by CJI in Re. V. Ramaswami's case are
alleged to be involved in Judges Plot 4 Plot.[014.00]. It is like
Criminal investigating another criminal .
( d ) If so how sure can we be that " 3 Judges Committee " appointed
to invetigate " 3 Judges Mysore Sex Scandal " were un-biased or were
above Board & have presented an accurate Report ?

Queries to Supreme Court , Parliament of India & Central Government
In Re. Judges' Mysore Sex Scandal
( a)" Will the Supreme Court Publicise Report of " 3 Judges Committee
" ( all & sundry material); morefully to know whether any evidence
adduced by many in support of Scam is informed to CJI & Supreme Court ?
(b) What is the Guarantee that despite prima facie evidence Judges of
Supreme Court which consists of Few corrupt Judges seved in Karnataka
are not inclined to take stern action ?
(c) Investigation of a Crime comitted by Minister or anyone lies
within Executive Domain like the case Justice K.Veeraswami, in this
case CBI . Is it not a case of hushing-up & messing-up of " 3 Pillars
of Constitution " ?.
(d) How long will you try keeping suppressed Crimes of Judges of
Supreme Court & High Courts when Union Law Minister Mr. P. Shiva
Shankar , on 28th Nov.1987 said " Supreme Court is filled with FERA
violators & Bride Burners…" ( AIR 1988 SC 1208 ). When Chief Justice
Of India Justice E.S. Venkataramaiaha admits that "in every High Court
there are 3-4 Judges who are out every evening to Party in Foreign
Embassiies or at Advocates' places…drink…dine…" (1990 Cr LJ 2179
) [041.09].
(e) 20% of Judges are corrupt , indirectly said Chief Justice of India
Mr. Justice S.P. Bharucha , in other words admitted that 80% of Judges
of India are not corrupt & are above board to be bribed or influnced ?
Then why cases are not filed against 20% of Judges ?

LOSS of Confidence in Judiciary : The Actions & Inactions of Supreme
Court trying to suppress crimes of Judges has resulted in We, the
People of India losing confidence in Courts & given rise to a Question
whether at all People of India's Fundamental & Statutory Rights are
safe in present set of Judges & Courts and Laws Governing thereof ?

Conscience of Judiciary Shaken: Supreme Court of India: "Police Raj"
it said when Judges all over India went on a kind of strike; for the
reason that a District Judge in liquor prohibited Gujarat State in
1991; drunk & misbehaved , police acted as per law or so. Conscience
of Judiciary was shaken the Court claims. What was it to do with
Judges all over India? Have they ganged-up as One to help each other &
continue crimes but still go unpunished? Punish Dutiful Police?

"Police Raj" to "Judges Tyranny": Judges serving all over India have
formed an Assocition called " All India Judges Association ". At the
time when One Party System in Parliament managed by Congress was to
give way to Multi-Party System (1989 & 1991 General Elections);
Supreme Court gave Judgments in 1992 & 1993 upholding that Judges of
subordinate courts of India are not Employees. They are like Ministers
/ M.L.A.s but not on par of Civil Servants [037.02][037.02A ]. Inter
alia Court said Central Govt. should set-up " All India Judicial
Services " & " National Judicial Pay Commission ". Supreme Court
continuously monitored to see that Pay Commission (FNJPC) is
constituted but failed to monitor setting-up of All India Judicial
Services [055.02 ]. What Judges want is more Liberty / Perks / Powers
but no liabilities / Duties. Un-bridled they want to be as Judges of
Supreme Court & High Court. FNJPC was also given power to give Interim
Relief to Judges. Non setting-up of National Judicial Academy [008.15
] & All India Judicial Services is nothing but Fraud on Constitution &
Supreme Court

Criminal Politicians Vs Criminal Judges : Hats off for the Judgment of
Supreme Court striking-down of Parliamentary Act amending
Representatives of Peoples Act. Court said Come Clean Mr. Politicians
in relation to diclosure of their Criminal , Financial & other such
antecedents so as to help electorate of India to decide whether to
vote for good or bad person in elections. But this 50 years belated
Judgment came as Bolt from Blue to politicians. In this perod Aliens,
Anti-nationals, Criminals & all sundries had a field Day.

But then What about Criminal / Corrupt / Judgment-for-Sex Judges ?:
The Supreme Court was unanimous in the Judgment of corrupt
politicians. Parliament is not unanimous to Bridle Judges or
judiciary. Nor is the Supreme Court ready to find ways & means to Tame
/ Terminate / Jail the Corrupt / criminal / Judgment-for-Sex Judges.
Such inactions of Supreme Court or High Court is nothing short of
giving leverage to such of them. It looks as though Supreme Court on
its own is eroding faith of Public in Judiciary as a whole. Like
Termites these Judges are Constitutional-Enemies-Within-India who are
bent upon to disseminate corruption among other Good Judges.

India: Time to end the lethal lottery of India's death penalty system

(New Delhi): The first major study into India's legal judgements on
death penalty cases has revealed that the system is riddled with fatal
flaws and that the only remedy is to abolish the death penalty
completely, said the study authors in New Delhi today.

Amnesty International believes that at least 140 people have been
sentenced to death in 2006 and 2007. According to the latest available
official figures, there were 273 persons on death row as of 31
December 2005. But this figure is likely to be considerably higher today.

The fate of these death row prisoners is ultimately a lottery. In the
first comprehensive analysis of around 700 Supreme Court judgements on
death penalty cases over more than 50 years, the authors expose a
judicial system that has failed to meet international laws and
standards relating to the death penalty.

Amnesty International India and the People's Union for Civil Liberties
(Tamil Nadu & Puducherry) have issued the study, Lethal Lottery: The
Death Penalty in India, A study of Supreme Court judgments in death
penalty cases 1950-2006.

It is the first to examine the essential unfairness of the death
penalty system in India by analysing evidence found in Supreme Court
judgments of abuse of law and procedure and of arbitrariness and
inconsistency in the investigation, trial, sentencing and appeal
stages in capital cases. It demonstrates that:

• the administration of the death penalty in India has not been in the
"rarest of rare cases" as claimed in the country

• on the contrary, there is ample evidence to show that the death
penalty has been an arbitrary, imprecise and abusive means of dealing
with defendants.

Dr V Suresh, President, PUCL (TN & Puducherry) said: "While the death
penalty continues to be used in India, there remains a danger that it
will be used disproportionately against ethnic minorities, the poor or
other disadvantaged groups. There is only one way to ensure such
inequalities in the administration of justice do not occur: the
complete abolition of the death penalty."

Amnesty International welcomes the current hiatus of executions in the
country. The relative lack of executions in the last decade -- one in
2004 -- illustrates that the people of India are willing to live
without the death penalty.

"India stands at a crossroads. It can choose to join the global trend
towards a moratorium on the death penalty, as adopted by the UN
General Assembly last year. It will also then join 27 countries in the
Asia Pacific region which have abolished the death penalty in law or
in practice.

"Or it can continue to hang death row inmates, when the judicial
system that puts them there has been shown by this extensive research
to be unfair," said Mukul Sharma, Amnesty International-India Director.

The full report is available at
http://www.amnesty.org/en/report/info/ASA20/007/2008 and a summary, at
http://www.amnesty.org/en/report/info/ASA20/006/2008

Background:

The study of the courts highlights some of the main failings as:

* Errors in consideration of evidence - most death sentences
handed down in India are based on circumstantial evidence alone. In a
1994 Supreme Court appeal, the Court noted sarcastically that the main
witness's memory constantly improved. His testimony at the trial three
years after the incident was observed to be far more detailed than his
confessional statement recorded a few days after.
* Inadequate legal representation - concerns included lawyers
ignoring key facts of mental incompetence, omitting to provide any
arguments on sentencing, or failing to dispute claims that the accused
was under 18 years of age at the time of the crime despite evidence to
the contrary.
* Anti-terrorist legislation - concerns include the broad
definition of `terrorist acts', insufficient safeguards on arrest, and
provisions allowing for confessions made to police to be admissible as
evidence.
* Arbitrariness in sentencing - in the same month, different
benches of the Supreme Court have treated similar cases differently,
with mitigating factors taken into account or disregarded arbitrarily.
* In the Bachan Singh judgment of 1980, the Supreme Court ruled
that the death penalty should be used only in the "rarest of rare"
cases. More than a quarter of a century later, it is clear that
through the failure of the courts and the State authorities to apply
consistently the procedures laid down by law and by that judgment, the
Court's strictures remain unfulfilled.

A total of 135 countries have abolished the death penalty in law or in
practice, having realised executions are unacceptable. In 2007, only
24 countries carried out executions (China, Iran, Saudi Arabia,
Pakistan and the USA were the main five perpetrators, accounting for
88 per cent of all known executions). See
http://www.amnesty.org/en/death-penalty

Judicial nepotism rampant in India

April 12, 2007 by CyberGandhi

In the first step in the fight against judicial nepotism, the Law
Ministry wrote to the Bar Council of India last month asking it to
ensure that lawyers don't appear in cases before judges who are close
relatives. However, it appears to have ignored the wider problem of
what is called Son Stroke or Uncle Judge, where judges have close
relatives practising in the same court.

NDTV discovered that this trend, where two judges or a group of judges
have children practising in each other's courts, is widespread. While
not everyone takes advantage of what has been described as a mutual
cooperative society, many of them do. This problem first surfaced in
2003, when the Bar Council of India demanded the transfer of all
judges whose relatives practised in the same courts.

A year later, BK Roy, then Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana
High Court, issued an administrative order barring a group of 10-12
judges from hearing any case pleaded by each other's relatives.

He quoted eminent jurist HM Seervai: "Experience shows that an
impression is created in the public, however unjustified it may be,
that it would be advantageous to engage a judge's son as an advocate."

"It was generally believed that A, B, C and D (all judges) constituted
a mutual co-operative society, in the sense was believed that each of
the four judges (A, B, C and D) would protect the sons of the three
other judges."

The order sparked off a protest by judges in Punjab who took mass
leave. Justice BK Roy was subsequently transferred, and since then,
the order has been ignored.

"Some relatives misuse their connections more blatantly than others,
but the problem remains in principle. An especially acute feature of
problem of nepotism as it exists here is that apart from relatives of
high court judges, children of sitting Supreme Court judges from this
region also practise here at Chandigarh."

"The advantages, the benefits that accrue to them from their
connections is well known to all and is fully exploited," said Anupam
Gupta, Senior Advocate, Punjab & Haryana High Court.

Recently an MP raised the issue of judicial nepotism again and claimed
that out of 490 judges of the various High Courts and the Supreme
Court, relatives of 131 judges are practising in the same court.

Limited directive

Finally, four long years after the issue was first raised by the Bar
Council, the Law Ministry issued a directive. But it was confined to
saying that no lawyer shall plead a case before a judge who is a close
relative.

It completely skirts the issue of close relatives of a judge
practising in the same court - the Uncle Judge or Son Stroke syndrome.

"There are complaints from all over the country that judges' children
are practising in the same high court and that is causing grave
problem in regard to handling of cases and the judges favouring and
one judges son appearing before another judge," said M N Krishnamany,
President, SC Bar Association.

Judges are, in fact, expected to follow a code of conduct which points
out that: "Close association with individual members of the Bar,
particularly with those who practise in the same court, shall be
eschewed."

But is this distance really possible?

"If your son, brother or sister is practising in the same court, you
can't eschew close association with your son, daughter or brother."

"Therefore, you should not be a judge in the same court; you should
opt to be transferred to some other court where a close relative is
not practising," said Prashant Bhushan, Member, Committee on Judicial
Accountability.

However, as figures show, this is clearly not the trend.

In the Punjab & Haryana High Court, the relatives of eight sitting
judges plead cases, while in Delhi High Court, the close relatives of
nine sitting judges are practising lawyers.

Also senior lawyers feel that the children of judges are often favoured.

"That instances have come that a relation of a judge having joined
only three four years in the practise suddenly his briefs are huge in
number so that is what it is under scrutiny because he takes advantage
of his position," said Jaganath Patnaik, President, Bar Council of India.

"It is very clear also as I know personally so many judges in the High
Courts their children are practising and are being pampered also,"
said M N Krishnamani, President, SC Bar Association.

The public impression is that in order to get a favourable order, it's
better to hire a close relative of a judge to plead your case.

Now the questions that remain to be answered are can the Bar Councils
keep a check on this practise and is the Law Ministry seriously
concerned about ending nepotism?

Ajmer Singh, Wednesday, April 11, 2007 (New Delhi), NDTV.COM

<script type="text/javascript">

var irr_lang = 'en';

</script>

<script src="http://fragments.irrepressible.info/js/fragment-125.js"
type="text/javascript">

</script>

Edited, printed , published owned by NAGARAJ.M.R. <at> #LIG-2 / 761,HUDCO
FIRST STAGE ,OPP WATER WORKS , LAXMIKANTANAGAR , HEBBAL ,MYSORE -
570017 INDIA … cell :09341820313
home page : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/naghrw,
http://groups.google.co.in/group/hrwepaper/,
http://evoiceofhumanrightswatch.wordpress.com/ ,
http://indiapolicelaw.blogspot.com/ , http://hrwpaper.blogspot.com/ ,
http://naghrw.tripod.com/evoice/ ,
http://e-voiceofhumanrightswatch.blogspot.com,
contact : naghrw <at> yahoo.com , nagarajhrw <at> hotmail.com
A member of AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL INDIA

__._,_.___
Yahoo! Finance

It's Now Personal

Guides, news,

advice & more.

Yahoo! Groups

Home Improvement

Learn and share

do-it-yourself tips.

Popular Y! Groups

Is your group one?

Check it out and

see.

.

__,_._,___

Gmane