JUSTICE DELAYED JUSTICE DENIED
Kindly compare the slogan with the following illustrative true example of high court :
There was one date of hearing for final hearing of Spl.C.A.9967 of 99 on 16-6-12. The petitioner was present before the Hoin.Court at 11 a.m.sharp and during mentioning moments he requested the Hon. court that his normal turn is at S.No. 66 .He is the petitioner appearing as a party in person before the Hon. court and he may be obliged to take his petition at the opening of the day as he was physically somewhat facing disabilities : just as he could not hear properly, he was a cardiac patient having faced two heart attacks and was undergoing severe treatment as the fundtion of his heart was only 16 % as such he was facing many limitations and probably he cannot sit continuously for longer time at one sit also also cannot relax in the court also as he must wait for previous 65 applicants .He was facing severe fluctuations of blood pressure also and under the tension he has to wait in the court room. He reported the difficulties before Hon .Court quoting the instance of previous submission made by him before previous bench i.e. before the bench of K.M.thaker where he had submitted the same difficulties and requested him to give any date suitable to Hon. court but on that day and time petition may be heard finally so that he may relax from the tension of the petition.But with a great surprise it was announced by the Hon Court on 16 th that the petition may not be placed before him .I appreciate the moral and ethics of Hon Court but the same request was placed before him also which was placed before Hon. J.K.M.Thaker during last hearing. But he p-laced inability to accept the pray and directed to place the pray before Hon Chief Justice.Accordingly the petitioner the party in person has appeared before the Hon. court of Chief Justice and mentioned the same difficulties before Hon. Chief Justice. As reported frequently before previous courts once again the same request was repeated by the party in person to give such date and time so that the matter can be heard at that time.This was an open submission before open court with full respects of hon.court but it also can not be granted upto the extent of pray of petitioner. Petitioner cravefullu urged and prayed before chief justice that he is of about 72 facing number of physical disabilities the disabilities were repeated that he could not listen properly which he had experienced also he could not speak properly, cannot stand properly under tension . Over and above this was 44 th turn right from 1999 to 2012.The petition was for pension matter. Pension is supposed to be fixed within six months after retiremewnts here in this case about 14 years had passed and the matter is still under abeyance. The petition was placed during 1999 and some dues were placed before respondents out of which some might have been given but when it has been given ? As per example the pension paper order was released on 4-2-2010 i.e. after about 12 years of retirements. Commutation amount of about Rs. 3 lacs were granted on 4-2- 10 which could have been granted during 1999 . Kindly consider the value of 3 lacs on 1999 and compare it to 2010. Still there are some dues pending with the respondents but to agreat surprise the respondent had served him a rejoinder on 12-6-12 stating that the poetitioner had hidden the facts before hon.court and not told that he had received something from respondents . I think it is the responsibilities of the respondent to submit the facts before HOn. Court to which extent the claims had been given to petitioner stating clearly that on which date petitioner was entitled to get the claims and on which date it is given to him and how and why delayed ? But petitioner had not yet complined on the issue only had requested to put a full stop on petition by taking the petition on hearing as early as possible looking to his tiny health. Hon. court must ask the respondent to place the details of dues paid to petitioner submitting detailed voudhers of payments with full details of payment .
I know that Hon. Court is not only supposed to be guided by the emotions or sentiments . It requires full proof evidences and documents which probably petitioner at this stage may not collect or submit but can be collected from the respondent . I think it is duty of the respondent to place the facts before Hon.Cort to guide the court to come to the proper conclusion after all they are learned advocates , they must not utilise their skill and intelligence to suppress the petitioner and just to support the respondent to show him an approach of success. May be the age criteria and severe heart attacks had damaged the skill memory and moral of petitioner I do not want to see that the petitioner should attend now the concentration on petition but towards health without tension .Whichever may be the decision of Hon. Chief Justice or any court on the petition on submitted records will be accepted by the petitioner. I submit apology if petitioner had submitted something unlike to Hon Court but we all respects the Hon> court and judiciary by all means. Hon. Court has many discretions with him and whatever will be the mandare of Hon> Court will be accepted by us.
With due respects regards and devotions
RAGINI PARIKH
Observor,caretaker and wife of petitioner
Kindly compare the slogan with the following illustrative true example of high court :
There was one date of hearing for final hearing of Spl.C.A.9967 of 99 on 16-6-12. The petitioner was present before the Hoin.Court at 11 a.m.sharp and during mentioning moments he requested the Hon. court that his normal turn is at S.No. 66 .He is the petitioner appearing as a party in person before the Hon. court and he may be obliged to take his petition at the opening of the day as he was physically somewhat facing disabilities : just as he could not hear properly, he was a cardiac patient having faced two heart attacks and was undergoing severe treatment as the fundtion of his heart was only 16 % as such he was facing many limitations and probably he cannot sit continuously for longer time at one sit also also cannot relax in the court also as he must wait for previous 65 applicants .He was facing severe fluctuations of blood pressure also and under the tension he has to wait in the court room. He reported the difficulties before Hon .Court quoting the instance of previous submission made by him before previous bench i.e. before the bench of K.M.thaker where he had submitted the same difficulties and requested him to give any date suitable to Hon. court but on that day and time petition may be heard finally so that he may relax from the tension of the petition.But with a great surprise it was announced by the Hon Court on 16 th that the petition may not be placed before him .I appreciate the moral and ethics of Hon Court but the same request was placed before him also which was placed before Hon. J.K.M.Thaker during last hearing. But he p-laced inability to accept the pray and directed to place the pray before Hon Chief Justice.Accordingly the petitioner the party in person has appeared before the Hon. court of Chief Justice and mentioned the same difficulties before Hon. Chief Justice. As reported frequently before previous courts once again the same request was repeated by the party in person to give such date and time so that the matter can be heard at that time.This was an open submission before open court with full respects of hon.court but it also can not be granted upto the extent of pray of petitioner. Petitioner cravefullu urged and prayed before chief justice that he is of about 72 facing number of physical disabilities the disabilities were repeated that he could not listen properly which he had experienced also he could not speak properly, cannot stand properly under tension . Over and above this was 44 th turn right from 1999 to 2012.The petition was for pension matter. Pension is supposed to be fixed within six months after retiremewnts here in this case about 14 years had passed and the matter is still under abeyance. The petition was placed during 1999 and some dues were placed before respondents out of which some might have been given but when it has been given ? As per example the pension paper order was released on 4-2-2010 i.e. after about 12 years of retirements. Commutation amount of about Rs. 3 lacs were granted on 4-2- 10 which could have been granted during 1999 . Kindly consider the value of 3 lacs on 1999 and compare it to 2010. Still there are some dues pending with the respondents but to agreat surprise the respondent had served him a rejoinder on 12-6-12 stating that the poetitioner had hidden the facts before hon.court and not told that he had received something from respondents . I think it is the responsibilities of the respondent to submit the facts before HOn. Court to which extent the claims had been given to petitioner stating clearly that on which date petitioner was entitled to get the claims and on which date it is given to him and how and why delayed ? But petitioner had not yet complined on the issue only had requested to put a full stop on petition by taking the petition on hearing as early as possible looking to his tiny health. Hon. court must ask the respondent to place the details of dues paid to petitioner submitting detailed voudhers of payments with full details of payment .
I know that Hon. Court is not only supposed to be guided by the emotions or sentiments . It requires full proof evidences and documents which probably petitioner at this stage may not collect or submit but can be collected from the respondent . I think it is duty of the respondent to place the facts before Hon.Cort to guide the court to come to the proper conclusion after all they are learned advocates , they must not utilise their skill and intelligence to suppress the petitioner and just to support the respondent to show him an approach of success. May be the age criteria and severe heart attacks had damaged the skill memory and moral of petitioner I do not want to see that the petitioner should attend now the concentration on petition but towards health without tension .Whichever may be the decision of Hon. Chief Justice or any court on the petition on submitted records will be accepted by the petitioner. I submit apology if petitioner had submitted something unlike to Hon Court but we all respects the Hon> court and judiciary by all means. Hon. Court has many discretions with him and whatever will be the mandare of Hon> Court will be accepted by us.
With due respects regards and devotions
RAGINI PARIKH
Observor,caretaker and wife of petitioner
No comments:
Post a Comment