LAW RESOURCE INDIA

Issue Brief on Lokpal Bill

Posted in CONSTITUTION, CORRUPTION, DEMOCRACY, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS, GOVERNANCE, JUSTICE by NNLRJ INDIA on April 6, 2011
Indian Parliament Building Delhi India

Image via Wikipedia

PRS LEGISLATIVE REVIEW

The stand-off between the government and Shri Anna Hazare, social activist has brought the issue of the Lok Pal Bill to the forefront.  First introduced way back in 1968, the Bill was introduced eight times in Parliament.  However, it lapsed each time after the Lok Sabha dissolved.  The note gives some historical background on the Bill as well as the recommendations of various commissions on the office of the Lok Pal.

Context

The central government is considering the introduction of a Lok Pal Bill to put in place a mechanism to tackle corruption.1 Currently, public servants (such as government employees, judges, armed forces, police) can be prosecuted for corruption under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Act require the investigating agency (such as CBI) to get prior sanction of the central or state government before it can initiate the prosecution process in a court.2 The Supreme Court in the 1998 P.V. Narasimha Rao bribery case ruled that Members of Parliament (MPs) fall within the ambit of the definition of “public servant” in the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. However, opinion among the judges was divided over the issue of previous sanction with one side stating that MPs could not be prosecuted since there was no authority competent to give sanction and the other suggesting that till the law is suitably amended, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and Chairman of the Rajya Sabha should give the necessary sanction.3

The idea of constituting an Ombudsman type institution to look into the grievances of individuals against the administration was first mooted in 1963 during a debate on Demands for Grants for the Law Ministry.4 In 1966, the First Administrative Reforms Commission recommended that two independent authorities at the central and state level be established to enquire into complaints against public functionaries (including Members of Parliament).4

The Lok Pal Bill was introduced for the first time in 1968 but it lapsed with the dissolution of the Lok Sabha. It was introduced seven more times in Parliament, the last time in 2001. However, the Bill lapsed each time except in 1985 when it was withdrawn.5 At the state level, so far 18 states have created the institution of the Lokayukta through the Lokayukta Acts.6

In 2002, the report of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution urged that the Constitution should provide for the appointment of the Lok Pal and Lokayuktas in the states but suggested that the Prime Minister should be kept out of the purview of the authority.7 In 2004, the UPA government’s National Common Minimum Programme promised that the Lok Pal Bill would be enacted.8 The Second Administrative Commission, formed in 2005, also recommended that the office of the Lok Pal be established without delay.9

In January 2011, the government formed a Group of Ministers, chaired by Shri Pranab Mukherjee to suggest measures to tackle corruption, including examination of the proposal of a Lok Pal Bill.10

While drafting or examining the Lok Pal Bill, it may be useful to have clarity on certain issues: (a) composition and manner of appointment of the Lok Pal; (b) whether its jurisdiction should include all public servants or only political functionaries such as Ministers, Prime Minister and Members of Parliament; (b) whether CVC and CBI should be brought under the Lok Pal to create a single independent body to deal with corruption cases; (c) whether Lok Pal’s role should be advisory or should it have powers to prosecute; (d) whether it should have suo motu powers to investigate or would require a written complaint; (e) whether the Prime Minister should be exempt; and (f) whether prior sanction should be required to initiate inquiry against an MP or Minister.

Key recommendations of Commissions

A number of commissions have made recommendations on various aspects of the office of Lok Pal including procedure of appointment, powers of inquiry, and powers of prosecution.

First Administrative Reforms Commission (1966)

  • A citizen has the right to seek redressal against administrative acts of the government. He can either move court or seek other remedies such as petitioning his Member of Parliament. However, these remedies are limited because they maybe too cumbersome or specific grievances may not be addressed. Therefore, a more effective and simpler machinery is required to redress specific grievances of citizens against the administration.
  • Each government department should have a suitable machinery to receive and investigate complaints and set in motion the administrative process to provide remedies. There should also be two independent authorities to redress grievances: (a) Lok Pal, which shall deal with complaints against the administrative acts of Ministers or secretaries of government at the centre and the state; and (b) Lokayukta in each state and at the centre, which would deal with complaints against the administrative acts of other officials.
  • These authorities should be independent of the executive as well as the legislature and the judiciary. The Lok Pal should be appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister. The PM shall consult the Chief Justice of India and the Leader of the Opposition. The Lok Pal shall have the same stature as the Chief Justice of India and can be removed only by impeachment. The Lokayuktas shall have similar powers as the Lok Pal and shall be equivalent to the Chief Justice of a High Court. Their appointment should, as far as possible, be non-political.
  • The Lok Pal may either act on the complaints made by an affected citizen or on his own cognition. He shall investigate cases related to maladministration, which involves acts of injustice, corruption and favouritism. The investigations and proceedings should be conducted in private and should be informal.
  • On receiving a complaint, the Lok Pal shall decide whether it is worth investigating, then send for comments to the concerned department. After getting the report, the Lok Pal shall decide if he wants to proceed or not. If he investigates and finds that injustice has been done, he shall suggest remedial action to the department. If the department does not act on it, he can report to the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister, who shall report back within two months. If he is not satisfied, then he may bring it to the notice of the Parliament or the Legislature. If there are criminal charges against a public official, he can bring it to the notice of the Prime Minister or the Chief Minister and they can then set the machinery of law in motion and inform the Lok Pal.

National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (2002)

  • The Constitution should provide for the appointment of the Lok Pal. But the office of the Prime Minister should be kept out of the purview of the Lok Pal.
  • Its findings should be final and form the basis for action by the government.
  • The Constitution should make it obligatory for states to establish the institution of Lokayuktas.
  • The Constitution should be amended to state that Members of Parliament may be prosecuted for the offence of giving or receiving monetary or other valuable considerations for voting in a particular manner or not voting.
  • An MP can be prosecuted after the investigating agency receives prior sanction from a committee constituted by the President. The committee shall have five MPs, nominated by the President in consultation with the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha.

Second Administrative Reforms Commission (2007)

Lok Pal

  • The Constitution should be amended to provide for a national Ombudsman called the Rashtriya Lokayukta. The role and jurisdiction of the Rashtriya Lokayukta should be defined in the Constitution while the composition, mode of appointment and other details can be decided by Parliament through legislation.
  • The jurisdiction of Rashtriya Lokayukta should extend to Ministers (except the Prime Minister), Chief Ministers, and Members of Parliament. In case the enquiry establishes the involvement of any other public official, it can enquire against such public servants.
  • The Prime Minister should be kept out of the jurisdiction of the Rashtriya Lokayukta.
  • The Rashtriya Lokayukta should consist of a serving or retired Judge of the Supreme Court as the Chairperson, an eminent jurist as Member and the Central Vigilance Commissioner as the ex-officio Member.
  • The Chairperson and members of the Rashtriya Lokayukta should be selected by a Committee consisting of the Vice President, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the Speaker of the Lok Sabha and the Chief Justice of India. The Chairperson and Member should be appointed for only one term of three years and they should not hold any public office later, except if they can become the Chief Justice of India.

 

Lokayukta

  • The Constitution should make it obligatory on the part of state governments to establish the institution of Lokayukta and stipulate the general principles about its structure, power and functions.
  • The Lokayukta should be a multi-member body consisting of a judicial Member in the Chair, an eminent jurist or eminent administrator as Member and the head of the State Vigilance Commission as ex-officio Member.
  • The Chairperson and member of the Lokayukta should be selected by a Committee of the Chief Minister, Chief Justice of the High Court and the Leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly. There is no need to have an Uplokayukta (deputy Lokayukta).
  • The Chairperson and members of the Lokayukta should be appointed strictly for one term only and they should not hold any public office under government thereafter.
  • The Lokayukta should have its own machinery for investigation. Initially, it may take officers on deputation from the state government, but over a period of five years, it should take steps to recruit its own cadre, and train them properly.
  • All cases of corruption should be referred to Rashtriya Lokayukta or state Lokayukta and these should not be referred to any Commission of Inquiry.
  • The jurisdiction of the Lokayukta would extend to only cases involving corruption. They should not look into general public grievances. The Lokayukta should deal with cases of corruption against Ministers and MLAs.
  • Each State should constitute a State Vigilance Commission to look into cases of corruption against state government officials. The Commission should have three Members and have functions similar to that of the Central Vigilance Commission. The Anti Corruption Bureaus should be brought under the control of the State Vigilance Commission.

Ombudsman at local level

  • A local bodies Ombudsman should be constituted for a group of districts to investigate cases against the functionaries of the local bodies. The State Panchayat Raj Acts and the Urban Local Bodies Act should be amended to include this provision.
  • The local bodies Ombudsman should be empowered to investigate cases of corruption or maladministration by the functionaries of the local self governments, and submit reports to the competent authorities for taking action. The competent authorities should normally take action as recommended. In case they do not agree with the recommendations, they should give their reasons in writing and the reasons should be made public.

Investigation and Prosecution

  • The State Vigilance Commissions and Lokayuktas should supervise the prosecution of corruption related cases.
  • The investigative agencies should acquire multi-disciplinary skills and should be thoroughly conversant with the working of various departments. Modern techniques of investigation should be used such as electronic surveillance, video and audio recording of surprise inspections, traps, searches and seizures.
  • A reasonable time limit for investigation of different types of cases should be fixed for the investigative agencies.
  • There should be sustained step-up in the number of cases detected and investigated. The priorities need to be reoriented by focussing on ‘big’ cases of corruption.
  • The prosecution of corruption cases should be conducted by a panel of lawyers prepared by the Attorney General or the Advocate General in consultation with Rashtriya Lokayukta or the Lokayukta.
  • The anti-corruption agencies should conduct surveys of departments with particular reference to highly corruption prone ones in order to gather intelligence and to target officers of questionable integrity.
  • The economic offences unit of states needs to be strengthened to effectively investigate cases and there should be better coordination among the existing agencies.

Comparison of Lokayuktas

Till 2010, 18 states have enacted laws to establish Lokayuktas. They are: Andhra Pradesh, Assam, Bihar, Chhattisgarh, Delhi, Gujarat, Jharkhand, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Orissa, Punjab, Rajasthan, Uttarakhand, and Uttar Pradesh. In Appendix 1, we have compared some of the Lokayukta Acts on certain parameters.

International experience

The basic idea of the institution of Lok Pal was borrowed from the concept of Ombudsman in countries such as Finland, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, U.K. and New Zealand. In 1995, the European Union created the post of European Ombudsman. Presently, about 140 countries have the office of the Ombudsman.11

The Ombudsman is an institution, independent of the judiciary, executive and legislature and analogous with that of a high judicial functionary. He is mostly free to choose his investigation method and agency. The expenditure of the office is under Parliamentary control.4

In Sweden, Denmark and Finland, the office of the Ombudsman can redress citizens’ grievances by either directly receiving complaints from the public or suo moto.11 However, in the UK, the office of the Parliamentary Commissioner can receive complaints only through Members of Parliament (to whom the citizen can complain).12 Sweden and Finland also have the power to prosecute erring public servants.11

Notes


[1]. “PM Inaugurates Conference of Chief Secretaries of State,” PIB, Feb 4, 2011.

[2]. Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

[3]. PV Narasimha Rao v. State (AIR 1998 SC 2120).

[4]. “Problems of Redress of Citizens’ Grievances,” Interim Report of the First Administrative Reforms Commission, 1966.

[5] . Unstarred Question No. 1773, Rajya Sabha, Answered on November 25, 2010.

[6]. Unstarred Question No. 385, Lok Sabha, Answered on February 23, 2011.

[7]. “Executive and Public Administration,” Chapter 6 of the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (Chairperson: Shri M.N. Venkatachiliah), March 31, 2002

[8]. National Common Minimum Programme of the Government of India, May 2004. http://pib.nic.in/archieve/upareport/upa_3_year_highlights.pdf)

[9]. “Ethics in Governance,” Fourth Report of the Second Administrative Reforms Commission, Jan 2007.

[10]. “GoM on Corruption to Firm Up Lok Pal Bill at the Earliest, Outlook, January 21, 2011.

[11]. The Parliamentary Ombudsman of Finland (see http://www.oikeusasiamies.fi/Resource.phx/eoa/english/ombudsman/othercountries/index.htx).

[12]. UK Parliamentary Commissioner Act, 1967 (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/13/section/6).

Prepared by: Kaushiki Sanyal

Date: April 1, 2011DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished to you for your information. You may choose to reproduce or redistribute this report for non-commercial purposes in part or in full to any other person with due acknowledgement of PRS Legislative Research (“PRS”). The opinions expressed herein are entirely those of the author(s). PRS makes every effort to use reliable and comprehensive information, but PRS does not represent that the contents of the report are accurate or complete. PRS is an independent, not-for-profit group. This document has been prepared without regard to the objectives or opinions of those who may receive it.

http://www.prsindia.org/index.php?name=Sections&action=bill_details&id=5&bill_id=1649&category=82&parent_category=0

About these ads

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Aurovindo Choudhury said, on May 10, 2011 at 18:10

    http://indiandemocracy-aurovindo.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-democracy-for-criminals-by-criminals_24.html

    Laws of India are a maize of confusions (purported to the advantage of vested interest groups, who had been governing the country for more than 5 decades who by law, are not equal(ALTHOUGH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNTRY STATES”ALL ARE EQUAL BEFORE THE EYES OF LAW”, but the reality is one needs this sanction, that sanction to get justice and that JUSTICE IS NOT, NOT GURANTEED, OF COURSE IF ONE CAN NOT afford to waste/ SPEND MILLIONS (where per capita income is not even $100.00/yr as per international statistics).
    There again, as proven with my own experience and as per reports of mass media, like all systems in India, the integrity of the judiciary is in doubt. Judges take arbitrary decision and judgments, of course to please the political bosses (press and media reports are full of it). Miscarriage of Justice is a common phenomenon.
    Thousands of examples can be given for draconian laws from British Raj (they say it is independent India, independent only the laws made in Independent for the glorified titled public servants who are known as VIP,VVIPS and what not, free everything, given different types of security all at the cost of have nots.).
    To mention a few, People are extorted, tortured, and thrown out of their fixed assets in name of Land acquisition Act from the British Raj.
    Judiciary in general always take refuge under this law, and Telegraph Act of British Raj, the laws have no relevance to the so called Independent India.
    Public service by practice is to harass and extort the people. In name of e-governance websites are full of wrong ids, addresses, and who cares to reply!
    This is the epic of modern India.
    And there are lots of propaganda going against corruption and the Prime Minister of the country states that he does not know.
    Most glorified titled public servants by laws of average are tied to large corruption, and local petty corruption are tied to local glorified titled public service.
    Public service act must be scrapped, and hire and fire be implemented. Details can be worked out for the public servants to work, as in other civilized democratic countries.
    In civilized democratic countries, no person is shown the door, on the false pretext of one or the other, (like in India, he/she is not here today, busy in meeting, and thousand and one lame excuses for the common people to suffer, mostly another form of extortion) to the contrary, each and everybody gets their job done right away within minutes.
    I had the privilege of getting services for the last fifty years.

    Law and order:
    In civilized democratic countries, I had witnessed police foot patrolling areas equipped with cell phone. Even police cars also patrol the areas and all have communications with the police control. This is a 24 hours operation.
    I had to travel far and wide for my work and when the telephone at home did not have any answer, I asked the police station to verify it. Police called back on long distance to state the facts within 15 minutes,
    Can anyone even dream of this kind of service from Indian police? I was stranded in a snowstorm with my car, where a police cruiser politely asked me “ what is the problem”. On knowing that I could not see in the snowstorm, he parked his red flashing police cruiser just behind my car (to ensure that other drivers on the highway don’t bump into my car) and waited until I was able to drive away.
    And, I am just a Joe Blow like all commoner.
    In India, I am positive these kinds of services are provided only to Indian glorified titled public servants with all kinds if fancy titles, who live on with all kinds of luxuries, on the national exchequer, an exchequer, do not guarantee medical, food, education, shelter, justice, or any humane needs to the people on the street.

    INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC) is a central law. For the last five decades perhaps for the convenience and definitely in connivance, the constitution says “Laws and order” is a state (province) matter. What a parody of hoaxes!
    Solutions:
    Let there be Federal courts (as in civilized countries) to deal with the Federal Laws, such as IPC, Environmental Protection Act, and many others.
    All provincial laws that have been enacted over riding the federal laws MUST BE SCRAPPED. These only cause harassments to people for the fact local glorified titled public servants harass the people for reasons obvious thus flouting all federal laws/Acts. People has got fed up to challenge the contravention by approaching local high court, apparently with no results at the same spending hard earned hundreds of thousands INR.
    Besides the website in this note there are thousand and one violations, if a research is done. I had filed an FIR a proven cognizable offence committed by the local Chairman, of the Municipality, Police it appears to me now just threw it in the waste paper baskets. Writing to everybody by email, did not yield any result.
    What are all the big names “Law Commission” and other bodies of India are doing?
    With all kinds of fancy laws written in books no social service including protection, justice, food, shelter, clean water/air, nothing at all, is guaranteed. Guaranteed is extortion, false charges, millions of illegal activities (those who are capable of doing it, mostly public servants, black money generators and the list is quite long.
    Guaranteed are starvation, dying of malnutrition, maltreatment by the so called hospital people, with spurious drugs, extortion, cheating, and being run over by the public transport, and the list of misery is endless.
    Funding of projects is done in piecemeal basis, and that most funding is misappropriated in the pockets of public servants.
    LOKPAL BILL.
    1.Lots of theatres have been enacted in the last 60 years in years India. Constitution of India has been amended more than the American Constitution the oldest written Constitution of the country in the world.
    2. People are in the same dark the way they were and extortion is an accepted way of life by the public servants, of course ways and means are very different.
    3. In the eye of law, proven criminals live the luxuries of life in front of all kinds of laws enforcement agencies.
    4. To my experience and to the experience of many others Judiciary is machinery infested with extortion, miscarriage of justice, let alone the lawyers who with immunity can cheat the innocent victims.
    5. Although there are all kinds of Commissions, such as law Commission, Bar council of India, Medical association, all legal bodies, they don’t have time for people on the street, for the fact these people have free lunches and luxuries at the cost of innocent victims and starving people.
    6. So the bill should cover the interest of the people and it must:
    (a) redress all the wrong doings of the public servants which can not be challenged in the court of law or kangaroo court which is another quagmire of endless sufferings. Be it prime me minister, justices and what not? This should and must include compensation in monetary terms. Provincial courts as witnessed, dance to the tune of political masters and people go on suffering endlessly.
    (b) All violations of Acts, laws, injustices anything at all, will the within the ambit of its jurisdiction.
    (c) All obsolete Acts, as an example, Telegraph Act, Land Acquisition Act of British Raj and or other arbitrary acts and laws, irrespective of laws implemented by Parliament members of which, as per media records are one third of the members are criminals, must be null and void. To state a few, VIP, VVIP, and all kinds of category of securities in persons must be abolished or the same kinds of security MUST BE GUARANTEED TO ALL RESIDENTS OF INDIA.
    (d) Victims compensation MUST NOT be arbitrary at the whims of so called glorified titled public servants. It must be automatic.
    (e) All residents of India, must be given free medical attention including medication, hospitalization and whatever is required for getting the proper medical care.
    (f) Justice must be guaranteed to all, whether one can afford to pay or not.

    http://indiandemocracy-aurovindo.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-democracy-for-criminals-by-criminals_24.html

  2. Aurovindo Choudhury said, on June 17, 2011 at 09:51

    —– Forwarded Message —-
    From: Aurovindo Choudhury
    To: vigilance@nic.in
    Sent: Mon, June 13, 2011 7:41:20 PM
    Subject: Fw: Registration of a Trus

    Cc: pkm@sansad.nic.in (Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee)
    Received: Monday, June 13, 2011, 4:27 AM

    I had filled all the forms for registration of a charitable trust and sent to the addresses of Commissioner of Income tax and others by registered post at the address of websites.
    ( The Govt of India)
    Surprisingly these came back as undelivered.

    The Trust name and logo are attached.

    In line with the local scenario, I had no choice but tried to get it through a local lawyer, most of whom I call liar.

    His name is Subrata Kundu and his cell no. 08016314616 and he claims that the people in Income Tax Dept. asks for 10K.

    I know as the world knows the state of affair in India, which partially is quoted below.

    The public service in India is Public Extortion service

    “http://indiandemocracy-aurovindo.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-democracy-for-criminals-by-criminals_24.html
    The Statesamn, May 10, 2011 reports that an ex Mayor of a Chinese City has been sentenced to death and all assets were confiscated by the Chinese judiciary.

    Will this ever happen in India ?

    Laws of India are a maize of confusions (purported to the advantage of vested interest groups, who had been governing the country for more than 5 decades who by law, are not equal(ALTHOUGH THE CONSTITUTION OF THE COUNTRY STATES”ALL ARE EQUAL BEFORE THE EYES OF LAW”, but the reality is one needs this sanction, that sanction to get justice and that JUSTICE IS NOT, NOT GURANTEED, OF COURSE IF ONE CAN NOT afford to waste/ SPEND MILLIONS (where per capita income is not even $100.00/yr as per international statistics).

    There again, as proven with my own experience and as per reports of mass media, like all systems in India , the integrity of the judiciary is in doubt. Judges take arbitrary decision and judgments, of course to please the political bosses (press and media reports are full of it). Miscarriage of Justice is a common phenomenon. Supreme court Justice Markanday Katju and Mrs Justice Gyan Sudha Misra on May 10, 2011 had made a ruling that subordinate judiciary is corrupt.

    Thousands of examples can be given for draconian laws from British Raj (they say it is independent India, independent only the laws made in Independent for the glorified titled public servants who are known as VIP,VVIPS and what not, free everything, given different types of security all at the cost of have nots.).

    To mention a few, People are extorted, tortured, and thrown out of their fixed assets in name of Land acquisition Act from the British Raj.

    Judiciary in general always take refuge under this law, and Telegraph Act of British Raj, the laws have no relevance to the so called Independent India.

    Public service by practice is to harass and extort the people. In name of e-governance websites are full of wrong ids, addresses, and who cares to reply!

    This is the epic of modern India .

    And there are lots of propaganda going against corruption and the Prime Minister of the country states that he does not know.

    Most glorified titled public servants by laws of average are tied to large corruption, and local petty corruption are tied to local glorified titled public service.

    Public service act must be scrapped, and hire and fire be implemented. Details can be worked out for the public servants to work, as in other civilized democratic countries.

    In civilized democratic countries, no person is shown the door, on the false pretext of one or the other, (like in India, he/she is not here today, busy in meeting, and thousand and one lame excuses for the common people to suffer, mostly another form of extortion) to the contrary, each and everybody gets their job done right away within minutes.

    I had the privilege of getting services for the last fifty years.

    Law and order:

    In civilized democratic countries, I had witnessed police foot patrolling areas equipped with cell phone. Even police cars also patrol the areas and all have communications with the police control. This is a 24 hours operation.

    I had to travel far and wide for my work and when the telephone at home did not have any answer, I asked the police station to verify it. Police called back on long distance to state the facts within 15 minutes,

    Can anyone even dream of this kind of service from Indian police? I was stranded in a snowstorm with my car, where a police cruiser politely asked me “what is the problem”. On knowing that I could not see in the snowstorm, he parked his red flashing police cruiser just behind my car (to ensure that other drivers on the highway don’t bump into my car) and waited until I was able to drive away.

    And, I am just a Joe Blow like all commoner.

    In India , I am positive these kinds of services are provided only to Indian glorified titled public servants with all kinds if fancy titles, who live on with all kinds of luxuries, on the national exchequer, an exchequer, do not guarantee medical, food, education, shelter, justice, or any humane needs to the people on the street.

    INDIAN PENAL CODE (IPC) is a central law. For the last five decades perhaps for the convenience and definitely in connivance, the constitution says “Laws and order” is a state (province) matter. What a parody of hoaxes!

    Solutions:

    PRECEDENCE

    In QUOTE.

    “Summary résumé

    Of

    Writ: MAT 3140 of 2003, and Appeal F.M.A no. 1040 of 2007

    1. The judgment of above writ MAT 3140 of 2003 was rejected by Justice Pinaki Ghosh was rejected and appeal F.M.A. no. 1040 of 2007 was pushed to the District Magistrate by Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee and Justice Tapas Kumar Giri J on 27/07/07.

    2. Right to live in peace

    2(a) Both judgments did not take into consideration of the safety and peaceful living of NRI Aurovindo Choudhury as was evident on the writ petition item 3, 4, 5,6,7,8,9,10. and did not order any protection to the applicant or compensation for the sufferings and harassment to the petitioner. No Protection was provided to the petitioner.

    3. Environmental pollution and malpractices to create Environmental hazards by the Kalyani Municipality .

    3(a) Item 12, 13, 14, 15,16 are clear intentional violation of the above acts and many other criminal acts.

    4 Arbitrary changing of Master Plan in line with local practice, presumably for money.

    4(a) Item 17,18 are clear examples. In this context the petitioner’s observation is that Supreme Court of India has ordered that no master plan can be changed..

    Petitioner’s comments:

    (a) Don’t the Judges of the High Court go through the petitions put before it for judgment?

    (b) Why the same was thrown back to the District Magistrate, Nadia when District Magistrate Nadia took no remedial action as is evident in item 15 of the writ petition. In the petitioner’s view even the highest judiciary of the state are in the game of throwing ball back making endless suffering to the people.

    Petitioner:

    a) 70 year old NRI.

    b) Appeal F.M.A. no. 1040 of 2007/WP 8826(W) of 2003 was pushed to the District Magistrate by Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee and Justice Tapas Kumar Giri J on 27/07/07, the petitioner was out of the country.Indian glorified titled public servants in general, particularly in West Bengal to the petitioner’s experience are yet to learn to provide service to the pblic.

    Engr. Aurovindo Choudhury, C.Eng., FIE for life,(India, Bangladesh), VDI(Germany), MBIM(UK & Aust), FInstP(UK), MAACE(US),MCIMM, MCIS(Canada), etc., Commissioner of Oaths for the province of Quebec with jurisdiction of all the countries of the world B-6/108 Central Ave., West, KALYANI, India.

    Tel: 011-91-33-64153255, Cell no. 91-9836028227.

    Email: ceaurovindo@yahoo.ca

    Unquote:-

    Let there be Federal courts (as in civilized countries) to deal with the Federal Laws, such as IPC, Environmental Protection Act, and many others.

    All provincial laws that have been enacted over riding the federal laws MUST BE SCRAPPED. These only cause harassments to people for the fact local glorified titled public servants harass the people for reasons obvious thus flouting all federal laws/Acts. People has got fed up to challenge the contravention by approaching local high court, apparently with no results at the same spending hard earned hundreds of thousands INR.

    Besides the website in this note there are thousand and one violations, if a research is done. I had filed an FIR a proven cognizable offence committed by the local Chairman, of the Municipality, Police it appears to me now just threw it in the waste paper baskets. Writing to everybody by email, did not yield any result.

    What are all the big names “Law Commission” and other bodies of India are doing?

    With all kinds of fancy laws written in books no social service including protection, justice, food, shelter, clean water/air, nothing at all, is guaranteed. Guaranteed is extortion, false charges, millions of illegal activities (those who are capable of doing it, mostly public servants, black money generators and the list is quite long.

    Guaranteed are starvation, dying of malnutrition, maltreatment by the so called hospital people, with spurious drugs, extortion, cheating, and being run over by the public transport, and the list of misery is endless.

    Funding of projects is done in piecemeal basis, and that most funding is misappropriated in the pockets of public servants.

    LOKPAL BILL.

    1.Lots of theatres have been enacted in the last 60 years in years India . Constitution of India has been amended more than the American Constitution the oldest written Constitution of the country in the world.

    2. People are in the same dark the way they were and extortion is an accepted way of life by the public servants, of course ways and means are very different.

    3. In the eye of law, proven criminals live the luxuries of life in front of all kinds of laws enforcement agencies.

    4. To my experience and to the experience of many others Judiciary is machinery infested with extortion, miscarriage of justice, let alone the lawyers who with immunity can cheat the innocent victims.

    5. Although there are all kinds of Commissions, such as law Commission, Bar council of India , Medical association, all legal bodies, they don’t have time for people on the street, for the fact these people have free lunches and luxuries at the cost of innocent victims and starving people.

    6. So the bill should cover the interest of the people and it must:

    (a) redress all the wrong doings of the public servants which can not be challenged in the court of law or kangaroo court which is another quagmire of endless sufferings. Be it prime me minister, justices and what not? This should and must include compensation in monetary terms. Provincial courts as witnessed, dance to the tune of political masters and people go on suffering endlessly.

    (b) All violations of Acts, laws, injustices anything at all, will the within the ambit of its jurisdiction.

    (c) All obsolete Acts, as an example, Telegraph Act, Land Acquisition Act of British Raj and or other arbitrary acts and laws, irrespective of laws implemented by Parliament members of which, as per media records are one third of the members are criminals, must be null and void. To state a few, VIP, VVIP, and all kinds of category of securities in persons must be abolished or the same kinds of security MUST BE GUARANTEED TO ALL RESIDENTS OF INDIA .

    (d) Victims compensation MUST NOT be arbitrary at the whims of so called glorified titled public servants. It must be automatic.

    (e) All residents of India , must be given free medical attention including medication, hospitalization and whatever is required for getting the proper medical care.

    (f) Justice must be guaranteed to all, whether one can afford to pay or not.

    http://indiandemocracy-aurovindo.blogspot.com/2009/09/is-democracy-for-criminals-by-criminals_24.html

    Are the so called anticorruption, ED, CBI and what not of India are blind to the georgeous life style of glorified titled Public Servants of India. All have assets disproportionate to their known source of income and there is Indian procedure of benami, and what not, and of course bribes.

    Why this simple registration of a Chartibale trust can not be done in India without paying bribes!

    Engr. Aurovindo Choudhury, C.Eng., FIE for life,(India, Bangladesh), VDI(Germany), MBIM(UK & Aust), FInstP(UK), MAACE(US),MCIMM, MCIS(Canada), etc., Commissioner of Oaths for the province of Quebec with jurisdiction of all the countries of the world , a grandson of Herliness Shri Shri Maa Anandamoyee at B-6/108 Central Ave., West, KALYANI, India.

    Tel: 011-91-33-64153255,

    Email: ceaurovindo@yahoo.ca

  3. aaditya said, on August 29, 2011 at 14:51

    It could be said that the government has found a way of getting around the prickly Centre-state relations issue by evoking the subject ‘actionable wrongs’ on the concurrent list to base its grievance redressal bill Team Anna had demanded a single law covering all government officials — from patwari, sub-divisional officers up to the cabinet secretary and PM in one bill. But going closer to the suggestions made by Aruna Roy and her associates, rural development minister Jairam Ramesh has begun crafting a Grievance Redressal Bill which will separately deal with corruption in delivery of government services at the local level.

  4. rahul said, on August 29, 2011 at 14:57

    Well, The government plans to use the clause of ‘actionable wrong’ on the concurrent list of the Constitution, which would allow the Centre to pass a legislation to control day to day graft cases and yet leave the state in charge of the business. The clause on the seventh schedule of the Constitution allows both Centre and states to legislate to regulate any actions committed that the governments can step in to correct or fix.Read more-http://sawaal.ibibo.com/news-and-current-affairs/govt-readying-grievance-redressal-bill-tackle-graft-1723725.html


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,619 other followers

%d bloggers like this: