Skip to main content

Contempt Case Against Ex Chief Justice UU Lalit For Disobeying SC Constitutional Bench Order

 


New Delhi: Contempt case filed against Ex Chief Justice Of India Shri Uday Umesh Lalit and Smt Bela M Trivedi for disobeying SC Constitutional bench order that access to justice is fundamental rights. They have violated the petitioners right and upheld the ban on filing any petition at Bombay High Court to protect illegal ICSE Board .

In Past the petitioner filed PIL at Bombay High Court against illegal operation of CISCE ie ICSE and ISC Board at Maharashtra . HRD denied any recognition in an RTI reply . CISCE claimed that he has recognition of all the states with UTs but not HRD in affidavit reply . Justice Pradeep Nandrajog and Bharti Dangre dismissed the PIL without State reply by not following judicial procedure in Sept 2019. They put the cost of Rs 5 Lac and banned petitioner for filing any petition at  BHC till paymnent of cost. Later it come to know via RTI that Maharashtra , MP , Delhi has no recognition to ICSE and ISC . The CISCE also accepted at many high courts that no act or executive order is passed in favour of them and it is merely a society . As per HRD Ministry education board can only be established by act of parliament or executive order of state. Later it was also come to know that EX CJ Bombay High Court Pradeep Nandrajog  has done schooling from ICSE board school. Inspite of personal interest he heard the petition to secure his own future.

SLP was filed before Supreme court to set a side the ban and direct BHC to decide matter as per merit.  During hearing via VC the court was informed that RTI information exposed illegal operations of ICSE board and requested court to set aside ban on petitioner by BHC in PIL 159/2016 . Shri UU Lalit said he can only reduce cost but cannot set aside ban. He neither reduced cost nor set aside ban. He corruptly suppressed the facts against ICSE board illegal operation in order . He did not recorded single line submission of petitioner in the order but recorded submissions of respondent . He willfully and deliberately done contempt of Hon’ble Supreme Court order in Anita Kushwaha vs. Pushap Sudan, ( (2016) 8 SCC 509 ) has held that access of justice is an integral part of the guarantee contained in Article 21 and 14 of the Constitution of India which guarantees equality before law and equal protection of law to not only citizens but non-citizens also.

PARLIAMENT COULD NOT RESTRICT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

 In Golaknath vs. State of Punjab [(1967) 2 SCR 762 

fundamental rights cannot be waived of. To substantiate his plea, reliance is placed on following catena of decisions:

1. R. Jambukeswaran and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., 2004(2) ATJ FB CAT 1;

2. Mani Kant Gupta and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2004(1) ATJ 349, and

3. Union of Indian and Ors. v. Wing Commander T. Parthasarathy, 2001(1) SCC 158.

 In Basheshar Nath v. C.I.T., it was held by the Supreme Court that the fundamental right cannot be waived.

 In Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, it was held by the Supreme Court that although an undertaking was given by the appellants before the High Court on behalf of the hut and pavement dwellers that they did not claim any fundamental right to put huts on pavements or public roads and that they will not obstruct the demolition of the huts after a certain date, they could not be estopped from contending before the Supreme Court that the huts constructed by them on the pavements cannot be demolished because of their right to livelihood under Article 21 of the Constitution. From this decision also it follows that a fundamental right cannot be waived, and there can be no estoppel.

The Kesavananda Bharati judgement or His Holiness Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr. (case citation: (1973) 4 SCC 225) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that outlined the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution.[2] Justice Hans Raj Khanna asserted through this doctrine that the constitution possesses a basic structure of constitutional principles and values. The Court partially cemented the prior precedent Golaknath v. State of Punjab, which held that constitutional amendments pursuant to Article 368 were subject to fundamental rights review, by asserting that only those amendments which tend to affect the 'basic structure of the Constitution' are subject to judicial review.


Such practice at SC is common ie passing order by suppression of fact to favour a party. As per SC rulings this type of order passed by fraud has no value in the eye of law. 

ORDER BY SUPPRESSION OF FACTS IS FRAUD

 

The Apex Court reported in (2003) 8 SCC 319 titled as Ram Chandra Singh vs. Savitri Devi & Ors., (2009) 13 SCC 569 titled as Rani Aloka Dudhoria and Ors. vs. Goutam Dudhoria & Ors. as also another judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2006) 7 SCC 416 titled as Hamza Haji vs. State of Kerala and Anr. to support his submission that the commission of a fraud on the court and suppression of material facts are core issues which vitiate every solemn act; fraud and justice never dwell together.

The Omission of facts amounts to fraud and fraud vitiates solemn act as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Hamza Haji vs State Of Kerala & Anr on 18 August, 2006.

Quote Part of Para 10:

 “It is true, as observed by De Grey, C.J., in Rex Vs. Duchess of Kingston [ 2 Smith L.C. 687] that: "'Fraud' is an intrinsic, collateral act, which vitiates the most solemn proceedings of courts of justice. Lord Coke says it avoids all judicial acts ecclesiastical and temporal".

In Kerr on Fraud and Mistake, it is stated that: "in applying this rule, it matters not whether the judgment impugned has been pronounced by an inferior or by the highest Court of judicature in the realm, but in all cases alike it is competent for every Court, whether superior or inferior, to treat as a nullity any judgment which can be clearly shown to have been obtained by manifest fraud."

Quote Part of Para 11:

"Fraud practiced on the court is always ground for vacating the judgment, as where the court is deceived or misled as to material circumstances, or its process is abused, resulting in the rendition of a judgment which would not have been given if the whole conduct of the case had been fair".

Quote Part of Para 12:

“Where fraud is involved, it has been held, in some cases, that a remedy at law by appeal, error, or certiorari does not preclude relief in equity from the judgment. Nor, it has been said, is there any reason why a judgment obtained by fraud cannot be the subject of a direct attack by an action in equity even though the judgment has been satisfied.”

Quote Part of Para 15:

"it is the settled proposition of law that a judgment or decree obtained by playing fraud on the court is a nullity and non est in the eyes of law. Such a judgment/decree --- by the first court or by the highest court --- has to be treated as a nullity by every court, whether superior or inferior. It can be challenged in any court even in collateral proceedings."

“In State of A.P. & Anr. Vs. T. Suryachandra Rao [(2005) 6 SCC 149], this Court after referring to the earlier decisions held that suppression of a material document could also amount to a fraud on the Court. It also quoted the observations of Lord Denning in Lazarus Estates Ltd. Vs. Beasley (supra) that, "No judgment of a Court, no order of a minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud. Fraud unravels everything.”

That Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of in Vijay Shekhar Vs. Union of India (2004) 4 SCC 666, had ruled that, if any Judge passes an order by ignoring material on record & considering extraneous materials then such Judge will be guilty of fraud - on - power.

 

“Thus, it is clear a fraudulent act even in judicial proceedings cannot be allowed to stand. In view of our finding that the complaint filed before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.10 at Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.118 of 2004 dated 15.1.2004 is ex facie an act of fraud by a fictitious person, and an abuse of the process court, every and any action taken pursuant to the said complaint gets vitiated. Therefore, we think the complaint registered before the Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.10 at Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No.118 of 2004 dated 15.1.2004 and all actions taken thereon including the issuance of non-bailable warrants is liable to be declared ab initio void, hence, liable to be set aside.”

 

In Ram Chandra Singh Vs. Savitri Devi and Others [(2003) 8 SCC 319], this Court held: "15.Fraud as is well known vitiates every solemn act. Fraud and justice never dwell together. 16. Fraud is a conduct either by letter or words, which induces the other person or authority to take a definite determinative stand as a response to the conduct of the former either by word or letter."

 

In Shrisht Dhawan v. Shaw Bros. it has been held that: (SCC p. 553, para 20) "20. Fraud and collusion vitiate even the most solemn proceedings in any civilized system of jurisprudence. It is a concept descriptive of human conduct."

 

DISHONEST RECORDING OF PROCEEDINGS IS GREATEST INJUSTICE: DELHI HIGH COURT

http://164.100.69.66/jupload/dhc/VSA/judgement/04-01-2017/VSA21122016TRP882016.pdf

TR.P.(CRL.)-88/2016 

21-12-2016(pdf) 

VINOD KUMAR CHAUHAN  
Vs
STATE THR. CBI & ORS.

https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/1st%20Topic.pdf

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI  , TR.P.(CRL.) 88/2016 VINOD KUMAR CHAUHAN ..... Petitioner versus STATE THR. CBI & ORS. ..... Date of Decision: 21.12.2016

 

53……A Judge who does not honestly and fairly record the proceedings, does the greatest injustice to the parties. A judge is supposed to have no personal interest in a case being tried or dealt with by him. He is always expected to truthfully record the proceedings conducted by him. It is for this reason, that the proceedings recorded by a judge in his orders is accepted as true. If a judge breaches this trust reposed in him, it reflects on his credibility and on his independence and impartiality.


Parties can file IA to recall such fraud order which is also not supported by CRPC 362 .

Since 36 hrs hours has passed registry has not issued diary number of E filed case . The staff may be taking consent of registrars  to issue diary number against Lordships. As the ICSE board is very high profile board and many IAS , Judicial communities have their certificates so they protect this board . So why courts are taking actions against  other illegal boards claiming govt recognition and giving immunity to ICSE . CISCE has more than 3000 schools across India and collecting Rs 150 cr Approx  per annum as affiliation and license fees (Rs 5 Lac per school approx) which is money laundering . Having license of Delhi society and operating education board since 1960. Operating board without license since 1960 is crime under section 3-4 of PMLA act. 


1.    SC ORDER ON FAKE CERTIFICATE :

In Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India v Jagdish Balaram Bahira  (2017) 8 SCC 670(FCI).

In its judgment in FCI, this Court has held:

“48...Where a candidate had been appointed to a reserved post on the basis of the claim that he or she was a member of the group for which the reservation is intended, the
invalidation of the claim to belong to that group would, as a necessary consequence, render the appointment void ab initio. The rationale for this is that a candidate who would
otherwise have to compete for a post in the general pool of unreserved seats had secured appointment in a more restricted competition confined to the reserved category and
usurped a benefit meant for a designated caste, tribe or class.  Once it was found that the candidate had obtained admission upon a false representation to belong to the reserved category, the appointment would be vitiated by fraud and would be void ab initio. The falsity of the claim lies in a representation that the candidate belongs to a category of persons for whom the reservation is intended whereas in fact the candidate does not so belong. The reason for depriving the candidate of the benefit which she or he has obtained onthe strength of such a claim, is that a person cannot retain the
fruits of a false claim on the basis of which a scarce public resource is obtained...
A candidate who does so causes detriment to a genuine candidate who actually belongs to the reserved category who is deprived of the seat. For that matter, a detriment is caused to the entire class of persons for whom reservations are
intended, the members of which are excluded as a result of an admission granted to an imposter who does not belong to the class. The withdrawal of benefits, either in terms of the revocation of employment or the termination of an admission was hence a necessary corollary of the invalidation of the claim on the basis of which the appointment or admission was obtained. The withdrawal of the benefit was not based on mens rea or the intent underlying the assertion of a false claim. In the case of a criminal prosecution, intent would be necessary. On the other hand, the withdrawal of civil benefits flowed as a logical result of the invalidation of a claim to belong to a group or category for whom the reservation is
intended.”

During hearing Justice UU Lalit was aware that if the ban will be lifted then any govt Board passed judge at BHC can recall the order and take action . To secure the interest of such fake board students he set aside the prayer of access to justice and done contempt of constitutional bench order. The 2 judges bench cannot violate 5 judges constitutional bench order

In Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Anr. [(2005) 2 SCC 673], (para 12), a Constitution Bench of this Court summed up the legal position in the following terms :

"(1) The law laid down by this Court in a decision delivered by a Bench of larger strength is binding on any subsequent Bench of lesser or co-equal strength.

(2) A Bench of lesser quorum cannot disagree or dissent from the view of the law taken by a Bench of larger quorum. In case of doubt all that the Bench of lesser quorum can do is to invite the attention of the Chief Justice and request for the matter being placed for hearing before a Bench of larger quorum than the Bench whose decision has come up for consideration. It will be open only for a Bench of co-equal strength to express an opinion doubting the correctness of the view taken by the earlier Bench of co-equal strength, whereupon the matter may be placed for hearing before a Bench consisting of a quorum larger than the one which pronounced the decision laying down the law the correctness of which is doubted.


As per SC order parliament cannot violate the fundamental rights but High court has done and SC up held the order inspite of constitution custodian and many international commitment. If people will be barred to approach court then people will approach criminals and it will endanger our democracy .    



Diary No.- 46405 - 2019
SAPAN SHRIVASTAVA vs. MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
Diary No.
46405/2019 Filed on 21-12-2019 11:25 AM
DISPOSED
   [SECTION: IX]
Case No.
SLP(C) No. 019074 / 2022  Registered on 21-10-2022
(Verified On 02-09-2022)
Present/Last Listed On21-10-2022 [HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI]
Status/StageDISPOSED (Motion Hearing
[FRESH (FOR ADMISSION) - CIVIL CASES]) Delay Condoned and matter dismissed(including all pending IAs)-Ord dt:21-10-2022 (Disposal Date: 21-10-2022, Month: 10, Year: 2022)
JUDGES: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE, HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
Disp.TypeDelay Condoned and matter dismissed(including all pending Ias)
Category0816-Letter Petition & Pil Matters : SLPs filed against judgments / orders passed by the High Courts in Writ Petitions filed as PIL
Act
Petitioner(s)

  1 SAPAN SHRIVASTAVA
  MEDIA REPORTER D-102, NATRAJ DARSHAN, NR. GANESH NAGAR CHOWK, NAVA PADA, SUBHASH ROAD, DOMBIVALI WEST, , DISTRICT: THANE ,THANE , MAHARASHTRA

Respondent(s)

  1 MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT
  DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND LITERACY SCHOOL 3 SECTION, SHASHTRI BHAWAN , DISTRICT: NEW DELHI , , DELHI

  2 COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION @ CISCE
  PRAGATI HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR, 47-48, NEHRU PLACE , DISTRICT: NEW DELHI ,NEW DELHI , DELHI

  3 UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
  DHOLPUR HOUSE, SHAHJAHAN ROAD ,NEW DELHI , DELHI

  4 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY
  THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY MANTRALAYA , DISTRICT: MUMBAI ,MUMBAI , MAHARASHTRA

Pet. Advocate(s)

  PETITIONER-IN-PERSON

  Dear SAPAN SHRIVASTAVA, your case efiling no. ECSCIN01127972023 , SAPAN SHRIVASTAVA Vs. SHRI UDAY UMESH LALIT is filed with Diary No. 49295 / 2023 on 28-11-2023 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court VC Video Conferencing Link

  ALL DAYS THIS LINKS ARE WORKING....NO CHANGES Seen. PLZ DONT MISUSE IT Video conferencing link common for all days. S.NO. COURT NO. COURT LINKS 1. Court No. 1 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court01 2. Court No. 2 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court02 3. Court No. 3 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court03 4. Court No. 4 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court04 5. Court No. 5 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court05 6. Court No. 6 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court06 7. Court No. 7 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court07 8. Court No. 8 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court08 9. Court No. 9 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court09          9A Court no.10            https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court10 10. Court No. 11 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court11 11. Court No. 12 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court12 12. Court No. 13 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court13 13. Court No. 14 https://sci-vc.webex.com/meet/court14

Bhopal Police Officers Inspectors Mobile Number and E mail ID

  OFFICERS LIST IGP TO TI POLICE OFFICERS CUG NUMBER LIST BHOPAL S.NO. POSTING RANK NAME P&T PBX CUG NO. E-MAIL 1 BHOPAL ADGP SHRI A SAI MANOHAR 2443599 407 9479990399 bhopalig@gmail.com 2 CITY/BPL DIG/CITY SHRI IRSHAD WALI 2443201 408 7049100401 dig_bhopal@mppolice.gov.in 3 DIG/ RANGE/ RURAL DIG/RURAL SHRI SANJAY TIWARI 2443499 305 7587628122 digbplrange09@gmail.com 4 BHOPAL SP (HQ) SHRI RAMJI  SHRIVASTAV 2443223 367 7049100405 sp_bhopal@mppolice.gov.in 5 BHOPAL SP (SOUTH) SHRI SAI KRISHNA THOTA 2443800 359 9479990500 spsouth_bhopal@gmail.com 6 BHOPAL SP (NORTH) SHRI VIJAY KUMAR KHATRI 2443320 377 9479990700 spnorth320@gmail.com 7 BHOPAL ASP (HQ) SMT RICHA COUBE 2677319 319 7587615141 asphqbpl@gmail.com 8 BHOPAL AIG SMT RASHMI MISHRA 2443804 9479990620 bhopalig@gmail.com 9 BHOPAL ASP(CYBER)CRIME VACANT 2920664 7587628201 asp.cybercrime-bpl@mppolice.gov.in 10 BHOPAL ASP(CRIME) SHRI GOPAL DHAKAD 2761651 947999060

MP Police Directory DGP Mobile Number Sudhir Saxena

MADHYA PRADESH POLICE TELEPHONE DIRECTORY I D S N B R A N C H N A M E D E S I G N A I O N S T D  C O D E O F F I C E R E S I F A X 1 F A X 2 M O B I L E CUG E  M A I L A D D R E S S 1 1 D G P  O F F I C E S u r e n d r a  S i n h D G P 0 7 5 5 2 4 4 3 5 0 0 2 4 4 3 3 3 6 2 4 4 3 5 0 1 94 25 01 45 35 70 49 10 00 01 dgp mp @m ppo lic e.g ov .in C-1 0, Swa mi Da ya na nd N ag ar Bh op al 2 2 M i l i n d  K a n s k e r A D G / P S O 7 5 5 2 4 4 3 5 2 6 2 4 4 3 5 2 8 8 9 8 9 9 9 7 2 7 7 7 0 4 9 1 0 0 5 1 0  p s o d g p m p @ m p p o l i c e . g o v . i n  D - 2 / 1 9 , C h a r  I m l i 3 3 P r a d e e p  B h a t i y a J D . ( P  R ) 0 7 5 5 2 4 4 3 5 0 5 2 4 9 1 1 7 2 9 4 2 5 1 7 1 1 1 3 H - 3 9 5 , S a i  A d h a r s h i l a  B a r k h e d a 4 4 D . P .  J u g a d e P S  T o  D G P 0 7 5 5 2 4 4 3 5 0 2 9 8 2 6 0 3 6 5 9 3 7049100502 134-A SEC-Sarvadharm Colony, 5 5 N . K .  S h r i v a s t a v a P S  T o  D G P 0 7 5 5 2 4 4 3 5 0 2 9 7 5 2 7 0 0 9 4 6 7049155426 G-40/9, S. T.T. Nagar. 6

Maharashtra Health Directory Mobile and Email address DHO, Civil Surgeon , Directors

  Contacts Ministers Back Minister Name Contact No. Mail ID   Prof.Dr.Tanajirao Sawant Hon. Minister Public Health and Family Welfare     (O) min.familywelafre@gmail.com     (F) Minister of State Name Contact No. Shri.  Hon. State Minister, Public Health 22886025 (O) 22023992 (F) Officers Name Contact No. Mail ID Project Director, Maharashtra State Aids Control Society 24113097/5619/5791   (O) pd@mahasacs.org Shri Shivanand Taksale (I.A.S.) CEO, State Health Assurance Society 24999203/204/205 (O)   Mantralaya State Public Health Department,  Mantralaya, Mumbai Telephone - 22610018 Officers Name Department / Section Telephone No in the workshop Expanded Mobile No Email IDs Subject Shri.Sanjay Khandare (I.A.S) Principal Secretary-1. 22617388 22632166 22617999 (F)             204         PA 216  Anti 211   psec.pubhealth@maharashtra.gov.in      Shri. N.Nawin Sona Secretary-2 22719030 / 22719031   202 / 244 PA 250   psec2.pubhealth@maharashtra.gov.in   Shri. Shivdas Dhule  (PA Shri. Mohite

Nehru खानदान की सच्चाई , Basic Knowledge of Nehru Family!

  Truth Of Nehru Surname  मोतीलाल नेहरू की 5 पत्नियाँ थीं। (1) स्वरूप रानी (2) थुसु रहमान बाई (3) मंजुरी देवी (4) एक ईरानी महिला (5) एक कश्मीरी महिला नंबर 1- स्वरूप रानी और नंबर 3- मंजुरि देवी को लेकर कोई समस्या नहीं है। दूसरी पत्नी थुसू रहमान बाई के पहले पति मुबारक अली थे। मोतीलाल की नौकरी, मुबारक अली के पास थी। मुबारक की आकस्मिक मृत्यु के कारण मोतीलाल थुसु रहमान बाई से निकाह कर लिये और परोक्ष रूप से पूरी संपत्ति के मालिक बन गये। थुसु रहमान बाई को मुबारक अली से 2 बच्चे पहले से ही मौजूद थे- (1) शाहिद हुसैन (2) जवाहरलाल, मोतीलाल द्वारा इन दोनों बच्चों शाहिद हुसैन और जवाहरलाल को थुसु रहमान बाई से निकाह करने की वजह से अपना बेटा कह दिया गया। प्रासंगिक उल्लेख:- जवाहरलाल की माँ थुसू रहमान बाई थी, लेकिन उनके पिता मुबारक अली ही थे। तदनुसार थुसू रहमान बाई से निकाह करने की वजह से मोतीलाल, जवाहरलाल नेहरू के पालक पिता थे। मोतीलाल की चौथी पत्नी एक ईरानी महिला थी, जिसे मुहम्मद अली जिन्ना नामक एक बेटा था मोतीलाल की 5 नंबर वाली पत्नी एक कश्मीरी महिला थी, यह मोतीलाल नेहरु की नौकरानी थी। इसको शेख अब्दुल

तोता पालने पर जेल जाओगे , कैद में रखना crime, Parrot Caging

  Crime Under Section 49,51 Of  Wild Life Protection act  तोता पालना तो देश में कॉमन है, ऐसे में उसको पिंजड़े में रखना भी अपराध है? वाइल्डलाइफ एक्ट के मुताबिक,  तोते या किसी अन्य पक्षी को पिंजड़े में कैद करके रखना और उससे किसी भी तरह का लाभ लेने के लिए प्रशिक्षण देना कानूनन अपराध है । भारत में कानून इजाजत नहीं देता कि किसी भी पक्षी को कैद करके रखा जाए। आम तौर पर नागरिक तोतों को पालतू पक्षी मानते हैं लेकिन वन्यजीव अधिनियम 1972 की धारा-4 के तहत इसे या किसी भी अन्य पक्षी को पिंजरे में कैद रखना या पालना गैरकानूनी है। वन्य प्राणी संरक्षण अधिनियम 1972 के अंतर्गत तोता को पालना या पिंजरे में कैद करना दंडनीय अपराध है। यदि किसी व्यक्ति ने तोता पाल रखा हो या उसे पिंजरे में कैद रखा हो तो वन विभाग के नजदीकी कार्यालय में सुपुर्द कर दें। देश भर में तोतों की करीब एक दर्जन प्रजातियां मौजूद हैं और सभी संरक्षित हैं। नियमानुसार तोतों को पालने के लिए वन विभाग की अनुमति जरूरी होती है, लेकिन उन्हें पिंजरे में बंद करने वाले यह अनुमति नहीं लेते हैं। लोग शौकिया तौर पर पिंजरों में रंग-बिरंगे पक्षियों को घरों में

Mehandipur Balaji Trustee Mobile Number

  मेहंदीपुर बालाजी ट्रस्टी का मोबाइल नंबर Dausa: Mehandipur Balaji Black Magic Mobile Number | Mehandipur Balaji Psychological Treatment Phone No. Mehandipur Balaji Temple is famous for saving people from Black Magic and Tantrik Kriya. Lord Balaji lives with Bhairav ji and Pretraj Sarkar. People come here for their Solution of Problems and Manokamna. Any Person affected with bad Spirit will Start Rotating his/her Head. Balaji, Bhairavraj and Pretraj Sarkar can help from Black Magic and Evil Spirits. Mehandipur Balaji Savamani Mobile Number | Mehandipur Balaji Arji Phone No. - +91-9782320445 और +91-9351416114 if any Person want to Solve their Problems then they Should Hire or Contact Pujari (Pandit ji) for Puja Path. Hanuman Kavach is also grace of Mehandipur Balaji. Hanuman Kavach is made after various Pooja Path and Tantra Saadhana. Pujari Mobile Number for Black Magic / Bad Spirit and Tantrik Problems  Solutions in Mehandipur Balaji - +91-9929156094

Contempt Case Against Sr. Advocates Amit Desai & Ashish Kamat Of Bombay High Court ....

  SENIOR ADVOCATES OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT AMIT DESAI AND ASHISH KAMAT POTENTIALLY TO FACE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS   Dr. Udit Raj (Ex-Loksabha MP) and noted dalit leader & National Chairman of All India Confederation of SC/ST Organisation And Sh. Ashok Jain, noted Trade Unionist had filed Criminal Writ Petitions for taking action against Private Insurance Companies – ICICI Lombard, Future Generali Insurance, Bajaj Allianz Insurance And Bharti Axa for having siphoned thousands of crores of Government Funds by bogus enrolment of policyholders, opening of fake bank accounts, Cheating Policy Holder’s money through fake billing, Collecting Premium from PSU’s but issuing policy in the name of Insurance Company Agents and passing huge agency commission and circumventing FDI guidelines by roundtripping of funds through shell companies in foreign ‘Tax Havens’. Strangely, Sr. Adv. Amit Desai baselessly claimed before the Court, all allegations have been investigated by CBI Rajasthan and no crimi

Limitation Act Applicable In Contempt Petition For Condonation Of Delay

  NINE YEARS DELAY CONDONE BY COURT AS RESPONDENT STILL DOING CONTEMPT . Cites 18 docs - [ View All ] Section 20 in the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 Article 215 in The Constitution Of India 1949 the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 The Special Courts Act, 1979 Pallav Sheth vs Custodian & Ors on 10 August, 2001 Citedby 0 docs S.G.L. Degree College vs Sri Aditya Nath Das, Ias And ... on 24 October, 2018 Smt. Kusumbai W/O Harinarayan ... vs M/S Shreeji Builders And ... on 14 November, 2019 Yogesh Vyas vs Rajesh Tiwari on 31 July, 2019 Sunil Kumar vs Girish Pillai on 31 July, 2019 Pramod Pathak vs Heera Lal Samriya & Others on 13 December, 2021 Madras High Court M.Santhi vs Mr.Pradeed Yadav on 11 April, 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 11.04.2018 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM CONTEMPT PETITION No.377 of 2018 M.Santhi ... Petitioner Vs. 1.Mr.Pradeed Yadav, I.A.S, Secretary to Government, School Education (HSE-1)