I shall prefer to be allowed to clarify some facts for the benefit of friends with No prejudices.
The decision of Late Mr Gandhi to file a Writ in Chandigarh HC way back in 2010 was in pursuance of the Fed. Policy to file such Writs in maximum number of Courts.
Mr Gandhi was Vice President of the Fed. at that time. Large part of the Petittion was drafted by Gandhi himself in consultation with many important Fed.leaders and retired RMs Mr. KML was invited to Chandigarh and taken to meet with our Advocate. Thus, he was duly associated with our CHD case. Mr Gandhi expired in December 2010 soon after forming the PANCHKULA Unit of the Fed. seperate from Chandigarh. I was given the responsibility to look after the Legal matters. To respect the opinion of the Fed leaders,we kept our case in Chd adjourned till the Jaipur case was finally decided there by the Divisional Bench. So far so good.
Compelled by circumstances known to hundreds and which I don't want to repeat, I wrote to the General Secretary suggesting it was time to institutionalize the working of the Fed. There should be a Legal Committee to take all legal decisions. Mr ASTHANA must account for lacs of rupees collected by him in his personal account. All out efforts have been made since then to marginalise PANCHKULA, as if we don't belong to the Fed.
We managed our finances for our legal cases in the
HC through contribution from the members. On top of it,
we contributed more than 1.5 lacs towards legal fund
of the Fed. I was invited to Delhi in July 13 and was
persuaded by m/s ASTHANA and late Jain to part with
One lac in my possession in return of full financial support
of theFed in the Supreme Court. I did my part. The GS
sent me the receipt as well the written assurance of his
promise. Soon KML and Jain forgot about it. A couple of
months before the Banglore GC Meeting last year I
mailed a copy of Jains letter to about 500 persons in India.
That is the end of the matter. in this regard. ENOUGH FOR JUST NOW?
S N Chhabra, PANCHKULA