"As I reported to you last night, I had a chance meeting with Mr Saurav
Agrawal, our lead counsel yesterday, in the thick of his flying visit to
the city. Although he stayed just for three hours and flew back to
Delhi in the afternoon, he came out of his high-profile conference, to
talk to me briefly. We quickly reviewed the status of the hearing in our
cases in the light of the disturbing DHC Orders of 8 Dec 2016.
Saurav's frank assessment of the state of things, left a chill in my
spine. To put it bluntly, we the Pensioners are losing control on the
management of our cases for all wrong reasons. It looks as if we are
once again at cross roads in our trek to reach the ever eluding
destination. The prospects of yet another extension of time is looming
large whether anybody is going to ask for it or not. Hon'ble Supreme
Court first directed that our cases shall be decided in five months flat.
As most of the Petitioners were absolutely lax in their preparation
with zero accountability even to their own members, let alone the
community of Pensioners, precious little happened within the prescribed
time limit and it was a cakewalk for LIC & Government on 31 Aug to
secure extension by another five months. No lessons were learnt since
then and history is threatening to repeat itself as the first extension
is going to come to an end shortly.
If
we see the pattern of the 8 Dec Orders in all the cases, we can't miss
the fact that Justice Khanna attributed a desire to seek extension of
time from the Supreme Court, to the Counsel of ALL the Petitioners
except Hyderabad & one of the two Jaipur matters. Here again,
the reason is obvious. As it was on record (incorrectly in our case
though), that there was no Counsel present in those two matters, no
mention could have been made by them any way as others were reported to
have done.
It was also a ground reality on Dec 8, that no counsel had expressly
mentioned that he would seek extension of time. The only inference that
could now be made is that Justice Khanna felt that it is not possible to
decide the matter before 31 Jan 2017,
in view of what he has noticed on 8 Dec in terms of the readiness to
argue by some of the Counsel who stood before him. He must have thought
that the only saving grace is that the Petitioners's Counsel seek
extension from the Supreme Court and make things easy for the Court to
play its part.
Now the real issue before us: Ironically LIC & UOI are watching (and
enjoying?) the fun. The pain of further extension doesn't bother them
nor the Court. It does not also pain some Petitioners' Counsel even, as
much as it hurts us. There is yet another angle. If a request for one
more extension were to be made (god forbid) by anybody, two things are
certain to happen before the Supreme Court. One, the Petitioner/s
concerned would receive a drubbing from Justice Misra for their
indifference to their own cause. We lose Court's sympathy. Second, the
extension shall not be for a few weeks or a couple of months - court
would be annoyed with repeated requests for piecemeal extensions and
throw us out for another six months. This is not a mere apprehension but
a distinct possibility.
What about additional costs? Are we (all) not bleeding already? With
correct interim payment cruelly denied by LIC and the chances of
correction miserably mishandled (by whoever it may be), where are the
further donations to come from? How to keep the pot boiling? And for how
long?
By any logic, further extension of time is SUICIDAL. I have requested Mr
Saurav Agrawal to resist it in whatever ever way he can. He agreed in
appreciation of my agony. He did mention of course, that we are a
divided house and are paying the price.
I am putting all these thoughts in black & white with a request that
we think of all possible avenues open to us to knock at all the doors
we can reach. Action needed is simple. The Authorized representatives of
each of the Petitioners, (you know I don't like the designation 'case
managers'), should be approached through whom they listen to - including
the Lord almighty, if they listen to none, make them strictly instruct
their respective Counsel, make them stand up on 4 Jan 2017 and they emphatically tell the Court We don't want any extension
WE ARE READY TO ARGUE OUR CASE, PLEASE FIX A PUCCA SCHEDULE AND WE
COMMIT TO FALL IN LINE AND COOPERATE WITH THE COURT. AND CONVINCE THE
JUDGE WE MEAN IT. THERE IS NO OTHER WAY AND IF WE FAIL WE ARE DOOMED.
I started my personal efforts in right earnest. Let us pull all the strings at our command and not give up.
PS: You would have read Mr MV Venugoplan's latest Post 'the Specter of
Dec 8 hearing'. He has more than made up for the delay in writing. As
usual, he excelled in his analysis of the state of things and shared
quite a few of his valuable thoughts with all. There were a couple
factual inaccuracies in his narrative and inputs. I am going to write to
him personally under copy to you, with a request to do what is within
his capacity to help things take shape on 4 Jan as I explained above.
I was traveling by road most of today and I used the opportunity to reach you through this. Will call you tomorrow to share further thoughts.
Warm regards,
Sreenivasa Murty M