PROCEEDINGS ON 25TH MARCH 2015
I AM SORRY I COULD NOT ATTEND TO MANY CALLS
FOR I KNEW THAT MR PULKIT DUBEY HAD GIVEN INFORMATION TO MR BANGURAJAN AND G
KRISHWAMY. I WAS IN DIRE PHYSICAL PROBLEMS THEREFORE I WAS HELPED AND ASSISTED
BY HIM. ONE DAY EARLIER WHEN I REACHED DELHI I WAS NOT SURE WHETHER I WILL BE
ABLE TO REACH THE COURT, THEREFORE, ON MY REQUEST MR RK SINGH CAME TO SAI DHAM
AND WE DISCUSSED. BUT OVERCOMING ALL MY PROBLEMS I REACHED THERE AND SAW THE
PROCEEDINGS.
I FOUND THE GREAT SUPER HERO WAS THERE IN
ADVOCATE’S ROBE WITH HIS TABLET. THERE WAS NOBODY FROM PANCHKULA SIDE, ADVOCATE
FOR DELHI WITH MR GN SRIDHARAN WAS THERE AND MS PINKLY ANAND ALSO CAME LATERON.
AM SINGHVI WAS NOT THERE.
THE COURT TOOK UP CASE NOS. 1 TO 5 IN
SEARTIM FIRST AND THEN ONE CASE MUCH BELOW. THEREAFTER THE COURT TOOK UP CASE
NO. 101, TILL NOW OUR SR ADVOCATE WAS THERE AND THEN 105 WHICH WAS ON THE ISSUE
OF MAHATMA GANDHI. IT WAS DECIDED THEN IT TOOK UP CASE NO. 121 IT WAS PASSED
OVER TO 2 PM AND OUR CASE WAS AT NO. 122. FINDING THAT IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME
HE TOLD MR RK SINGH TO INFORM HIM WHEN THE CASE AND KEEP TAKING NOTES OF WHAT
IS RAISED BY SINGHVI AND WHEN OUR TURN COMES HE WILL RAISE OUR ARGUMENTS, WHICH
DID NOT COME THOUGH LATER MR GUPTA HAD COME.
MR SINGHVI TRIED TO CONFUSE THE COURT THAT
HE IS COMING AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 21/1/2011 AND AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN
REVIEW, BUT AVOIDED TO SAY ANYTHING ABOUT DISMISSAL OF SLP AGAINST REVIEW
JUDGMENT WHICH WAS BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF THE COURT BY RK SINGH HAS BEEN
DISMISSED AND CANNOT BE REOPENED IN THESE PROCEEDINGS, THEN AMSINGHI SAID THAT
THE BURDEN WILL BE 9700 CRORES, WHICH WAS REBUFFED BY RK SINGH THAT THIS IS NOT
LIC’S CASE BUT FOR ARMY PERSONNEL, THE COURT SAID WHATEVER BE THE AMOUNT, WHAT
IS TO BE PAID THAT HAS TO BE PAID WHETHER 9000 CRORES OR 90000 CRORES.
THEN HE CAME OUT THAT THERE ARE 1 LAKH
PENSIONERS OF LIC WHICH THE COURT SAID SO WHAT BUT RK SINGH BROUGHT BEFORE THE
COURT THAT EVEN TODAY THERE NOT EVEN 80000 EMPLOYEES BOTH IN SERVICE OR
RETIRED. THEN AM SINGHI CAME TO 48 BUT RK SINGH SAID THAT THIS MATTER WAS
CONSIDERED BY COGNATE BENCH IN ITS JUDGMENT DATED 18/3/2015, AND THAT TOO WAS
AGAINST LIC. HE GAVE TO THE COURT THE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT WHEN AM SINGHVI
COULD NOT SAY AS TO WHAT WAS THE MATTER AND ASJ SAID I DO NOT KNOW, OUR RK SINGH
SAID THAT HEARING ON A RUMOUR HE HAS ALREADY FILED CAVEAT ON 27TH JANUARY
BUT A COPY HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED TO HIM SO FAR. THEN AM SINGHVI HAD TO COME OUT
THAT IT IS AGAINST THIS DEFENDANT KML ASTHANA. THE COURT ASKED THE COURT MASTER
TO CALL FOR THE FILE OF THAT CASE AND BOTH THE MATTERS WILL BE DECIDED TOGETHER
INSTEAD OF HEARING THE SAME MATTER AGAIN AND AGAIN BUT BEFORE THIS COURT SAID
THAT HOW COME AFTER FOUR YEARS YOU HAVE COME, WHICH RK SINGH CORRECTED AFTER
FIVE YEARS SINCE THE DISPUTE IS OF JANUARY 2010 WHEN JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED BY
JUSTICE BHANDARI.
Please click below.
THE COURT ENQUIRED AS TO WHO HAS TO PAY THE
MONEY ON WHICH AM SAINGHVI COULD NOT SATISFY THE COURT, BUT RK SINGH SAID THAT
IT IS FOR LIC ONLY.
ONE MORE REMARK THE COURT SAID THAT
WHATEVER BE THE JUDGMENT IT WILL BE APPLICABLE TO ALL PENSIONERS.
RK SINGH ALSO SAID THAT EVEN TODAY THE
PENSIONS ARE NOT CORRECTLY BEING PAID, THEN THE COURT SAID THAT WE WILL HEAR
ALL THESE ARGUMENTS ON THE NEXT DATE.
AND DIRECTED THE COURT MASTER TO CALL FOR
THE FILE AND TAG TOGETHER AND THE ASJ TO PROVIDE A COPY OF THE SLP AND ALSO TO
US TO FILE REPLY IF LIKE.
AT ONE STAGE THE COUNSEL FOR DELHI ROSE AND
RAISE THAT THEIRS IS THE CASE ABOUT REMOVAL OF ANOMALY IN DA/DR THEN COURT SAID
OK WE WILL HEAR TOGETHER.
IT IS TO BE INFORMED THAT AGAIN UOI HAS
FILED FOUR SLPS AND SINCE THEY ARE ON THE SAME SUBJECT IT IS BETTER THAT ALL OF
THEM ARE DECIDED ONCE AND FOR ALL OTHERWISE ON THAT GROUND LIC WILL NOT MAKE
COMPLIANCE OF THIS JUDGMENT WHEN IT COMES IN OUR FAVOUR.
IT IS ALWAYS THAT FIRST THE APPELLANT HAS
TO PLACE AND PROVE ITS CASE AND THEN ONLY THE DEFENDANT IF REQUIRED HAS TO MAKE
ITS SUBMISSIONS, BUT IF THE COURT IS NOT SATISFIED WITH THE APPELLANT AND
DISMISSES THE APPEAL THEN THE RESPONDENT MAY NOT BE REQUIRED TO ARGUE. MR NIDESH
GUPTA WAS THEREFORE FOR LONG BUT LOOKING TIME TO BE TAKEN HE HAD GONE TO OTHER
COURT. EVEN ON CALLING OF THE CASE AM SINGHVI WAS NOT THERE AND LATER ON HE
CAME RUNNING. WHEN THERE ARE MANY CASES ONE ADVOCATE CANNOT KEEP SITTING
FOR INDEFINITE PERIOD. BUT GOING FOR SOMETIME LOOKING TO THE POSSIBILITY OF THE
CASE COMING UP CANNOT BE TAKEN TO HAVE FLOWN AWAY. THIS IS THE PROCEDURE.
THE ARGUMENTS OF LIC ARE NOT CONCLUDED AND
THOSE OF THE RESPONDENTS HAVE NOT STARTED, FIRST WE WILL BE HEARD THEN IF NEED
BE THE OTHER RESPONDENTS.
BUT BY THE TIME THE CASE CAME TO A CLOSE MR
MSMURTY WAS NOT VISIBLE IN THE COURT ROOM BECAUSE HE HAD FLOWN AWAY TO SEND
FALSE REPORTS. AFTER COMING OUT OF THE COURT IN THE VERANDAH WHEN OUR ADVOCATES
AND ADVOCATES OF DELHI WERE PRESENT I TILD MR SRIDHARAN THAT MSM IS HARPING ON
MEETING OF ADVOCATES, CALL HIM BECAUSE HE IS PLEADING TO BE YOUR
REPRESENTATIVE. NOW THAT WE KNOW THE PROSPECTIVE STAND OF LIC AND ALL THE
ADVOCATES ARE HERE LET US FIX UP TIME FOR A FRUITFUL MEET, HE SAID HE IS NOT
ABLE TO SEE HIM AND WILL LET ME KNOW WHEN HE IS FOUND OUT.
IT IS MR MSMURTY WHO IS CAUSING CHAOS IN
THE MINDS OF PENSIONERS ABOUT THE ROLE OF MYSELF AND MY ADVOCATES THAT WE ARE
BENT UPON TO SPOIL THE CASE AND WE ARE BOUND TO LOSE IT, AS IF IT WAS HE WHO
HAD BROUGHT THE CASE UPTO THIS STAGE AND I AM OPPOSING. OTHERWISE HE IS GOD AND
HE WILL GUARANTEE WIN. HE IS FOLLOWED AND SUPPORTED BY BR MEHTA OF PANCHKULA.
PL SEE AND ENJOY HIS COMICAL MESSAGES ON THE CHRONICLE WEBSITE AND IT IS FOR
YOU TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO BELIEVE. HOWEVER, I AM NOT BOUND BY HIS ADVICE
UNLESS IT IS IN LINE AND SUPPORTING MY CASE WHICH HAS WON ME THE SUCCESS. IT
DOES NOT MATTER WHAT HIS STATURE WAS/
I WANT TO KNOW FROM THESE PERSONS, IN CASE
MY ADVOCATES WERE NOT THERE OR MR RK SINGH DID NOT SPEAK WHO PREVENTED HIS
ADVOCATE, WHOSE NAME IS NOT KNOWN, OR HIMSELF WHEN IN BLACK ROBE TO SPEAK,
AFTER ALL THE THREE CASES ARE BASED ON THE JUDGMENT IN ASTHANA’S CASE AND SO
FAR HE HAD BEEN PUBLISHING HE HAD HAD DISCUSSIONS FOR SO MANY HOURS ON SO MANY
DAYS THE CASE WITH HIS ADVOCATE BUT NONE OF THEM ARE READY TO COME AND DISCUSS.
THIS IS ONLY AN ALIBI SOMEHOW TO BLAME ME. HE WANTS TO KNOW MY ARGUMENTS AND
MAKE COMMENTS AGAINST US. WHEN ALL HIS EFFORTS HAVE FAILED NATURALLY
FRUSTRATION PREVAILS. OTHERWISE NOBODY CAN GUARANTEE THE FUTURE BUT CAN PUT HIS
BEST POSSIBLE EFFORTS AND THAT I AM DOING.
THANKS FOR BEARING WITH ME FROM THE TIME
THESE BLACK CLOUDS HAVE APPEARED AND NOW THAT I AM TRYING TO CLARIFY THE MATTER
TO WHICH I AM NOT BOUND.
KML ASTHANA
(courtesy: Pensioners Voice & Sound Track)