Monday, March 31, 2014

Update:IV CPC Rank Pay Contempt Petition Case as on 31 Mar 2014

The case came up for hearing today ie 31 Mar 2014 in the Court of Justice RM Lodha.
After hearing the Solicitor General, the Court exempted the Contemnors (Ex Def Secy and present CAG, CGDA since promoted to Def Fin, Ex Secy Def Fin, and ex Secy Expenditure since both retd) from personal appearance.

The Court directed the petitioners (RDOA) to file application for impleadment of present Def Secy and CGDA within two weeks.

Link to court order: Court order of 31 Mar 14

 http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/casestatus_new/querycheck_page2.asp

38 comments:

sunlit said...

I suppose that would mean a fresh plaint and a fresh summons/notice. But RDOA could educate others, when time permits, on the processes and time-frames involved.

Harry said...

Sir,

1. Two weeks for filing application for impleadment of two (out of four) Contemnors.

2. Then Court issues notice to two Contemnors...

3. Contemnors seek more time...

4. One or two no-shows in Court...

5. We run into Court Summer Break...

...and the agony continues :(

dev said...

Disgusting is the only word. While RDOA is doing what it suppose to do THE BEST but too much of liberty is given to Babus and Govt by Judiciary. Else this case could have been concluded like SAHARA case. I do not think justice will ever be done and if at all done...it will be too little too late......It is almost denied.

neelam singh said...

justice Lodha had told Gen VK to blow in the direction of the wind....

He is giving an example of what he must have meant....He is going to be CJI.
God Save the judiciary, The AFs & above all this country...

Either he is naive or just bloody smart, trying to get into good books of evergreen Babus...

bharatiya said...

None can believe it !It beyond all acceptable norms. How can somebody holding the post be houled for contempt when he WAS not involved. Now, we have to doubt the intensions and JUST judgement. We should ask for full bench . Also object to this decision of judge Lodha.

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

Dear RDOA, we are unable to understand today's proceedings. Why have the HSC gave exemption from appearing? what they want from RDOA within two weeks?
Please educate us. thanks
v.sundaresan

Taaza Khabar said...

"Agla Padav," as the compere says in any Hindi TV serial.

Positive part is that the next hearing may be in the Court of the soon to be Chief Justice R M Lodha.

Veterans said...

It is too much to expect that any MoD official is going to be punished for the contempt of court. By insisting for that, we are wasting the time. Rather, I feel that RDOA should strive for getting fresh order for execution from court.

Ranjay said...

after Rank pay verdict...I think judges know their aukat...now they need to hire judges from foreign country for they have proved that they can't deliver judgement....

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/energy/oil-gas/sc-appoints-australian-judge-to-preside-over-arbitration-between-reliance-industries-oil-ministry/articleshow/33034654.cms

charanjit singh said...

Tarikh-pe-tarikh. I fail to understand what is in the mind of HSC. Why could it not ask for impeadment of these two officials during the first hearing itself? Why so late now?
Secondly, Why can`t HSC find out of its own the difference between `AS ON` and `WEF`.
Justice Lodha had been giving favourable judgements earlier, but suddenly there is some change in his actions. God saved us .

Sqn Ldr C S Gandhi

BB said...

The Judiciary confounds me at all times. May be we can understand this better when the reasoned judgement is available or is it that there is no reason recorded?
Biman

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

I agree with Harry's comments. What is tthe use of a "impleading pettition" at this stage except that this gives some escape route to the babus and more na more delay?
v.sundaresan

corona8 said...

@bharatiya:"...How can somebody holding the post be houled for contempt..."

The case was between UOI and Lt Col Rao and ORS.

It may be the Hon'ble Supreme Court's view the defendants should not be individuals but the posts they'd once represented.

MAJOR NAZAR SINGH GILL said...

Mr Devinder Singh Bhullar has been pardoned from hangging till death due to delay in decision on mercy petition.They have forgotten about nine people killed by terrorists and sufferings of their families.Now Mr Bitta is asking Congress President to permission to kill himself. Similarly Babus will come out that they should be pardoned as they were never the decision making authority of MOF, MOD, CGDA,P CDA(P) and P CDA(O). In casetomarrow few veterans come out that they have suffered losses due to these Babus and they should also be permitted to commit suicides publically in front of South/North Blocks or HSC.Now , we should waive off these dues to Govt so that this amount could be utilised by some one for corrupt purposes for commission as to arms/equipment dealers.

Dasila said...

Under which law/rule/act, HSC has accepted the plea of Ld SG. The direction of the HSC to RDOA is questionable. Why the present incumbents should be answerable for the mistakes rather crime(if I may say so)committed by their
predecessors? This logic is beyond my comprehension.

Satyam ev Jayate said...

Members of RDOA are disappointed.

If Subrato Roy can be locked up in prison by a Bench of the Supreme Court for "dealing, denying, defying tactics" in complying with judgment/order of the Court, why are the 4 contemnors exempted from appearance, let alone not locked up for pretending not to understand the orders of the Court? Hope RDOA will give more details.

Secondly, how does impleading the present Def Secy and CGDA help? They will file affidavits settled by Solicitor General that they did not take the decisions that are questioned now in the CP 328 of 2013.

Heads we lose, tails they win?

Maj R P Sehgal said...

IT will mean unending agony of WAIT...and wait without any fruitful gain or no gain at all for the veterans who are in their 70s and 80s. These Babus will have their way as always.Can we do something or just wait.

Alok Asthana said...

Is it for this country that I took such extreme risks at times?

yogesh said...

This is clear match fixing between govt and SC... There is a need to file contempt petition against SC..

Red Indian Cowboy said...

We got a Decisive Victory in OROP because of 2014 General Elections starting on 7 April 2014 for the Fauji Vote Bank !

But Rank Pay Case does not seem to be making any headway ?

It is now in April 2014 or never .......

Moment the April 2014 General Elections are over....Rank Pay Case will start SNORING till 2019 General Election ???

corona8 said...

"They will file affidavits settled by Solicitor General that they did not take the decisions that are questioned now in the CP 328 of 2013";

The originally named contemnors did not commit contempt as individuals but as the designations of UOI they represented.

That seems to be the logic. The present incumbents inherited the liabilities along with the duties, responsibilities and perks of the job.

So maybe it all makes sense.

Satyam ev Jayate said...

@corona8, as per RDOA's clarification, contempt petition cites the respondent(s) by name and not designation. This is confirmed if one reads other cases on the Apex Court website.

Second, the original contemnors committed contempt as individuals by applying their minds to the topic at hand - did the draft MoD letter comply with the Apex Court's ruling of 04 Sep 12.

The present (sic) incumbents inherited the decision and the implementation, approved by RM and FM. As the matter was already before the Apex Court when they assumed office, was it possible to take any decision?

Therefore, the plea may carry the day for the new respondents, who are now not the original contemnors!

Ravi Rao said...

We should involve the Defence Minister as a Contempter as was done with his approval and he is aware of the whole case since the Sep4, 2012 judgement was passed when he was in office and it was his responsibility for correct implementation of the order.

Ranjay said...

@ corona8
then Mr Lodha should have said the same on 23 sep 2013. why did he waste these 6 months....

Is he naive or shrewd...

My lord thats how we refer them...;)

sunlit said...

RDOA would be engaged full time in meeting requirements of the court order, but it would be nice to learn from them some sort of a brief description of the process, and the time involved, that all affected can now factor in.

dajay said...

What has happened in HSC shows the clear intent & writing on the wall so there is no pointing harping on the issue of Contempt petition.I feel best thing in the present scenario is to request HSC to give very clear & candid instructions to Solicitor General & present Defence Secretary to implement HSC order in letter n spirit based on Attorney General opinion with a fixed PDC. It will also be very difficult for HSC deny this because any punishment to the errant babus should not be the main aim.Implementation of the order itself will be a big reprimand to the rudderless bureaucracy.It is also the right time to bring in the national media to expose the indifferent attitude of the system toward (H)ARMED FORCES.

Manuureet Singh said...

I feel the RDOA went wrong in the very first instance in the contempt petition where the contemnors should have been listed based on appointment and not by name. The HSC should also have been impressed to issue contempt notice by appointment and not name. This would have saved lot of precious time. The battle thus continues driving home few lessons for petitioners too.

Jai said...

Indian Courts need to strike a balance between exercising due diligence and delivering timely justice. One wonders if the words 'Herein Fail Not' in the order asking the contemnors to appear in person was just a bit of pompous judicial English?

Dhoop said...

@Manuureet Singh:"....went wrong....";

It is quite easy to get critical, armed with hindsight.

All legal cases have ifs and buts and no two legal opinions are ever similar till decided upon.

Even judgements are reviewed and set aside by superior benches.

RDOA's legal team is doing a commendable job. If there are any better ideas, nothing stops anyone from putting forth suggestions in advance or from taking up issues independently in the courts.

The only thing anyone can say, by hind sight, is maybe the current holders of appointments could also have been listed as contemnors and if the last hearing had also taken place by now the application would have been in place.

But, that is the way the legal system works in our country. It is fine to be critical, but one needs to count one's blessings.

One only has to look at the horrible justice systems of some countries in Africa, the Middle East or South America to realize how lucky we are to have our legal system, slow as it is.

Ravi Chowdhary said...

The decision not to implement the Supreme Court Judgement was made by the then Def Secy now present CAG and he is as much more responsible than the present Def Secy. A person has retired does not mean he can take any decision while in the last leg of service and take the plea of retirement. If Gen V K Singh could be called to the Court even after retirement the rule applies to Defence Civilian Officials also. I request the RDOA to take up again with the Supreme Court not to let the miscreants off.

ravi mahajan said...

All decisions taken by the Police OR bureaucrat are his own ( for the highest level ), in other words ACP XXX takes a decision to "shoot at Site/sight" is not Police decision but that of ACP XXX, similarly, all civilian officials who have given permissions in Adarsh scam, or any other incorrect orders is the responsibility of the INDIVIDUAL OFFICIAL and not of his department or rank.
RDOA is absolutely correct and Justice Lodha is biased to say the least.

Our great Justice gives verdict with the malice or undue interest is liable.

Dhoop said...

@Ravi Mahajan:""...RDOA is absolutely correct...";

Have the RDOA team or this blog ever said they will not implead the present Def Sec and CGDA as directed by the court?

Of course they are correct in proceeding with the litigation as per the judicial process.

Some rather heedless comments, amounting to a near contempt of court, are missing the point that law is different from common lay perceptions.

corona8 said...

@Ranjay:"..should have said the same on 23 sep 2013..";

Do you mean to say Hon'ble Supreme Court should have issued an order without representation by the defendant or taking into account their application?

I do think there is a need to understand how cases are dealt with in the higher judiciary. It's a bit different from dealing with our company level charge sheets.

Bloomberg said...

HSC be pleased to Order CASH OUTGO Rs 1500 Crores be Deposited by Contemnors in Supreme Court in the RANK PAY CASE by 20 April 2014 ......like the Sahara Case

Msk Rao said...

Supreme Court be pleaded to Order to deposit Rs 1500 Crores in Supreme Court in Rank Pay Case by 20 April 2014 by Contemnors - loke Sahara Case

bharatiya said...

@dhoop, pl help me in understanding "The contemnors will have to appear in person at 1030h on 13 Feb 2014 in the Court and will continue to do so till finalisation of case. HEREIN FAIL NOT " this is order given by Judge Himself . May I and all RDOA members to believe that He did not mean what He wrote.
How does Law differ from common perception.?
How do you deal with this if the order is not followed in action and spirit of this order ? By any common man !
Rather company level situation it is possible so long as he does not order it in WRITING

Ranjay said...

@ corona8
justice delayed is justice denied....
contemnors were to appear in person in the Court and were to continue doing so till finalisation of case.they had used a phrase... HEREIN FAIL NO

what changed overnight....Allah appeared in an avatar or something...


further as per para 3 of court order....
Learned Solicitor General submits that the
order dated 4.9.2012 has been complied with in all
respects and the grievance of the petitioners that the
order has not yet been complied with is not correct.

something is not right somewhere...

WG.CDR.V.SUNDARESAN(RETD) said...

"HEREIN FAIL NOT" A good word from the judiciary. But it will be "always fail to appear" ( u can do ........all)in the words of babus.
v.sundaresan