The order for constituting a Commission (AFGRC) was issued while hearing the case Pushpa Vanti Vs UOI, which was not being argued by RDOA. The case being fought by RDOA (Advocate Mahaveer Singh) was for Rank Pay, which is not what has caused the SC to order AFGRC. RDOA was also present in the court at the time to argue their Rank Pay case.
.
The presumed comment of the SC on what bearing would constitution of the AFGRC have on the Rank Pay issue was a result of the RDOA counsel's arguments for his case and question to the bench after orders for AFGRC had been issued. However, the SC orders on this hearing on the GoI's affidavit seeking recall of the SC's 08 Mar 2010order are not yet public and facts will be known only thereafter.
.
In any case, those who have a copy of the GoI's affidavit which was being heard at the time, should peruse Para 12 of the Affidavit which indicates that the 8 mar 10 SC order was only relevant to Maj Dhanapalan since none of the other petitions on Rank Pay from courts across the country had yet been transferred and brought on record of the SC. It is for this reason, I expect, that the SC has supposedly ordered transferring all these cases to the CJI and a separate bench. If so, it implies that the rank Pay case would be heard de novo and the SC order of 08 mar 2010 may or may not ultimately hold for the rest of the ESM.
.
God Bless,
.
Pravesh Renjen
*
From: pravesh renjen
.
Have the SC orders on its hearing of the the UoI's Rank Pay recall petition come out? Those would give us the facts.
.
A reading of Para 12 of the UoI's Review Petition on rank pay suggests to me that the UoI views the 08Mar 2010 order as being applicable only to Maj Dhanapalan's case. In its view numerous petitions by officers in courts across the country had yet not been transferred and taken on record at the SC and had not been not heard. The Bench, apparently accepting this view, has therefore transferred all such petitions and the Recall application to the CJI.
.
To my mind it implies that the Rank Pay case is yet not settled and all the euphoria on the 08 mar 2010 judgement was premature. The case would be heard de novo and could go either way.
.
Would you kindly advise??
.
God Bless,
.
Pravesh Renjen
*
Further to my following mail. I had written to Maj Navdeep Singh to which he has kindly replied. My mail and his reply are reproduced below for your info.
.
Quote
.
From: navdeepsingh.india@gmail.com
.
Sir,
.
As on date, the rank pay issue stands settled since the orders dated 08 March 2010have neither been stayed nor recalled.
.
Only the review / recall application stands transferred to another bench. The Bench has NOT accepted any view of the UOI as on date. The case would only be heard de novo if the orders are recalled, which is not the case till date.
.
The link of the order is
.
Regards
.
Navdeep Singh
*
Dear Parvesh,
.
Maj Navdeep has given a very logical analysis of the Order of Supreme Court. However, there still seem to be a number of doubts in the minds of all the veterans including myself.
.
Would it be possible for RDOA to approach the Supreme Court to know the implications of the Supreme Court order, to clear the doubts in every body's mind, once and for all. I do not think, it is wise for every one to make wild guesses about the implications of the Order of Apex Court, to confuse every one more and more.
.
God Bless you.
.
Col LK Anand Retd
*
Dear All,
Dear All,
Totally agree with Respected Veteran L K Anand.
Is it really all that difficult to get the correct picture while sitting in the capital?. Use RTIs in abundance. It is not at all heavy on the pocket. Just an Action Group is required.
Wishing All the Best and Regards.
VPS
*
Dear Veteran Sachar
Considering the fact that RTI HAS to be an individual effort and not an institutional one, have you considered to do your bit by the ESM -- and get down to doing the needful?
I mean, that would be more effective, regardless of which town you live in, than your continuous 'pokes' at those "sitting in the capital"!
Let us see how effective you are, really!
CK Sharma
Thanks for the guidance, Dear Veteran Sharma.
As a Group nothing has happened in the last 2 1/2 years that this group was formed. So, the request was to the active appointment holders of this Group, including you, to do some useful activity rather than posting stories day in and day out.
If the suggestion has not gone well with you as an individual, as usually seen in the past, then please keep your this suggestion with you.
Thanks and wishing for your good health.
Regards.
VPS
As usual, very quick to dole it out -- but not able or willing to take it!
CK Sharma
My Dear CKS,
I personally feel it is undesirable to react on certain misplaced egos. The fact remains that the doubts arising from Supreme Court Order or its overall implications do definitely exist, and should, as possible be clarified and informed to all veterans, who certainly are expressing various types of doubts. Who does it and how it is to be done is a matter of conjecture, and may be decided by the Governing body of IESM or RDOA or someone else.
Personal attacks in this issue are not in good taste.
Thanks.
Col LK Anand Retd
.
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
.
*
.
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment