This
is a specimen case of how an honest and upright government employee could be
harassed by the corrupt administrative machinery and the extra ordinary
reaction of the Supreme Court against it. Supreme Court vide its order dated
17/11/2015, directed the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay a lump sum of Rs.10
lakhs to a Government employee within a period of three months from the date of
order towards compensation for the wrong done by the State.
Now
the question remains, what action is taken against the real culprits including
the PIL petitioner who had done these mischiefs? There is no direction from the
Supreme Court in this regard. Also there is no direction regarding who to bear
the burden of compensation i.e., the tax payers or the politicians or their
sycophants who had perpetuated the crime. Whether any departmental action is
taken against the bureaucrats who sided with the politicians and tortured a
clean officer. Whistle blower protection act is only a show piece legislation
just to eye wash.
(Author
note: I am also a similar victim. One case is explained in detail in my book “A
FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION” www.amazon.in/dp/9352353986. I issued notice under section 80 of the Civil Procedure Code for compensation
at two occasions. But I did not pursue it further.)
Below
is the details of the case:
A
petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India was filed by Dr. Ram
Lakhan Singh, an Indian Forest Service Officer who rendered services to the UP
State and Government of India in various positions for about 35 years till his
retirement. The main contention of the
petitioner was that he was illegally detained by the respondent authorities
after implicating him in false vigilance cases and dishonouring the High
Court’s directions. Because of the
malicious, wilful and contemptuous acts of the State and clear abuse of legal
process, he and his family members had to suffer a great ordeal of mental agony
and heavy financial loss besides being defamed in the society. Hence he
petitioned to the Supreme Court (he appeared before the SC in person) to
express displeasure over the violation of his family members’ fundamental
rights and to direct the respondent to pay compensation for the loss of his
professional career, reputation and for causing mental agony.
The relevant facts were that he had rendered about 35 years’ service to the
State of U.P. and the Government of India, with an unblemished record. He became a Member of the National Board for
Wild Life on 22nd September, 2003. The
then Chief Minister of the respondent State wanted the petitioner to take
necessary steps so as to get the Benti Bird Sanctuary located at Kunda of
Pratapgarh District de-notified by the NBWL in its meeting held on 15th
October, 2003. As the petitioner did not comply with the directions, the then
Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, in the guise of a complaint by the MLA of his
own party against the petitioner, issued directions to the Director General,
Vigilance Establishment of the State to initiate a vigilance enquiry against
him. Finally he was removed from his post.
The petitioner moved the High Court by Writ Petition No.126 of 2004 to
declare that the vigilance enquiry against him was done in clear violation of
the prescribed procedure. The High Court
by orders dated 30th January, 2004 and 14th September, 2007 directed the State
Vigilance Committee to carry out the enquiry proceedings, but the respondent
did not comply with the directions of the High Court. Thereafter also he was harassed
by way of filing PIL and FIR against him, raiding his house, arresting him,
suspending him etc. He was finally discharged from the Court proceedings, the
petitioner had written a letter to the Chief Minister seeking an amount of
Rs.4½ crores towards compensation and damages.
Finally
the SC has held “this Court is reluctant in determining or granting any
compensation while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 32 of the
Constitution, but advises the parties to approach the competent Courts for adjudicating
those issues. However, keeping in view
the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and taking into consideration
the age and trauma suffered by the petitioner who spent about 11 days in jail
and fought the legal battle for about a period of 10 years before various
forums and more particularly in the absence of any proved charges of corruption
against the petitioner, we deem it fit that a lump sum amount of Rs.10 lakhs be
awarded as compensation to the petitioner on all forms. Accordingly, we direct
the State of Uttar Pradesh to pay a lump sum of Rs.10 lakhs to the petitioner
within a period of three months towards compensation. The writ petition stands
disposed of accordingly.”
(Ref: SC WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.933 OF 2014 Dr. RAM
LAKHAN SINGH V/S STATE GOVERNMENT OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH CHIEF SECRETARY)
Read my book,'A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION'. For details, go to link:
https://www.facebook.com/afraudintheindianconstitution
Read my book,'A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION'. For details, go to link:
https://www.facebook.com/afraudintheindianconstitution
Also read my other blogs and website:
indiantravelexperience.manjaly.net
cagreport.manjaly.net
publiccause.manjaly.net
