As I informed earlier, now I am posting my written arguments . kindly offer your remarks.
WRITTEN ARGUMENTS
(Against SLPs No 11695 & 11696 of 2011 on 04-Jul-2011 )
My Lords,
1. I, Balla Rama Rao, am the Petitioner-In-Person to argue the SLPs No.11695 & 11696 of 2011.
2. It is very well known fact to Every One that an Order or a Legality of any Activity consists the conditions of both Right and Responsibility. If any one of these two conditions not considered before passing the Order/confirms that it is a Legal on the specific activity, then the entire activity/process is 100% illegal.
3. In my case, the activities are fallen under the categories of (a) Prior to Enquiry Stage (b) Enquiry Stage (c) After Enquiry Stage (d) After Single Judge’s Order.
4. If any violation done by the Respondents in the activities of Prior to Enquiry Stage then all the further stage activities will be 100% illegal.
5. The Lower Court must verify the violations done by the Respondents in the activities of Prior to Enquiry Stage when I have brought the notice to the lower Court. Actually, the case will be finalised at this stage only.
6. I am ready to prove that the Respondents’ Information/Arguments for any period (Past/Present/Future) is/are 100% illegal as the Reader of their Information/ the Listener of their Arguments may feel that there is 100% truth as it fulfills one of the condition of the Right of the legality of an activity and the Reader/the Listner may not question the condition of Responsibility of legality of an activity as the lower Court did. Actually, it will be known to any one that their Information/Arguments is/ are 100% illegal, if we raise the question of the condition of Responsibility of legality of that activity.
7. The Violations done by the Respondents for which they have to provide the Proofs for the Activities:
I. Prior to Enquiry Stage are:
(1) MD has transferred me from Factory to Baroda by assigning
the duties. Here, we can find:
(a) His Right is : Ordering me to report at Baroda by assigning
the duties.(Kindly Refer Page Nos from 33 to 34)
(b) His Responsibility is: Providing the information as
requested in my letter. (Kindly Refer Page Nos from 38 to 46)
(c) My Argument/Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: Due
to non fulfillment of MD’s responsibility ( Here, we can find
the Charge Sheet instead of his Reply) on the above
activity,there is no legality to this activity and resulted that
confirms that MD has misused his power namely, Transfer with
Malafide Intention.
(2) MD has confirmed that he has postponed my transfer.
(Kindly Refer Page Nos from 58 to 60) Here, we can find:
(a)His Right is : Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)
(b)His Responsibility is:He must accept any one of my request.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity:MD has not accepted
any one of my request on transfer. Due to non fulfillment of MD’s
responsibility on the above activity,there is no legality to this
activity and resulted that confirms that MD has told lie and it
attracts legal punishment.
(3)MD has confirmed that the Disciplinary Authority has a legal
power’. Here, we can find:
(a)His Right is : Informing the above information that he has
power on delegation on Disciplinary Authority on or before
14-Sep-1999.
(b)His Responsibility is: Providing the Documentary Evidence
that he has the power on or before 14-Sep-1999 by getting
the power from the Board with amendment on Disciplinary
Authority of the CDA Rules of the Company.Actually he has
gotten his power on 07-Dec-1999.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: Due to non
fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the above activity,there
is no legality to this activity and resulted that confirms that
MD has misguided the Reader/Listener by providing the
false date of his right.
(4)MD has confirmed that the Charge Sheet (05-Oct-1999) was very
clear without any ambiguity.(Kindly refer page nos from 47 to 50)
Here, we can find:
(a)His Right is : He has the power to issue the charge sheet.
(b)His Responsibility is:Providing the allegations against each
charge and must not add additional charges.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: All the charges are
stated in one place and closed with mentioning all the charges
and added additionally two charges seperately. Due to non
fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the above activity,there is no
legality to this activity and resulted that confirms that MD has
misguided the reader by providing the false proforma of the
Charge Sheet that violates the employee’s right (Article 311 (2) )
that to know what he has done wrong.
II. Enquiry Stage are:
(1) MD has confirmed that the Enquiry procedure was followed
Here, we can find:
(a)His Right is :Informing that he has followed the enquiry
procedure.
(b)His Responsibility is:He must issue the charge sheet as per
CDA Rule No.26.3 of the Company and must get report by
giving the place to reply from the Employee and if not
satisfied with this report or Employee has failed to submit his
reply within the specified time, he may recruit the Enquiry
Officer to conduct an Enquiry.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: He has not issued the
Charge Sheet legally even though I request ( Kindly Refer Page
Nos from 51 to 57) and has not provided the place to give the
reply. Due to non fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the
above activity,there is no legality to this activity and resulted
that confirms that MD has violated the Freedom of Speech
(Article 19) and it attracts legal punishment.
III. After the Enquiry Stage:
(1) MD has confirmed that the Enquiry Report was 100% legal as all the charges were proved. So, We passed on Order for Discharge (Kindly Refer Page Nos from 67 to 69) Here, we can find:
(a)His Right is : Issuing the Discharge Order.
(b)His Responsibility is:He must prove that his Counter Affidavit
(CA) and the Enquiry Report (ER) have 100% legal information.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity:After deep study of
CA and ER by comparing with the Reply Affidavit, it is found
that these two have 100% illegal information. So there is no
legality to this activity and has no value in law.
IV. After Single Judge’s Order:
(1)MD has informed to the lower Court that:
(i)The petitioner is working in a Private Engineering College at
Vijayawada.
(ii)The Petitioner took money to report at Baroda in 1999.
(iii)No complaint was made to implement the Continuity of
Service and other Attendant Benefits.
(iv)The Petitioner is not an Employee as on Date (13-Dec-2010)
Here, we can find (for all the above activities):
(a)His Right is: Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)
(b)His Responsibility is:Providing the Documentary evidences/the
proofs against the above acivities.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of these activities:MD has not provided
the proofs. So, there is no legality to these activities and resulted
that confirms that MD has told lie and it attracts legal
punishment.
(2)MD has been withholding the Employee’s benefits like
Increment,Promotion (since DOJ) Transfer, Job Descripttion, SLs,
ELs, Casual Leaves etc, etc,. by simply treating me as a Casual
Labour instead of Permanent Employee by not implementing the
continuity of service with other attendant benefits which was the
part and parcel of the Single Judge’s Order dated 24-Oct-2007 since
Reinstatement. Here we can find:
(a) His Right is : He can appeal against this Order.
(b) His Responsibility is: He must implement this Order as stated in
CC 1298/’10 till his Appeal is finalised.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of ths activity: He can not take an
advantage to negate the part and parcel of this Order by simply
appealing.Due to non fulfillment of his responsibility,he must be
punished U/S 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act. Here, the
so, funny thing is that the lower Court has set aside this case (CC)
based on his lies instead of awarding the punishment. I heartfully
beg this Court to rectify the lower Court’s mistake.
(3)MD has simply influenced the mind of Judges of the lower Court
by informing the false information with lies to set aside my WA
420/’08 ( to negate my Back Wages ) and to allow his WA 63/’08( to
remove my Job).Here we can find:
(a) His Right is: Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)
(b)His Responsibility is:He must prove that his information ( CA,ER,his
Affidavits, Arguments,etc) is 100% legal to remove my job and to
negate my backwages.
(c)Legal Remark on Legality of ths activity: After deep study of CA , ER
and his Affidavits by comparing with the Reply Affidavit, it is found
that these three have 100% illegal information and his arguments
were 100% lies and He has tried to mislead the lower Court to get
judgment in favourable to him that attracts Legal Punishment. So
there is no legality to this activity and has no value in law. Here, the
so, funny thing is that the lower Court has set aside my WA 420/’08
and partly allowed his WA 63/’08 based on his lies with false
information instead of allowing my WA by setting aside his WA. I
heartfully beg this Court to rectify the lower Court’s mistake.
8. The Court must verify the actvities’( Prior to Enquiry Stage) legality that whether the Respondent has fulfilled his responsibility or not in Correlation to his right .
9. So, requesting the required information is 100% legal activity. The Respondents must not negate my every request having the subject ( “Kindly allow me to work either at HO or at Factory”) and the lower Court must consider the above requests to pass an order for backwages as prayed in my WA 420/’08, to set aside their WA 63/’08.
10. Here, MD has not fulfilled his responsibility against the assigned duties.It confirms that he has misused the power.By misusing the power,he can not claim judgment in favour to him and should not harass me both mentally and financially by using the Constitutional Body as his own weapon by simply filing the case (Actually, he must not file any case by violating the rules against me U/S 3 (viii & ix) of POA 1989 as I belong to Scheduled Caste Community. He has been harassing me since 1997.No one has the right to harass any one. How can he harass me up to today?), by having the illegal intention that the Court may not ask his responsibility and simply remit the case to the enquiry stage.These type of people will be fallen under the category of ‘SILENT ESCAPERS’ namely, Violate the law and Act as law implementers.
11. In most of the Cases, the lower Court(s) remits the case again to the Stage of Enquiry very bluntly as passed in my case without verifying the legality of the activities Prior to the Enquiry Stage.How can the lower Court gives judge status again to the Silent Escapers instead of awarding the punishment? These Silent Escapers are more dangerous than Direct Killers ( Here we can find the Court awards punishment to killers then why does the Court not award punishment to these Silent Escapers?) as they harass the Employee and his family members.We see many of the Employees lives are spoiled by these Silent Escapers by deciding to Sucide either the entire family or the Employee as faced these worst situations in my life.Who is responsible their suicide decision/activity? Here, the Silent Escapers. To give the real justice to those Employees or his family members, I most respecrfully beg this Court to review all the cases filed in India to give judgment in time (not more than 6 months) to the Petitioners by rectifying the lower Court’s mistakes to implement the Rules/Orders as set by itself to save these Petitioners from these Silent Escapers.
12. Here, the lower Court has not considered the condition of Responsibility as explained above and has passed the Order favourably to the Respondents without verifying the legality of the Transfer and the Subsequent activities. It means that the lower Court has confirmed that the activities Prior to the Enquiry Stage are legal.How can the lower Court confirms that their activities Prior to Enquiry Stage are legal without checking the conditions of legality of an activity?. The lower Court must not show any partiality as every one is Equal before law till the case is finalised. The lower Court has shown partiality in my case.When the Petitioner approaches the lower Court, It must consider the maintanance of Employee’s Family. The lower Court must pass an Order to get Salary by serving till the case is finalised or the Court must pass the Order to both the parties (MD and my Self) not to enter the Company’s Premses till the case is finalised.The lower Court has neither done.The case must be finalised not more than 6 months.But it has taken round about 11 and half years in my case (including WP/CC/WAs) only for verifying the legality’s conditions for the activities prior to the enquiry stage.
13.Most of the Enquiry Officers, who are panel members of CVC are spoiling the Employees lives as spoiled my life by giving false Reports without considering the conditions of the legality of the actvity and their Role Existency as per the procedure of the Enquiry.It is the responsibility of CVC to get reports and verify the legality’s conditions and make the right report to submit to this Court to award legal punishment to Silent Escapers.
14. It is deeply proved that all the activities of the Respondents are 100% illegal in my Reply Affidavit in WP13295/2000. With out Studying my Reply Affidavit, passing Orders by the lower Court is 100% illegal. I most respectfully beg this Court: (a) to rectify the mistakes of the lower Court, (b) to implement its Orders/Rules to provide the real Justice to its appraochers and to save them from these Silent Escapers.
That’s all my Lords.
Thanks my Lords.
(Rama Rao Balla)
Petitioner-In Person
