4 ex.CJI of Supreme Court SHAMED India – 100 Lies Can’

4 ex.CJI of Supreme Court SHAMED India – 100 Lies Can't Over Ride Facts 
 
Friends, 
You don't have to be Alfred Hitchcock to link up Granadiers Association, General VK Singh and Bhim Singh to RSS BJP – surely VK Singh supplied copies of Legal Opinion of Chief Justices to them to file PIL in the Supreme Court. There are enough grounds for Cabinet Secretary to first direct General VK Singh to proceed on indefinite leave and later Dismiss Him from service. There can't be any compromise with Treacherous Conduct. I added this para when I found when a bloody fool like Bhim Singh was indirectly representing him who obviously had service records of General VK Singh, this amounted to politicization of Army.
 
All four CJI knew even few days here and there AFFECTS their elevation to the top in judiciary or retire from High Court. How can they allow forgery of date of birth when General VK Singh's date of birth and place of birth are known, Son of Army Officer he was born in Khadki Military Hospital, Pune.  
 
India has been shamed by Four CJI in giving Atrocious Legal Advise – 100 lies can't over ride facts – refer Bullet Points. India is known for Unclear and Weak judgments and take decades to decide even simple Civil Cases. Weak Judiciary is directly responsible rampant corruption and judiciary is most corrupt in India. 
 
Even in matters requiring Expert Advices they go ahead with Mischief of Parties and any Scandalous Order of the Apex Court is applied by entire Subordinate Judiciary at Lightening speed – even before detailed judgment is signed by the Judge – but Good Judgments are not even put on the website. Thus Indian judiciary is most corrupt in the world, most irresponsible in the world and take decades to decide simple matters. 
 
I hold Corrupt Judiciary responsible for 95% of Corruption and Loot in India – no Economic Criminal gets punished in real sense – It is only media pressure that forces Judiciary to indict criminals. 
 
Ø      VK Singh was on 10 May 1950, at Khadki Military Hospital, Pune, India. 
 
Ø      Along with DOB Place of Birth is also specified but IGNORED in Opinions.  
 
Ø      On 29.7.1965 he was eligible to apply as 15yr 2 month old for NDA but with 10 May 1951 as dob and age 14yrs 2 months he was not eligible to apply. 
 
Ø      NDA application was signed by his Father, Written by Teacher and attested by his school Principal – all endorsed May10, 1950 as dob. 
 
Ø      UPSC verified his application at several stages and cleared his application based on May10, 1950. 
 
Ø      With 10 May 1951 as dob he was entitled to apply for July1996 batch. 
 
Ø      Initial advantage was that he was Senior to two Batches of NDA by a year and six months, one batch of IMA, but in the later career Youngest Officer in his rank and sure to get promotions at expense of Officers who may be born on 09 May 1951 but factually a year younger to him. 
 
Ø      His father was Army Officer and Colonel so he knew age manipulation would ensure clear passage to the Rank of Army Chief. 
 
All the discussion has not Focused on Actual Date and Place of Birth. 
 
POLITICAL MISCHIEF 
 
Pattern of BJP RSS Half Pants supporting Gen VK Singh is clear indication of Political Mischief. Four CJI and more giving Legal Opinion was intended to tarnish image of UPA government. 
 
BJP RSS Half Pants had in the past abused President of India, Governors, Civil Servants, Prime Minister, High Court & Supreme Court Judges etc. 
 
Ravinder Singh
Progressindia008@yahoo.com 
January21, 2012
 
4 ex-CJIs come out in support of Gen Singh
Raise Questions On AG's Opinion In DoB Row
Josy Joseph TNN January19, 2012

New Delhi: Army chief General V K Singh's contention before the Supreme Court on his age has the backing of at least four former chief justices of India and a former solicitor general. 

    Of the four ex-CJIs, at least two have raised questions about the attorney general's opinion, which led the defence ministry to dismiss Gen Singh's stand that his date of birth is May 10, 1951. Besides the CJIs, former solicitor general Gopal Subramaniam too has given legal opinion to the Army chief saying that the attorney general's opinion was not binding on the government. 

    It is still not clear if all five legal opinions would be placed before the SC in the course of the case. These opinions were obtained at various times in recent days, as the Army chief was battling the MoD over the issue. Justice G B Patnaik, who was CJI in 2002, has said that the attorney general's legal opinion, while it carried great weight, "cannot be said to be binding upon the central government". 

    "The position of law is crystal clear that in case of government employee, the date of birth is required to be recorded in the service register on the basis of age as recorded in school and college records at the time of entry into service and any correction with regard to the said date of birth can be permissible only if the rules governing the conditions of service allow the same," Patnaik has said. Patnaik also argued that the UPSC form filled with 1950 as the year of birth "cannot be treated as conclusive piece of evidence recording date of birth nor can it be taken as admission on the part of the querist in the teeth of the official document like matriculation certificate" and other documents. 

    Justice J S Verma, who was CJI during 1997-98, has said the UPSC form was a "feeble support" to argue for 1950 as the Army chief's year of birth. "This mistake was corrected promptly by UPSC, while selecting him for the NDA and accepting May 10, 1951 as the correct DOB of the candidate. This correct date was thereafter accepted and recorded in the authentic records of the AG's branch in performance of the mandate in the charter of duties. It is needless to reiterate that except for the negligence of the MS branch to correct the revenant entry in its records, the correct DOB of Gen V K Singh was alone accepted and recorded in all the revenant documents of the Army," Verma has said in his opinion. 

    Verma also said, "If it be true that the learned attorney general has taken a different view (I would not like to believe it), then it is likely that the query for his view may not have been framed correctly to give the impression that it is Gen V K Singh who seeks a change in his authentic DOB as recorded by the AG's branch to attract jurisdiction of the MS Branch which refuses to do so." 

    Verma also pointed to a "contextual observation" which "is of greater national significance". "Recent media reports give this impression of Army chief Gen V K Singh for not sparing even the highest in the armed forces for their involvement in the housing and land scams. I am afraid edging out such an Army chief before the end of his legitimate tenure on this pretext may give the public impression of silencing the voice of an 'inconvenient truth'," he said. 

SC may not hear petition tomorrow Army chief General V K Singh wants to fight the legal battle in Supreme Court alone as he has not moved any application for tagging of his petition on the age issue with a PIL by Grenadiers Association (Rohtak Chapter), which is scheduled for hearing on Friday. A bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia is scheduled to hear the PIL, which too has pleaded that the date of birth of Gen Singh be declared as May 10, 1951 instead of May 10, 1950 as insisted by the defence ministry. With Singh's counsel not moving any application for listing of the case for urgent hearing till Wednesday, there is little chance of his petition getting listed for hearing on Friday and may be heard by the SC next week. TNN
 
Apex court rejects PIL favouring Army chief
Apex court rejects PIL favouring Army chief
FRIDAY, 20 JANUARY 2012 
 
The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a PIL filed by an ex-servicemen association which backed the Army chief General VK Singh on his age row.
 
Raising objections on how a PIL was maintainable in service matters, the bench headed by Chief Justice SH Kapadia dismissed the petition of Grenadiers Association (Rohtak Chapter) which requested the court to restore the date of birth of the Army Chief as May 10, 1951 in all official records.
"In our view the writ petition of this type at the behest of the association is not maintainable," the bench of CJI, Justices AK Pattnaik and Swatanter Kumar said. Without commenting anything on the merits of the case, the court raised several preliminary objections to hear the petition which supported the Army chief.
 
As a general principle, the court held that PIL in service matters was not permitted. Further, the bench termed it "unfortunate" as to how an association can seek this relief that pertained to an individual when he himself has approached the court.
 
Hinting at the dangerous precedent such a step would set, the bench said, "If we entertain this petition, it would be a very bad precedent. Or else, anybody would come and seek a declaration in service matters. Just see the implications as it would be a chaotic situation."
 
The bench also objected to the petitioner using an opinion rendered by former CJI RC Lahoti in the body of the petition to support its stand. "Its most unfortunate that opinion of former CJI is annexed when the opinion itself states that it should not be placed before any court of law or tribunal." As a rule in future cases, the court directed the Registry of Supreme Court not to accept any petitions to which opinions of retired judges were annexed.
 
Senior advocate Bhim Singh, who represented the petitioner, justified the action on the ground of overwhelming public interest. He argued that the matter concerned the chief of Army who heads a one million strong Army, whose reputation and honour was at stake. But at one point during the argument, Singh argued, "I want to know whether the Government is determined to change my date of birth."
 
The bench interrupted, "You appear for the association…This is a service matter. The person who is affected has to come to court."
 
Govt files caveat even in PIL on Army chief's age
Dhananjay Mahapatra TNN January20, 2012

New Delhi: The Centre is willing to take no chances in any case relating to Army chief Gen V K Singh's age issue and on Thursday filed a caveat in the PIL filed by little known Grenadiers Association (Rohtak Chapter), which is scheduled for hearing before the Supreme Court on Friday. 

    The PIL has sought relief identical to those asked for by Gen Singh's writ petition. By filing the caveat, the Centre has ensured that the apex court bench headed by Chief Justice S H Kapadia would pass no orders in the PIL without hearing its law officers. Gen Singh's counsel too are sure to keenly watch the proceedings on the PIL in the CJI's court on Friday. 

    The government is fielding its top law officers — attorney general G E Vahanvati and solicitor general R F Nariman — to oppose the PIL on basic locus standi ground. Interestingly, in the last three days, Gen Singh has shown no urgency in getting his petition listed for hearing either prior to or along with the PIL, the pendency of which, he had informed defence minister A K Antony, was the reason which forced him to move the SC for a declaration that his year of birth was 1951 and not 1950 as insisted by the government. He had even termed the PIL as "insidious". 

    Sources close to Gen Singh said, despite moving court on the age issue, he was not taking the urgent hearing option for early listing of his petition as he was still open for an amicable yet honourable resolution of the controversy to avoid a bitter legal tussle. 

    The PIL had come up for hearing on December 16, 2011, before a bench of Justices B S Chauhan and T S Thakur, but it had adjourned hearing after Justice Thakur decided to recuse. The Grenadiers Association, through its president Col (retd) B S Koshal, appeared to know every detail about Gen Singh's bio-data. "At the time of submission of UPSC application form on July 29, 1965, he was still pursuing Class X and therefore, there was no certificate available with him from Rajasthan Secondary Education Board," it has said. 

    All other documents — Gen Singh's Class X certificate, certificate from commanding officer 14 Rajputana Regiment dated August 3, 1965, medical examination record — showed that his year of birth was 1951, the PIL said. 

    The Army chief had surprised the government by moving the SC on Monday with a writ petition seeking a direction to the Centre to correct their records and enter his date of birth as May 10, 1951. Immediately after filing the petition, Gen Singh had written to Antony explaining that he was forced to move court as the PIL could have proved "insidious" to his own interest and dignity.
 
Disparity in Gen's records, petitions to shape govt's case
Dhananjay Mahapatra TNN Jaunary19, 2012

New Delhi: The Centre plans to highlight in the Supreme Court the apparent mismatch between pleadings in General V K Singh's petition on the age controversy and the official records in its strategy to punch holes in the Army chief's contention that he had consistently maintained that his date of birth was May 10, 1951. 

    In the petition, General Singh says he had on November 12, 2009 "addressed a letter to the then chief of Army staff referring to his letter of July 2008 and stating that petitioner (General Singh) had written to then chief of Army staff, seeking justice and elaboration on the Military Secretary (MS) branch's constraints. The issue of MS branch not being responsible for verification was also mentioned". 

    The Centre says the contents of the November 12, 2009 letter of General Singh to then Army chief General Deepak Kapoor was quite different from what is pleaded in the petition. The letter,  says, "I have learnt of some misgivings and doubts being raised on my commitment given on my date of birth as per your directions. You are well aware that I have not gone back on this commitment. 

    "In July 2008, when I wrote to you to seek justice and elaboration of MS branch constraints, you had told me that the case is closed and will not be discussed. I have taken your directions in letter and spirit. My subsequent correspondence with MS branch has been on the verification process which I wanted to know for my own satisfaction. After the MS branch wrote saying that this function is of AG branch, I have treated this issue as closed. I am sure you are well aware of these facts." 

    Finally, he attempted to convince General Kapoor not to harbour any misgivings about raising the controversy in future. "I once again reiterate that my commitment to you stands and any doubt of misgivings need to be dispelled," Singh assured General Kapoor just four months before he became the Army chief. 

    In his petition filed through advocates Prabhjit Jauhar and Puneet Bali, General Singh did not elaborate about the contents of this November 12, 2009 letter but went on to explain why he agreed to accept May 10, 1950 as his date of birth in January 2008. 

    "On being ordered again by the then chief of Army staff, vide letter dated January 30 & 31, 2008 addressed to MS branch, petitioner (General Singh) accepted the date of birth as per the letter of the MS branch dated January 21, 2008 as directed. In the highest traditions of the Indian Army, he had no option but to comply with the orders and command of his direct superior as also the assurances of his superior officer with the hope that he would bring the issue to a logical and ethical conclusion," the petition stated. 

    Defence ministry wants the law officers to highlight in Supreme Court why General Singh, who in 2008 wished to honour the highest tradition of the Indian Army, was now reneging on his commitment to abide by his November 12, 2009 promise to General Kapoor.