03.11.2009
To: The Joint Secretary, Ministry of Tourism, Govt of india; The Prime Minister's Office.
(1) “Latrines for us! They exclaimed in astonishment. We go and perform our functions out in the open. Latrines are for you big people”, Mahatma Gandhi recounting Untouchables’ grievances at Rajkot Sanitation Committee in 1896.
“Lack of sanitation privacy a shame on us. It is a shame that even today our mothers and sisters in India lack basic privacy. This national disgrace must be addressed urgrently.” Hollow concern of our present prime minister mr manmohan singh. Source: Hindustan Times, Feb.1,2006.
It is 3rd Nov. 2009 and status is maintained, successfully.
(2) However I request you to imagine the mind blowing frantic trauma of a foreign national traveling in india suddenly struck with nature's call and finding no public loo at large and imagine the humiliation and annoyance of the same foreign national because he is not accustomed to urinate out in the open which we indians are led to quite comfortable with.
(3) Whereas those at central to the seat of powers care not for the compulsive shame attached to defecating in the open that mass Indian poor experience everyday, let us we care for the dignity of foreign nationals traveling in india. Wait..... i am not expecting government of india will start building mass public toilets nor i am asking for the same.
(4) RELIEF SOUGHT: Please issue a travel advisory to all foreign nationals and also advise all foreign embassies and consulates in India to issue a travel advisory- “So as to avoid nature's call in the middle- always use wash room before you leave your hotel, any office or residence because you may not find public toilets at large”.
(5) Whereas certainly the advisory is self derogatory in nature yet we should be first thinking of the dignity of our foreign national guest.
(6) I am sending physical copy of this communique to the foreign Embassies, Consulates in india and to the office of President/ Prime Minister of USA, UK, France, Germany, China, Japan, South Africa, Brazil and Australia.
Sandeep Jalan
Janhit Manch, Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle West, Mumbai- 400056.
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
"Justice dinakaran" and "Mr dinakaran" are two man
Date: 03.11.2009
From: Sandeep Jalan, Janhit Manch, Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle West, Mumbai.
To: Shri K G Balakrishnan, the CJI, Shri Veerappa Moily, the Minister of Law & Justice
Whereas Justice Dinakaran is accused of land grabbing with documentary evidences....
And whereas according to one SC Judgment no FIR can be registered against any Judge....
And yet FIR can be registered against Mr Dinakaran [not against Justice Dinakaran], for the offence of land grabbing was committed in an individual capacity.....
And whereas the bar to register any FIR against any Judge is on the premise where any Judge has been accused of corruption in the due discharge of his duty as a Judge.....
This is exactly what the SC has said in one ruling where no sanction is required to prosecute a public servant accused of amassing wealth disproportionate to his income, for amassing wealth is not an act which can be said “in the due discharge of his duty”....
Act of criminality is outcome of an individual thought process.
Man accused of or convicted criminals shouldn't be called as representing to any Community, Religion or any institution for NO Religion, Community or Institution has Sanctions for any Criminal acts. Religions, communities and Institutions are beyond the scope of indulging in illegality or criminality.
Man accused of or a man convicted of any criminal act has allegiance to none except to himself.
I request the Hon'ble CJI/ Law Minister to sufficiently dwell into the matter.
I am etcetra-
Sandeep Jalan
From: Sandeep Jalan, Janhit Manch, Kuber Bhuvan, Bajaj Road, Vile Parle West, Mumbai.
To: Shri K G Balakrishnan, the CJI, Shri Veerappa Moily, the Minister of Law & Justice
Whereas Justice Dinakaran is accused of land grabbing with documentary evidences....
And whereas according to one SC Judgment no FIR can be registered against any Judge....
And yet FIR can be registered against Mr Dinakaran [not against Justice Dinakaran], for the offence of land grabbing was committed in an individual capacity.....
And whereas the bar to register any FIR against any Judge is on the premise where any Judge has been accused of corruption in the due discharge of his duty as a Judge.....
This is exactly what the SC has said in one ruling where no sanction is required to prosecute a public servant accused of amassing wealth disproportionate to his income, for amassing wealth is not an act which can be said “in the due discharge of his duty”....
Act of criminality is outcome of an individual thought process.
Man accused of or convicted criminals shouldn't be called as representing to any Community, Religion or any institution for NO Religion, Community or Institution has Sanctions for any Criminal acts. Religions, communities and Institutions are beyond the scope of indulging in illegality or criminality.
Man accused of or a man convicted of any criminal act has allegiance to none except to himself.
I request the Hon'ble CJI/ Law Minister to sufficiently dwell into the matter.
I am etcetra-
Sandeep Jalan
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)