Thursday, 28 October 2010
The trustees had illegally prevented us from having food at the Ashram Dining Room intimidating us with the presence of police. The Warden of Jenny Women’s Hostel had refused to accommodate us and had also informed Manoj Das Gupta about their reluctance to continue with whatever underhand undertaking that had taken place between them. However the trustees not only continued to deny and deprive we five sisters from partaking food from Dining Room, they failed to make any alternative provisions for our sustenance. Therefore we filed I.A.No.2094/2010 for restoring our food and all other facilities. Orders were passed allowing us to eat at Ashram Dining Room on 27.10.2010.
In the evening of 27.10.2010 we five sisters made urgent attempts to meet Manoj Das Gupta. We finally landed up at Manushri Chatterjee’s house, his girl-friend with whom he daily has his dinner. We rang the bell and none other than Manjushri opened the door. After several requests, during which her brother Swadesh came out and tried to shoo us away but we did not leave, Manoj Das Gupta finally came forward to talk us. We informed him that our food and all other amenities and facilities and as provided to every inmate had been restored to us on 27.10.2010 by the order passed in I.A. No.2094/2010 by the Hon’ble Judge of the Principal District Munsif at Pondicherry. At first he simply refused to believe us. Then when we read out the directive portion of order of restoration, he hid behind his façade of seemly obedience and questioned the veracity of the order.
Only when we categorically informed him that we were going to eat our dinner at Ashram Dining Room that he toned down and sarcastically replied, ‘one more day of not eating in Dining Room will not really kill you.’ What a thoroughly reprehensible statement! We answered him that only we knew with what great difficulty we had survived this ordeal without having food but he simply laughed mockingly. He then told us that we could only eat at Dining Room after he had consulted with the other trustees, his co-conspirators, and asked us to meet him the next day at Trust Office, inaptly named ‘Grace Office’ by the trustees since this office has brought total disgrace to the whole of Ashram community.
As instructed we went to Dis-“Grace Office” today at about 11.30 p.m. Once again Manoj Das Gupta met us surrounded and supported by women-inmates. Shilpi Shroff, Jahnavi Ravikanti, Abhipsa Nagda were some of the women we spotted standing behind him when Manoj Das Gupta informed us that we could go and have our lunch at Ashram Dining Room. We wanted in writing his statement but he assured us that there would be no problem and that no one would stop us.
However when we went to the Ashram Dining Room people took our photos, which is not permitted, and passed nasty comments. Thank God, at least nobody denied us food.
Friday, 30 July 2010
Trustees send a letter at a wrongly mentioned address to Jayashree enclosing a non-certified copy of the malafide order dated 21.06.2010. We inform the trustees that the order is not verifiable and even as we are taking steps to obtain a certified copy, the trustees forcibly implement this order.
On 22.07.2010 we five sisters go for lunch. Using Pondicherry police to intimidate us, Matriprasad, Maya Khandelwal, Jahnavi Ravikanti, Purushottam Kothari and others assault Jayashree and Hemlata and deny us food at Ashram Dining Room. (See posting dated 22.07.2010).
On 23.07.2010 I meet the Warden of Jenny Working Women’s Hostel saying that our food has been stopped at Ashram Dining Room and we have been directed to reside at the hostel by the Madras High Court. Thereafter on 27.07.2010 I write a letter to the Warden asking her about our position vis-à-vis her hostel. In answer I get a letter from her dated 25.07.2010 which she has sent to the trustees stating that their representatives have misrepresented and mislead them and they are in no position to accommodate us.
In spite of receiving letter dated 25.07.2010 from the Warden of Jenny Women Hostel the trustees have failed to provide food to us till date.
Typed-copy of letter dated 25.07.2010 (Warden’s letter to trustees) is produced below.
Thursday, 22 July 2010
On 21.06.2010, without our knowledge and in our absence Justice K. Venkataraman of Madras High Court passes perverse orders directing we five sisters to accommodate ourselves at Jenny Working Women’s Hostel. Thereafter the trustees send Jayashree an uncertified copy of this order at wrong address. We cannot verify its authenticity and so we take steps to get this order by ourselves from the Madras High Court.
Meanwhile we were secretly informed that trustees are going to stop our food and so on 22.07.2010 at about 12 p.m. together we five sisters go for lunch at Ashram Dining Room. There we see police constables men and women, as well as Matriprasad, Purushottam Kothari, Maya Khandelwal, Jahnavi Ravikanti, among others, waiting for us. The inmates come forward to forcibly stop us and beat Jayashree and me in the process. The police are simply watching the show. We are denied food at the Ashram Dining. We go towards the Lt. Governor’s house to seek a meeting with him. We are chased by the police and land up instead at the Chief Secretariat. By then media persons have arrived and after much ado the Chief Secretary Mr. Chandra Mohan gives us an appointment.
We have no food to eat. For how long? Anybody's guess.
Wednesday, 14 July 2010
For a second time trustees filed another clarification petition in M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. 3314/2007 to further clarify the unambiguous High Court Order dated 04.08.2008.
The trustees misrepresented to Justice K. Venkataraman that on enquiry by them they have found that ‘International Guest House’ was unwilling to accommodate the five sisters. They produced the letter received by them from ‘International Guest House’ but failed to produce their own letter which they claimed to have written to the guest house management. This alleged letter has never been made public by them obviously because no such letter exists!
When the trustees had informed us that ‘International Guest House were unwilling to accommodate us, we had asked for rooms at ‘Seaside Guest House’. They were even more furious by this demand and enraged, they proceeded to file their second clarification without even bothering to reply to us.
Justice Venkataraman suo motto appointed Advocate Commissioner, who submitted his report on 23.12.2008 before Justice K. Venkataraman. His report completely exposed the trustees and their devious manipulations and their ill-intentions towards us. Not one accommodation, as cited by the trustees, met the criteria set by Justice K. Venkataraman. All the guest houses chosen by us fit within the stipulated criteria, ‘International Guest House’ being the most suitable and which had even agreed to provide accommodation. (See posting dated 30.12.2008)
Meanwhile we had also written to the Chief Justice of Madras High Court, Justice H.L. Gokhale, and asked him to transfer our case from Justice Venkataraman’s court to anyone else because he was prejudiced in favor of the trustees and because of him another inmate was thrown out on the street and was living on the charity of the church. (What a shame on the trustees that inmates, who have dedicated their entire lives to the Ashram, are forced to live on the charity of the church!) (See posting dated 03.10.2014)
This letter had made Justice K. Venkatarman spitting mad and also because the Advocate Commissioner’s report was so damaging to the trustees, Justice K. Venkataraman became vindictive towards us and repeatedly berated and belittled our lawyer in the open court. His hostility became unbearable and with a heavy heart we asked our lawyer to report ‘no instructions’ and give up vakalat. We were assured that before the case came up for orders, we would be issued with summons either from the court or from the trustees intimating to us the date of appearance. No such thing happened.
More than 1 ½ years after submission of the Advocate Commissioner’s report, Justice K. Venkatarman suddenly brought up the matter, without issuing us summons either through court or through the trustees. Then without taking into account a third party’s objective findings as directed by the court, viz. the Advocate Commissioner’s report, Justice K. Venkatarman proceeded to pass his third impugned order dated 21.06.2010 in M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, illegally modifying his own order for a second time. We are directed to accommodate ourselves at ‘Jenny Working Women’s Hostel’.
By repeatedly entertaining the frivolous petitions filed by the trustees, Justice K. Venkataraman not only lowered the stature of the High Court to that of a Trial Court and misused his discretionary powers of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, but he also illegally modified two times his own order under the guise of clarification resulting in unsought for eviction proceedings.
Friday, 9 April 2010
In the interim junction petition in I.A. No.935/2001 filed in O.S. No.253/2001 challenging the illegal show cause notice issued by the trustees, due to some technical difficulty a vague order was passed. Trustees and my four elder sisters, both sides challenged this order before the Hon’ble Madras High Court. C.R.P. No. 2230/2001 & No. 2534/2001 in O.S.No.253/2001 were preferred and Mr. Justice P.D. Dinakaran, without appreciating the merits of the case, passed even more vague orders and confused the whole issue still further. By a common order dated 29.10.2001 both the CRPs were disposed off.
Thereafter the suit went for trial prejudiced by this vague order of the Madras High Court and subsequently the suit was dismissed on 09.03.2007. My sisters preferred A.S. No.24/2007. By then five sisters’ case in O.S. No.409/2005 had already been filed challenging their illegal expulsion. So the trustees made an even greater jilebi and further clouded the understanding of the already confused judge. Obviously other factors, best left unsaid, were also instrumental for the outcome. On 09.04.2010, exactly 10 years from the day of the institution of O.S. No.24/2007, our appeal was dismissed. Since we were so bogged down with the issues relating to O.S. No.409/2005 we desisted from further appealing before the Hon’ble High Court.
So for about 10 long years we were constrained to fight a needless battle to satisfy the whims and fancies of the trustees attempting to prevent their highhandedness.