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.