OUR LETTER TO THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA

As a last recourse to get justice we have written a letter to the President of India. We hope that at least the Hon'ble President will intervene and help us. Let us wait and watch.

Blatant Misuse of Powers under Article 227 by Some Corrupt Madras High Court Judges

Together with the active help, support and willful wrong intervention of two judges of the Madras High Court, the trustees have legally harassed us using the backdoor entry under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. These judges are Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar. A gist of their misuse of discretionary power of supervision is cited below.

1. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.3314/2007, filed under Article 227 by the trustees on an interim petition granting food, shelter, clothing, medical and all other basic needs and necessities of life. He passed perverse order on 29.01.2008 containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
2. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.1/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for clarification, using for a second time Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a second time and passed perverse order dated 04.08.2008 illegally modifying his first order dated 29.01.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
3. Justice K. Venkataraman wrongly entertained M.P. No.2/2008 in C.R.P. No.3314/2007, again filed by trustees for a second clarification, for a third time, again using Article 227. He indiscriminately exercised his powers of supervision for a third time and passed perverse exparte order dated 21.06.2010 illegally modifying his first two orders dated 29.01.2008 and 04.08.2008, containing reliefs neither asked by the trustees nor by us.
4. Justice K. Venkataraman ought to have issued notices to us either through court or directed the trustees to issue private notices to us, in view of the fact that our lawyer had given up Vakalat. He unjustly passed an order dated 21.06.2010 in our absence without giving us a just and fair opportunity to defend ourselves.
5. Having appointed suo motto an Advocate Commissioner, Justice K. Venkataraman failed to base his order dated 21.06.2010 on the report of the Advocate Commissioner. He waited for about 1 ½ years from the date of submission of the report of the Advocate Commissioner to pass his order dated 21.06.2010. He passed exparte order after having unjustly eschewed the line contained in the report that clearly indicated the harassment and victimization caused by Ashram trustees to us.
6. The orders passed by Justice K. Venkataraman dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010, using his discretionary power of supervision under Article 227, are perverse, bad in law and were illegally modified under guise of clarification to metamorphose into an eviction proceeding which was not the prayer of the trustees in any of their petitions in the first place.
7. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees, once again under Article 227. They blatantly misused discriminatory supervisory powers and admitted the CRP since the trustees had failed to prefer an appeal at the Pondicherry Appellate Authority and had jumped the necessary legal steps before approaching High Court.
8. Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar wrongly entertained C.R.P. No.4219/2010 filed by the trustees under Article 227, on an interim petition restoring food and shelter to us since the third party had failed to comply with the Order dated 21.06.2010.
9. Justice S. Manikumar passed perverse order dated 03.08.2012 in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 disregarding the principles of natural justice, balance of convenience and facts and circumstances of the case. He based his order dated 03.08.2012 by further modifying the three illegal orders already passed in C.R.P. No.3314 of 2007 dated 29.01.2008, 04.08.2008 and 21.06.2010 by Justice K. Venkataraman, by colluding with him.
10. Justice S. Manikumar passed final order after more than one year (containing two summer vacations) of hearing the final arguments. He failed to appreciate the case in C.R.P. No.4219/2010 on its own merits because the facts and circumstances and cause of action were different from those in C.R.P. No.3314/2010 and deserved impartial and independent evaluation of the case.
11. Since trial in O.S. No.409/2005 had already begun and was underway, Justice K. Venkataraman and Justice S. Manikumar ought to have waited for the final outcome of the trial before passing orders dated 21.06.2010 and 03.08.2012. They wrongly entertained revisions on interim injunction petitions, exercised discriminate supervisory powers under Article 227 and passed outright eviction orders, a prayer neither made by the trustees nor by us, resulting in an absolutely blatant miscarriage of justice.

Justice S. Manikumar - Another Compromised Judge?

Even though the police had assisted the trustees in illegally stopping our food they abstained from assisting us to get back our food at Ashram Dining Room. In fact even our complaints for the assault on 22.07.2010 on us by some inmates were registered only under the Magistrate Court’s directions.

The trustees transparent acts of malice and duplicity came to light when knowing fully well and having received the letter dated 25.07.2010 from the Warden of Jenny Working Women’s Hostel, the trustees sent money orders to Jenny Hostel’s address for all of us, but their correspondences to us were all sent at the Ambabhikshu House address, wherein we were still residing.

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.

Trustees approached directly Justice K. Venkataraman and filed C.R.P. No.4219/2010 and Contempt No.1483/2010 against we five sisters. In fact in Contempt Petition No.1483/2010 Justice K. Venkataraman even named Mrs. R. Vasanthi (the upright judge of PDM who had passed order for restoring food and all other facilities). Thank god some sense prevailed and he did not pursue his vengeance against this most honorable judge.

However Justice K. Venkatarman went on harassing and intimidating my lawyer at Madras High Court, who with great difficulty managed to transfer both C.R.P. No.4219/2010 and Contempt No.1483/2010 to another bench consisting of Justice S. Manikumar.

Justice S. Manikumar also played foul because he was scared of his senior namely Justice K. Venkatarman and in any event corrupt judges always stick together and watch out each other’s back. Anyhow Justice S. Manikumar heard the arguments on both sides in April 2011. He did not record any contempt on our side but he took offence since we had used the word illegal while speaking of High Court order in our counter in the proceedings. We apologized for this mistake.

Generally High Courts and Supreme Court orders are dictated then and there in the open court, at least the directive part. But Justice Manikumar failed to follow procedure. He posted the matter for orders and after more than a year, past two summer vacations, he passed an even more malafide order dated 03.08.2012, not only upholding Justice K. Venkatarman’s order but modifying it still further and literally ordering eviction on an interim petition revision.

Justice K. Venkataraman Illegally Modifies his Own Orders - Misuse of Article 227

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.

Golconde Guest House as Alternate Accommodation

Meanwhile the trustees preferred an appeal in C.M.A. No. 35/2005 against the interim order dated 10.06.2005 at Appellate Authority Pondicherry. Trustees’ Appeal was dismissed on 30.01.2007 and the Trial Court Order dated 10.06.2005 was upheld since the balance of convenience was in our favor.

The trustees then preferred a revision at the Madras High Court in C.R.P. No.3314/2007 challenging the dismissal of their appeal on 30.01.2007. Justice K. Venkataraman was the presiding judge who openly sided with the trustees. In fact he repeatedly told our lawyer that the girls should be taught a lesson of how life is lived outside the Ashram!

Trial Court order dated 10.06.2005 and Appellate Court order dated 30.01.2007 did not suffer from any legal infirmity and were based on principles of natural justice as well as balance of convenience.In spite of no question of law being raised by the trustees, much less a legal infirmity, Justice K. Venkataraman, under the guise of showing concern for us by stating that when trial commences the girls will be further harassed and in order to safeguard the girls’ interests it would be better if they changed residence, passed order on 29.01.2008 directing us to reside in some other accommodation other than in Ambabhikshu House.

This was not the relief sought for by the trustees in their C.R.P. No.3314/2007 and definitely not by us. But since we were helpless we complied with Justice K. Venkataraman’s malafide order dated 29.01.2008. 

‘Golconde Guest House’ is a guest house maintained by the Ashram for visitors and some inmates.We requested to be accommodated at ‘Golconde Guest House’ till the trial was over. As far as food was concerned the question did not arise and Ashram Dining Room could continue as before. We also asked for a reasonable sum of Rs.100/- per day to be paid to each one of us to meet the expenses of our daily needs and necessities since our ‘Prosperity’ had been stopped.

Suresh Chandra De (retd. IPS) Comes to his senses – Thank God

After still more vague Order dated 29.10.2001 passed by Mr. Justice P.D. Dinakaran in C.R.P. No. 2230/2001 & No. 2534/2001 in O.S.No.253/2001, trustees proceeded to conduct an enquiry against my four elder sisters while O.S. No.253/2001 was still pending. The trustees appointed one Mr. Suresh Chandra De, a retired police officer who had settled in Pondicherry, as the enquiry officer.

Suresh De, without going into the facts and circumstances of the case, issued my four elder sisters notice of enquiry. We issued a Legal Notice to Suresh De against this enquiry but he did not desist. We were constrained to file an interim petition in O.S. No.253/2001 against the trustees and Suresh De, for directing them to stop this enquiry.

The trustees rushed to the Madras High Court and filed a contempt petition. Trustees issued us personal notice informing us to be present when the matter would be heard by Mr. Justice P.D. Dinakaran. We appeared on 27.11.2002 and Matriprasad was also present in the court hall. Justice Dinakaran loudly asked Matriprasad from his high seat demanding to know why we ladies had been called since he had not issued any notice of contempt. Matriprasad had no reply.

Thereafter Mr. Justice Dinakaran orally directed Matriprasad that matters should be settled out of court by the trustees. A series of attempts for reconciliations were made but since the trustees repeatedly denied having caused us harassment and victimization, all the attempts failed. 

Good sense has prevailed at last as Mr. Suresh Chandra De desists from conducting any enquiry and we also did not press our interim petition against him in good faith.

Today Justice P.D. Dinakaran has dismissed the Contempt Petition filed by the trustees and no contempt was recorded against my four elder sisters.

Constitution of Civil Suit in O.S. No.668/2002

A third enquiry (by the trustees’ count) was constituted for the same alleged misconduct leveled against me by the trustees – 

1. “in camera enquiry” (no documents as yet produced to show its proceedings)
2. Mr. K. Natarajan’s enquiry having Vijay Poddar as presenting officer (report not furnished though concluded)
3. Mr. Menon’s enquiry illegally initiated by Madras High Court because of trustees’ deliberate misrepresentation, leniency shown due to spiritual institution, and …sous-entendu.

All the three enquiries found me to be guilty though no evidence was produced. In fact Mr. Menon went to the extent to state that it did not matter who made me pregnant without first ascertaining the fact whether I was pregnant. As per him I could have been made pregnant by Manoj Das Gupta himself if I so chose to claim.

And even better was the hilarious conclusion which Mr. Menon came to that having become pregnant in the end of year 2000 (implying November or December 2000) I was found to be 6-7 months pregnant by 10.01.2001 (implying within 2-3 months). As per Mr. Menon’s conclusion I have achieved a medical miracle!

It is also interesting to note that Matriprasad was the presenting officer for the trustees since Vijay Poddar, Sri Aurobindo Society, did not wish to be dragged into their nasty web at the cost of his reputation for a second time.

Mr. Menon submitted to my lawyer at Madras/Chennai a copy of the perverse undated report. On 08.11.2002 I collected this perverse report. Knowing fully well the modus operandi of the trustees, before they could take action based on the impugned report and expel me for a third time (by trustees’ count) I challenged the same today by filing O.S. No.668/2002 before the Hon’ble I Additional District Munsif at Pondicherry.