Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

ramarao balla (Marketing Officer)     20 June 2011

Arguments

As I informed earlier, now I am posting my written arguments . kindly offer your remarks.

WRITTEN ARGUMENTS

(Against SLPs  No 11695 & 11696 of 2011 on 04-Jul-2011 )

My Lords,

1.    I, Balla Rama Rao, am the Petitioner-In-Person to argue the SLPs No.11695 & 11696 of 2011.

2.    It is very well known fact to Every One  that an Order or a Legality of any Activity consists the conditions of both Right and Responsibility. If any one  of these two conditions not considered before passing the Order/confirms that it is a Legal on the specific activity, then the entire activity/process is 100% illegal.

3.    In my case, the activities are fallen under the categories of (a) Prior to Enquiry Stage (b) Enquiry Stage (c) After Enquiry Stage (d) After Single Judge’s Order.

4.    If any violation done by the Respondents in the activities of Prior to Enquiry Stage then all the further stage activities will be 100% illegal.

5.    The Lower Court must verify the violations done by the Respondents  in the activities of Prior to Enquiry Stage when I have brought the notice to the lower Court. Actually, the case will be finalised at this stage only.

6.    I am ready to prove that the Respondents’ Information/Arguments for any period (Past/Present/Future) is/are 100% illegal as the Reader of their Information/ the Listener of their Arguments may feel that there is 100% truth as it fulfills one of the condition of the Right of the legality of an activity and the Reader/the Listner may not question the condition of Responsibility of legality of an activity as the lower Court did. Actually, it will be known to any one that their Information/Arguments is/ are 100% illegal, if we raise the question of the condition of Responsibility of legality of that activity.

7.    The Violations done by the Respondents for which they have to provide  the Proofs for the Activities:

I. Prior to Enquiry Stage are:   

(1) MD has transferred me from Factory to Baroda by assigning

              the duties. Here, we can find:

            (a) His Right is : Ordering me to report at Baroda by  assigning

                                         the  duties.(Kindly Refer Page Nos from  33 to 34)

            (b) His Responsibility is: Providing the information as                 

                    requested in my letter. (Kindly Refer Page Nos from  38 to 46)

           (c) My Argument/Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: Due

                 to non fulfillment of MD’s responsibility ( Here, we can find                     

                 the Charge  Sheet  instead of his Reply)  on the above                    

                 activity,there is no legality to this activity and resulted that

                 confirms that MD has misused his power namely, Transfer with

                 Malafide Intention.

     (2) MD has confirmed that he has postponed my transfer.

              (Kindly Refer Page Nos from 58 to 60)  Here, we can find:

              (a)His Right is : Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)

              (b)His Responsibility is:He must accept any one of my  request.

              (c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity:MD has not accepted 

                  any one of my request on transfer. Due to non fulfillment of MD’s

                  responsibility on the above activity,there  is no legality to this

                  activity and resulted that confirms that MD has told lie and it

                  attracts legal  punishment.             

          (3)MD  has confirmed that the Disciplinary Authority has  a legal

              power’. Here, we can find:

              (a)His Right is : Informing the above information that he has  

                  power on delegation on Disciplinary Authority on  or before     

                  14-Sep-1999.

              (b)His Responsibility is: Providing the Documentary Evidence   

                   that he    has the  power on or before 14-Sep-1999 by getting          

                   the power from the Board with amendment on Disciplinary       

                   Authority of the CDA Rules of the Company.Actually he has

                   gotten his power on 07-Dec-1999.

          (c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: Due to non                 

              fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the above activity,there

              is no legality to this activity and resulted that confirms that

              MD has misguided the Reader/Listener by providing the

              false date of his right.

          (4)MD has  confirmed that the  Charge Sheet (05-Oct-1999) was very

              clear  without any ambiguity.(Kindly refer page nos from 47 to 50)

              Here, we can find:

              (a)His Right is : He has the power to issue the charge sheet.

              (b)His Responsibility is:Providing the allegations against each

                  charge    and must not add additional charges.

         (c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: All the charges are

             stated  in one place and closed  with  mentioning all the  charges

             and added additionally two charges seperately. Due to non 

             fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the above activity,there is no

             legality to this activity and resulted that confirms that MD has

             misguided the reader by providing the false proforma  of the

             Charge Sheet that violates the employee’s right (Article 311 (2) )

             that  to know what he  has done wrong.

II. Enquiry Stage are:

(1) MD  has confirmed that the Enquiry procedure was followed

          Here, we can find:

         (a)His Right is :Informing that he has followed the enquiry

              procedure.

         (b)His Responsibility is:He must  issue the charge sheet as per    

              CDA Rule No.26.3 of the Company and must get report by

              giving the place to reply  from the Employee and if not

             satisfied with this report or Employee  has failed to submit his

             reply within the specified time,  he may recruit the Enquiry     

             Officer to conduct  an Enquiry.

                   (c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity: He has not issued the              

                       Charge Sheet legally  even though I request ( Kindly Refer Page

                       Nos from 51 to 57) and has not provided the place to give the

                       reply. Due  to non fulfillment of MD’s responsibility on the      

                       above activity,there  is no legality to this activity and resulted

                       that confirms that MD has violated the  Freedom of Speech     

                       (Article 19) and it attracts legal punishment.

III. After the Enquiry Stage:

(1) MD has confirmed that the Enquiry Report was 100% legal as all the charges  were proved. So, We passed on Order for Discharge (Kindly Refer  Page Nos from 67 to 69)   Here, we can find:

              (a)His Right is :  Issuing the Discharge Order.

              (b)His Responsibility is:He must prove that his Counter Affidavit

                  (CA) and the Enquiry Report (ER) have 100% legal information.

              (c)Legal Remark on Legality of this activity:After deep study of 

                  CA  and ER by comparing with the Reply Affidavit, it is found

                  that  these two have 100% illegal information. So there is no

                  legality to this activity and has no value in law.

IV. After Single Judge’s Order:

             (1)MD has informed to the lower Court that:

                 (i)The petitioner is working in a Private Engineering College at   

                     Vijayawada.

      (ii)The Petitioner took money to report  at Baroda in 1999.

            (iii)No complaint was made to implement the Continuity of

              Service and other  Attendant Benefits.

           (iv)The Petitioner is not an Employee as on Date (13-Dec-2010)     

                 Here, we can find (for all the above activities):

             (a)His Right is: Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)

             (b)His Responsibility is:Providing  the Documentary evidences/the

                 proofs   against the above acivities.

             (c)Legal Remark on Legality of these activities:MD has not provided

                 the proofs. So, there  is no legality to these activities and resulted   

                 that   confirms that MD has told lie and it attracts legal

                 punishment.

           (2)MD has been withholding the Employee’s benefits like

                Increment,Promotion (since DOJ) Transfer, Job Descripttion, SLs,

                ELs, Casual Leaves etc, etc,. by simply treating me as a Casual

                Labour instead of  Permanent Employee by not implementing the

                continuity of service with other attendant benefits which was the  

               part and parcel of the Single Judge’s Order dated 24-Oct-2007 since

                Reinstatement. Here we can find:

        (a) His Right is : He can appeal against this Order.

        (b) His Responsibility is: He must implement this Order as stated in 

                                                 CC 1298/’10 till his Appeal is finalised.

        (c)Legal Remark on Legality of ths activity: He can not  take an

            advantage to negate the  part  and parcel of this Order by simply

            appealing.Due to non fulfillment of his responsibility,he must be

            punished U/S 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Court Act. Here, the 

            so,  funny thing is that the lower Court has set aside this case (CC)

            based on his lies instead of awarding the punishment. I heartfully

            beg this Court to rectify the lower Court’s mistake.

     (3)MD has simply influenced the mind of Judges of the  lower Court

         by informing the false information with lies to set aside my WA

         420/’08 ( to negate my Back Wages ) and to allow his WA 63/’08( to

         remove my Job).Here we can find:

   (a) His Right is: Informing the above information ( in “—ve“ sense)

   (b)His Responsibility is:He must prove that his information ( CA,ER,his  

       Affidavits, Arguments,etc) is 100% legal to remove my job and to

       negate my backwages.

    (c)Legal Remark on Legality of ths activity: After deep study of  CA , ER

        and his Affidavits by comparing with the Reply Affidavit, it is found

        that these three have 100% illegal information and his arguments

        were 100% lies and He has tried to mislead the lower Court to get

        judgment in favourable to him that attracts Legal Punishment. So

        there is no legality to this activity and has no value in law. Here, the 

        so, funny thing is that the lower Court has set aside my WA 420/’08

        and partly allowed his WA 63/’08 based on his lies with false

        information instead of allowing my WA  by setting aside his WA. I

        heartfully beg this Court to rectify the lower Court’s mistake.

8. The Court must verify the actvities’( Prior to Enquiry Stage)  legality that whether the Respondent has fulfilled his responsibility or not in Correlation to his right .

9. So, requesting the required information is 100% legal activity. The Respondents must not negate my every request having the subject ( “Kindly allow me to work either at HO or at Factory”) and the lower Court must consider the above requests to pass an  order for backwages as prayed in my WA 420/’08, to set aside their WA 63/’08.

10. Here,  MD has not fulfilled his responsibility against the assigned duties.It confirms that he has misused the power.By misusing the power,he can not claim judgment in favour to him  and should not harass me both mentally and financially by using the Constitutional Body as his own weapon by simply filing the case (Actually, he must not file any case by violating the rules against me U/S 3 (viii & ix) of POA 1989 as I belong to Scheduled Caste Community. He has been harassing me since 1997.No one has the right to harass any one. How can he harass me up to today?), by having the illegal intention that the Court may not ask his responsibility and simply remit the case to the enquiry stage.These type of people will be fallen under the category of ‘SILENT ESCAPERS’ namely, Violate the law and Act as  law implementers.

11. In most of the Cases, the lower  Court(s) remits the case again to the Stage of Enquiry very bluntly as passed in my case without verifying the legality of the activities Prior to the Enquiry Stage.How can the lower Court gives judge status again to the Silent Escapers instead of awarding the punishment? These Silent Escapers are more dangerous than Direct Killers ( Here we can find the Court awards punishment to killers then why does the Court not award punishment to these Silent Escapers?) as they harass the Employee and his family members.We see many of the Employees lives are spoiled by these Silent Escapers by deciding to Sucide either the entire family or the Employee as faced these worst situations in my life.Who is responsible their suicide decision/activity? Here, the Silent Escapers. To give the real justice  to those Employees or his family members, I  most respecrfully beg  this Court to review  all the cases filed in India  to give judgment in time (not more than 6 months) to the Petitioners by rectifying the lower Court’s mistakes to implement the Rules/Orders as set by itself to save these Petitioners  from these  Silent Escapers.

12. Here, the lower Court has not considered the condition of Responsibility as explained above and  has passed the Order favourably  to the Respondents without verifying the legality  of the Transfer and  the Subsequent activities. It means that the lower Court has confirmed  that the activities Prior to the Enquiry Stage are legal.How can  the lower Court confirms that  their activities Prior to Enquiry Stage are legal without checking the conditions of legality of an activity?. The lower Court must not show any partiality as every one is Equal before law till the case is finalised. The lower Court has shown partiality in my case.When the Petitioner approaches the lower Court, It must consider the maintanance of Employee’s Family. The lower Court must pass an Order to get Salary by serving till the case is finalised or the Court must pass the Order to both the parties (MD and my Self) not to enter the Company’s Premses till the case is finalised.The lower Court has neither done.The case must be finalised not more than 6 months.But it has taken  round about 11 and half years in my case (including  WP/CC/WAs) only for verifying the legality’s conditions  for the activities prior to the enquiry stage.

13.Most of the Enquiry Officers, who are panel members of CVC are spoiling the Employees lives as spoiled my life by giving false Reports without considering the conditions of the legality of the actvity and their Role Existency as per the procedure of the  Enquiry.It is the responsibility of CVC to get reports and verify the legality’s conditions and make  the right report to submit  to this Court to award legal punishment to Silent Escapers.

14. It is deeply proved that all the activities of the Respondents are 100% illegal in my Reply Affidavit in WP13295/2000. With out Studying my Reply Affidavit, passing Orders by the lower Court is 100% illegal. I most respectfully beg this Court: (a) to rectify the mistakes of the lower Court, (b) to implement its Orders/Rules to provide  the real Justice to its appraochers and to save them  from these Silent Escapers.

 

 

 

That’s all my Lords.

Thanks my Lords.

 

 

 

(Rama Rao Balla)

Petitioner-In Person

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Learning

 0 Replies


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register