To, Date;
11.8.2014
Registrar (E-1),
Punjab and Haryana High Court,
Chandigarh.
Sub; Complaint against jagjit
Singh Supdt Liquidation branch for corruption/falsification of records of High
Court /dereliction of duty/ amounting to major misconduct.
Sir,
1 Jagjit
Singh is employed in liquidation branch nonstop since 2006 first as Sr.
assistant on 19.7.2006, than as Superintendent Grade-II since 19.5.2010 till
date. He was dealing with correspondence to and from Official Liquidator
attached with High Court and judicial and administrative files. Vide letter Dt
22.1.14 I had given information regarding corruption by D P Ojha Official
Liquidator and jagjit Singh of upto Rs 500 crores scam in High Court on
inter-alia following grounds;-
Non preparation of inventory at time of
possession by D P Ojha Official Liquidator which later facilitates theft by him
in league with some employees of High Court including Jagjit Singh. Staff of D
P Ojha seals the units, then D P Ojha sends in men with officials seal who then
steal the assets and re-seal the units. Difference
in the date of possession and date of inventory of all companies is evidence of
embezzlement of its assets. In matter of Altos India, Security agency M/s
CD security informed this court about theft by staff of Official Liquidator who
had come to steal assets and were also in possession of official seal given by
to them by official Liquidator. Justice Swatantar Kumar ordered registration of
FIR. Both members of then staff Mr Datta and Mr Krishan were recently convicted
by trial court. Same is situation in all cases. CD security who gave
information was depaneled. Now such security agencies are given work who
participate and allow theft by official liquidator D P Ojha and do not inform
his misdeeds to Court. To avoid favoritism, Justice Swatantar kumar vide order
Dt 28.5.1998 in CP 49/98 had ordered seriatim engagement of security agencies.
b). Payments
in names of security guards who have never been born. False names are given
without any proof of identity and later salaries are claimed in their names.
Enquiry report in case of claim of Rs 1.5 crores in PNFC is C-1. D P Ojha had
to return back amount to PSIDC (CP 53/12). Same is situation in all cases.
There is no proof of employment /existence of any security guard in any
company. The amounts are misappropriated by D P ojha in league with others
including Jagjit Singh.
c) In
first instance inventory is delayed and later even inventoried assets are
stolen by D P Ojha in league with some
employees including Jagjit Singh. In order to hide their own theft, they lodge
FIRs against unknown persons. Copies of some recent instances of FIRs are C-2.
OL states in reply under RTI, that, I should seek only a reasonable number of
FIRs.
d)
Sale of assets without
mentioning reserve price. Norms were laid by High
Court in CP 220/05 wherein mentioning of
reserve price was must. On 4/5.8.14 (CA 405/14), a property sought to be sold
by OL for Rs 37.5 lacs got sold for Rs 60 Lacs i.e. 60% more which is evidence
that sales done by D P Ojha are at much below realizable price. This does not
happen in other courts firstly because property is sold above reserve price and
secondly full amount is taken before seeking confirmation. Jagjit Singh
deliberately does not point out above violations during confirmation
proceedings.
e) D P Ojha does not file valuations on
record. Difference between valuations and sale price is amount of
misappropriation. Jagjit Singh deliberately does not point out concealment of
valuations which proves deriving personal benefit out of sale of assets of
companies in liquidation.
2 Scam
is upto Rs 500 crores. Amount can be determined by verification of records of
companies in Liquidation. Till date no
one has verified the records of companies in liquidation. D P Ojha is rich and
influential. D P Ojha says that
no harm can come to him as he pays monthly commission to some persons in High
Court including Jagjit Singh who protect his interests.
3. After
I raised heat in above matters by informing this court by my letter Dt
22.1.2014 and previous letters, D P Ojha moved the present OLR 11 of 2014
trying to seek amendments to previous orders of company Judges and proposed
changes in norms (R/6) for security agencies by hiding certain facts. I wrote a
letter Dt 4.8.2014 to Hon’ble Company Judge copy of which is (enclosed as C-3)
with request to hear me or issue notice to me.
4. Following
facts prove connivance of jagjit Singh in fraud, criminal conspiracy in theft
and misappropriation of assets of companies in Liquidation by D P Ojha;-
A. The
files of urgent cases are sent to Court a day earlier i.e. they should have
been sent on 7.8.2014. I went in morning to Liquidation branch and found that
file of OLR 11/2014 was lying on table of Jagjit Singh and had not been sent
with other files too chambers/court a day earlier. My letter was still attached
with file at top. This itself is prove of his connivance with D P Ojha as he
did not wanted the judge to read my letter before hearing the matter.
B. Then
following conversation then took place with Jagjit Singh;-
KD Aggarwal; “I have being pointing out since 2009 that no
security guards are ever appointed in any case have I been able to prove this
since then.”
Jagjit Singh; “Yes it has been proved, but I am not
involved.” (He is defending himself without any allegation on him which itself
is proof of admission of his guilt.)
KD Aggarwal; “Have I been able to proof theft of assets
in all cases.”
Jagjit Singh; “Yes it has been proved, but I am not
taking any money from D P Ojha.” (He is defending himself without any
allegation on him which itself is proof of admission of his guilt.)
KD Aggarwal; “Non preparation of inventory at time of
possession, Is’nt it shocking?”
Jagjit Singh; “What do you want?”
KD Aggarwal; “Have you read my letter?”
Jagjit Singh; “Yes I have read.”
KD Aggarwal; “Have you read OLR 11/2014.”
Jagjit Singh; “Yes I have read.”
KD Aggarwal; “In R/6, D P Ojha now wants the previous
orders to be amended regarding ID proofs and inventory and seriatim. Is’nt it
shocking?”
Jagjit Singh; “I have seen everything. All the orders
that you have mentioned have been attached by D P Ojha and D P Ojha is not
seeking any change in norms? Just consolidation at one place. I will point out
your letter during hearing.”
KD Aggarwal; (According to my information certain crucial
norms were sought to be changed / removed altogether by concealing certain
orders/letters/facts so then I asked him) “Alright, you have been saying that you
are honest and not part of liquidation scam, show me from OLR that D P Ojha has
attached orders of Justice N K Sud Dt 30.10.2003 and circulation of letter Dt
15.9.2003 i.e. previous norms, orders of Justice S S Nijjar and also show me
from Annexure 6 that norms regarding (a)- preparation of inventory at time of
possession, (b) submission of ID proofs of security guards at time of
engagement (c) seriatim appointment of security agency and suggestions of
Justice N K Sud about time bound direction for sale (all of which are the core
of security of assets of companies in liquidation) are in the proposal R/6 made
by him. This will prove you to be honest and I can go home and sleep firm in
belief that nothing wrong will happen.”
Jagjit Singh; (At this, he got enraged, he started
shouting, abusing and threatening me. He said “You get out from MY Branch, who are you to interfere in my
functioning?. Tere khilaaf mein action kara deanga. Tun kutt khani hai meton”
Teri vigilance inquiry kara deanga, main bahut powerful hain”. He used such
words which I do not want to write, he had completely lost his mind and temper.
I left so as not to precipitate matter further. I am informed that later he was instigating other staff members
to file a counter complaint against me as he knows that I will be informing
this incident to authorities. It is better that CCTV Cameras be installed in branches to keep watch on corrupt, violent
and abusive staff/others.
C) It is evident that Jagjit Singh is part of
nexus indulging in theft of assets, misappropriation of property and public
funds in league with D P Ojha which is proved when he lied. The orders of Justice N K Sud Dt 30.10.2003,
circulation of letter Dt 15.9.2003, orders of Justice S S Nijjar which I
wanted him to show and which Jagjit Singh said are on file of OLR 11/2014 may not be on file of OLR
11/2014, The norms which I wanted him to show and which Jagjit Singh said are
part of R/6 i.e. norms regarding (a)-
preparation of inventory at time of possession, (b) submission of ID proofs of
security guards at time of engagement (c) seriatim appointment of security
agency and suggested time bound direction for sale (all of which are the core to
security of assets of companies in liquidation) may not be actually part
of R/6. Since he had indulged in falsification and outright lies, hence got
enraged when I challenged him to show from records that what he was saying is
true His words and actions never match. he is/was indulging in falsification
and lies.
D) Jagjit
Singh was the reader of company matters. Company matters began at 3 PM, I
remained sitting in the court the entire time. When the matter No 110 came-up
for hearing, jagjit Singh concealed my
letter Dt 4.8.2014 from the Judge. (I was not a party so I could not say
anything).
E) Concealment
of material facts/ letters/norms and outright lies/ falsification about
contents of OLR 11/2014 and annexure R/6, language, threats, criminal
intimidation are proof of theft. Misappropriation, embezzlement of assets of
and public funds of companies in Liquidation and misbehaviors amounting to
moral turpitude. He can afford to lose the job as he has made personal benefit
by sharing commissions from theft, misappropriation and embezzlement of assets.
of companies in Liquidation. He was enraged that I knew about some of the
contents of OLR 11/2014.
5. He
concealed my letter Dt 4.8.2014 and previous material orders of Justice N K Sud
alongwith norms circulated by Letter Dt 15.9.2014 and orders of Justice SS
Nijjar etc which would have thrown light on real motive of D P Ojha in moving
OLR 11/14. Above orders which I had requested the branch to attach with my
letter could have been very material in assisting the Company Judge in lifting
the veil and exposing the nefarious intentions of D P Ojha in making OLR 11/ of
2014 which actually seek amendment of previous orders on the same subject.
Perusal of previous norms and orders of Justice N K Sud and justice SS Nijjar
could have scuttled the very attempt of D P Ojha in asking for the amendments
of previous orders. He has said that there are difficulties in previous norms
without mentioning what is difficulty in (a)- preparation of inventory, (b)
submission of ID proofs of security guard (c) seriatim appointment of security
agency and suggested time bound direction for sale (all of which are the core
of matter of security of assets of companies in liquidation) alleged
difficulties were as fictitious as the like fictitious security guards which D
P Ojha falsely created to get rid of earlier orders/norms already circulated
and make this court a party in the fraud and misappropriation of assets of
companies in liquidation about which I have been writing since 2009. I am an
expert in the matter of Official Liquidator and copy of letter written by
Insolvency section, Ministry of corporate affairs, Govt of India seeking my
suggestions about office of official liquidator and their manual is enclosed as
C-4. Predecessor of Company Judge i.e. Justice Rajiv N. Raina had barred jagjit
Singh from handling judicial/court files.
It is therefore prayed;-
1. Action be taken against Jagjit Singh for interfering in the administration of Justice. Sec 2c of Contempt of Courts Act states;
2 (c)
criminal contempt" means the publication (whether by words. spoken or
written, or by signs, or by visible representations, or otherwise) of any
matter or the doing of any other act whatsoever which-
(i) scandalises or tends to scandalise, or
lowers or tends to lower the authority of, any court; or
(ii) prejudices, or interferes or tends to
interfere with, the due course of any judicial proceeding; or
(iii) interferes or tends to interfere with,
or obstructs or tends to obstruct, the administration of justice in any other
manner;
2. Such
disciplinary action be taken against Jagjit Singh as deemed fit.
KD Aggarwal
Advocate.
No comments:
Post a Comment