To, Date;
23.4.2015
H’ Acting Chief Justice,
Through
Registrar General,
P & H High Court Chandigarh.
SUB; Certified copy of Letter Dt 6.5.2005 of
Chief Justice B K Roy (retd) on file of CWP 6916/04.
Sir,
1. By way of CWP 6916/2004, petitioner
challenged UT Govt. allotment of 5.86 acres of prime land @ Rs 900 sq yards
whereas three years earlier the same UT Govt had allotted adjacent land to Bar
Council of India @ Rs 5,800 per sq yards. 2 sons of a judge were prime
stakeholders of allottee. The then Chief Justice B K Roy alongwith Judge Suryakant cancelled the allotment
vide order Dt 14.2.2005. Later a
mysterious 2nd order by J Suryakant appeared on the file (dismissing
the writ) after Chief Justice B K Roy had left. When this fact came to
knowledge of Chief Justice B K Roy, he immediately wrote a letter Dt 6.5.2005
to his successor, that the second order allegedly dated 14.2.2005 by J. Surya
kant was not on file when he left the High Court and neither pronounced in
court with main order. HCJ thus stated that J Suryakant had written a post
script order, (which amounts to fabrication of the judicial files of CWP
6916/2004 by J Suryakant {on account of favor and affection for kith and kin of
a judge}). HCJ B K Roy requested that his letter be kept on record of CWP
meaning thereby his letter be read with both the orders Dt 14.5.2005 as part of
Judicial record. The chief Justice agreed and ordered as under;-
Placed before me by the RG at the residence.
As desired be kept on the record of CWP 6916/2004 sd/- 6/5/05 8.30 pm.”
It was sent for compliance to JR(judicial),
then to DR (J) then to AR (J) and then to W/15 for compliance vide order Dt
7.5.05.
2. After
verifying that letter is on file and noting its contents, I applied for its
certified copy on 21.2.15 vide petition No 513068. Copy has not been supplied.
Surreptitious attempt is being made to hide truth and prevent its certified
copy being given. The following facts be noticed;
i) HCJ
B K Roy requested that his letter mentioning all the facts relating to order Dt
14.2.2005 be kept on record of CWP 6916/04 meaning thereby his letter be read
with both the orders Dt 14.5.2005 as part of Judicial record.
ii) Vide
order Dt 6.5.05, The then CJ directed its placement on file of CWP 6916/04 as
part of Judicial record relating to order Dt 14.205
iii) Letter
related to orders Dt 14.2.2005 ‘Part A’ was required to be mentioned in index
of ‘Part A’.
iv) Letter
was placed on record by dealing clerk who also prepared index. Whether clerk mentioned it in the index or
not is a mistake of clerk. Part A and Index is not prepared by Chief Justice.
Order Dt 6.5.05 of H Chief Justice cannot be negated by dealing clerk.
v) Photocopy
of Letter was published by a newspaper and is available with several
Journalists and lawyers social media and internet;
3. Letter
is required as evidence in CROCP 1/2012 to prove that J Suryakant is habitual
in violating law & fabricating records out of favor and affection for kith
and kin of judges to support the averment made by me qua CWP 10434/2010-subject
matter of CROCP wherein also he had changed the order of CM 5153/2011 to favor
kith and kin and vacated the confirmed stay the moment respondent changed the
advocate and hired kith and kin without any new facts or change of
circumstances. He kept the case with him by saying ‘part heard’ when case was
neither heard nor fixed for arguments. Part heard is not done in motion
matters. He then changed facts and statute to support his order.
4. After
receipt of show cause notice of CROCP, I inspected cause list register of J
Suryakant of few days. A cursory glance proved that he is habitually violating
majesty of law by passing orders in favor of few advocates mostly kith and kin
of judges. Stay is granted whenever they appear for petitioner and stay is
vacated whenever they appear for respondent. Law has NO relevance. In one case
when petitioner and respondent both hired kith and kin, he did not know what
order to pass and hence directed the matter to be placed before other bench.
5. Not
giving certified copy of document on record would amount to hiding truth. Our
national emblem says “sateya mev jayate”. High Court is not a place where truth
is hidden. Hiding corruption by one of its own members under the carpet is not
the solution. However much one may seek to conceal it, the bulge will show and
rise. Removing it; is the only solution. Hiding corruption only encourages it.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Let the document see the sunlight.
Prayer and requirement to uphold majesty of
law;
A) Certified
copy of letter Dt 6.5.2005 on judicial record of CWP 6916/04 be supplied to
undersigned.
B) Cases
where kith and kin of judges are appearing or have interest should NOT be
listed before J Suryakant unless both the parties have hired kith and kin of
judges.
Kapil Dev Aggarwal.
