Registrar judicial illegally denies certified copy of decided case.

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 2^nd 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;

http://archive.tehelka.com/story_main12.asp?filename=ts061105Judgement_after.asp

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.