See the Advertisements of Naveen Patnaik; See the Reality

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

The Sun was cutting through Bhubaneswar, the Capital City of Orissa, with its piercing rays.

Public Works Department was repairing a government quarter through a contractor.

With the 3 months old child on her flanks, a mother was toiling to earn her food for a day.

And, Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik was launching his electioneering with blowing the conch of his success!

Narendra Modi: The issue is human rights of his wife

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

What would be the response of Election Commission to allegation of Congress against Narendra Modi in matter of his affidavit on his marital status is a politico-administrative action to watch.

But on the basis of confession of Mr. Modi that he has married and abandoned his wife after two months of marriage, the issue is human rights of his wife.

Conjugal rights of a married person is a vital part of his/her human rights. Mrs. Modi’s conjugal rights are totally violated as Modi has abandoned her after two months of marriage.

For violation of human rights of any member of human society, the society has always insisted upon action against contravener of human rights and the Human Rights Commission has also taken action.

Therefore, the BJP’s assertion that marriage being a personal matter of Modi, the nation has nothing to worry, is not tenable.

It is a fit case for National Human Rights Commission to initiate action against Modi on the basis of his confession in the public that after two months of marriage he has abandoned his wife, such abandonment having shattered Mrs.Modi’s human rights as a married woman.

Forgery on Gopabandhu’s Will: Cuttack District Judge Office looks like its breeding bed! Orissa High Court should look at it

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Article 227 of the Constitution of India has given the power of superintendence over all the Courts of a State to the State’s High Court. Therefore, I urge upon the High Court of Orissa to look at what has happened in the office of the Cuttack District Judge in the matter of the State’s most precious document – the last Will of Utkalmani Pandit Gopabandhu Das. The said office of judiciary looks like a breeding bed of forgery.

People’s faith in judiciary will be lost if influential persons freely tamper with or replace an original Will with forged ones and/or escape law by using the fake/forged Will in legal forums by projecting the same as the certified copies thereof granted by the District Judge.

The offense is too serious to be ignored.

I have discussed earlier in this site why I suspect that Gopabandhu’s last Will has been suppressed or destroyed by Radhanath Rath, a servant of Gopabandhu, who thereafter had eventually grabbed the editorship of his paper-The Samaja – after manufacturing a forged Will of Gopabandhu with the help of Lingaraj Mishra; and how the Servants of the People Society (SoPS) has taken over The Samaja to its ownership by using the fake Will.

In order to reach the reality, I had tried to legally obtain a certified copy of Gopabandhu’s Will, projected as probated by the District Judge of Cuttack in Misc. Case No. 42 of 1928. I had filed the application for the certified copy on 21 August 2013, which was registered as Copy Application No. 353A.

As the same did not fetch any result till 7 April 2014, despite meeting the District Judge in his chamber several times, a colleague of mine in ‘Save The Samaja Forum’ used RTI to know of the whereabouts of the Probated Will of Gopabandhu.

RTI RESPONSEIn answering to the RTI query, the State Asst. Public Information Officer-cum-Sheristadar, District Judge Court, Cuttack has informed that “the Will of Pandit Gopabandhu Das probated in Misc. Case 42/1928 is not available” as the said Will “has been sent to the Office of the District Judge, Berhampur and received by the Sheristadar of the said Office on 02.04.1936.”

CERTIFICATION OF THE WILLThis information makes the situation more intriguing, as I have found out in course of research that the same office of the District Judge, Cuttack has issued a certified true copy of the probated Will on 9.1.1996 to an applicant, which has been used in a case.

When the Will is “not available” in the office of the District judge, Cuttack since 2.4.1936, as it has been “sent to the Office of the District Judge, Berhampur and received by the Sheristadar of the said Office” on that date, how could the said District Judge office issued a stamped certified copy of the Will on 9.1.1996?

Was it then manufactured in the District Judge Office?

This question needs be looked into by the High Court of Orissa.

A further point that deserves attention is that, when this certified copy shows that the Will was probated on 20.9.1930, another copy of the Will, used by the SoPS and its life members as certified copy of the Will, shows that the same was probated on 7.9.1929. The date of copy of this Will is 27. 3. 1958. If the Will of Gopabandhu is not available in the Office of the District Judge, Cuttack since 2.4.1936, where from this so-called true copy emanated?

This question needs be looked into by the High Court of Orissa.

And, how the Will of Gopabandhu was probated on two different dates – 20.9.1930 and 7.9.1929 in the same probate case bearing No.42/1928?

This question too craves attention of the High Court of Orissa.

amend will - order of probateIt is baffling that the probate order dated 7.9.1929 covers a Will that it mentions as “amend Will”.

Pandit Gopabandhu had died after dictating his Will to Radhanath Rath, as per eye-witnessed accounts of Pandit Nilakantha Das. The Will probated on 20. 9. 1930 as per stamped certified true copy dated 9.1.1996 is written by Lingaraj Mishra. Yet again, the Will probated on 7.9.1929 is written by the same Lingaraj Mishra. How could the District Judge in the same 42/1928 case grant probate to the “amend Will”, when the Will filed on 15.12.1928 was kept pending till 20.9.1930?

This question needs be looked into by the High Court of Orissa.

The point to be noted is that, if at all the Will probated on 7.9.1929, was the Will dictated by Gopabandhu in his death bed, he had not amended the will after his death. So the “amend Will” doesn’t deserve any credence. Was it real and really probated?

This question needs be looked into by the High Court of Orissa.

Both the avatars of the Will seems to be stark instances of forgeries in which the District Judge office of Cuttack has played the role of breeding bed.

This is a serious offense against the people of Orissa.

The High Court of Orissa, being the Court of superintendence, should immediately take cognizance of this matter and institute a time-bound inquiry to find out the truth and to take action against everybody- alive or dead – if forgery is ascertained and to ensure that the people of this State are not left in the lurch to bear with judiciary’s suspected role in forgery of this type.

This is really urgent.

EC must not act haphazardly: If use of Padma word by Tirkey is bad, why BJD as a contesting party has not been banned?

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Election Commission has instructed Dillip Tirkey not to use the “Padma” word in depicting the Padma Shree he has been decorated with, while projecting his suitability as a candidate before the voters of Sundergarh from where he is contesting for the Lok Sabha.

It is a legally correct step and we fully endorse it.

But what about Biju Janata Dal?

The “Biju” word should have been dropped from the said party as it is contesting for both the Lok Sabha and Vidhan Sabha when almost all welfare programs that influences the voters are named after Biju, the father of the present Chief Minister who has contrived this mischief to mislead the voters and bag their votes. Had BJD not dropped the Biju name, it should have been banned, as all most all welfare programs and public places and institutes are named after Biju.

Look at the mischief:

Biju KBK Yojana,

Biju Setu Yojana,

Biju Gajapati Yojana,

Biju Kandhamal Yojana,

Biju Krusak Kalyan Yojana,

Biju Gramya Bidyut Yojana,

Biju Saharanchal Bidyutikaran Yojana,

Biju Yuva Sashaktikaran Yojana,

Biju Gramina Magana Swasthya Sibira Yojana.

These and suchlike welfare programs founded and funded by Orissa Government are mischievously, willfully, calculatedly and intentionally named after Biju Patnaik by his son Naveen Patnaik who has misused his chief minister position to make his party – Biju Janata Dal – be viewed by the voters as synonymous with welfare. This is the worst political misappropriation of the State exchequer, and the most harmful arsenal created to damage electoral wisdom, the like of which is never to be found in India.

On March 5, we had attracted the attention of the EC to this hazardous mischief under the caption: Election Commission now must ban operation of all Orissa Projects named after Biju Patnaik, as projection thereof was bound to mesmerize and mislead the voters.

The EC has not acted responsibly in this case. All these state projects named after Biju are being projected in massive advertisements and election rallies. Voters are unable to differentiate between Biju Janata Dal and Biju named welfare projects.

So, it is clear that in banning use of “Padma” word by Tirkey while not banning welfare projects named after Biju when the party named after him is seeking mandate, the EC has been working haphazardly and against the very spirit of fair election.

Issue of ownership: Samaja newspaper employees seek clarification from SoPS on exposures in ORISSA MATTERS


ORISSA MATTERS has exposed how the Servants of the People Society (SoPS) has hijacked Utkalmani Pandit Gopabandhu Das’ famous newspaper The Samaja to swindle its fabulous earnings by using a forged Will. It has become clear by the ORISSA MATTERS reports available together at that SoPS has no legitimate ownership over the paper.

As the SoPS has never dared to counter the allegation, worried employees of the Samaja through their trade union – Utkalmani Newspaper Employees Association – have attracted attention of the Chairman and members as well as the Trustees of SoPS to this exposure in in their letter No. 15/GS/2014 dated 24.3.2014.

Signed by Devi Prasanna Nayak, President and Subash Chandra Singh, General Secretary of the Union, the letter notes, “Even as the members of our Union are extremely worried over the litigations ffecting Servants of the People Society in internal tussles, we are in deep quagmire over the issue of ownership of the Samaja where we are employees.

“We are giving you the link to a website styles, wherein, over and above the publications in depicting serious exposures and raising serious questions on legitimacy of SoPS as owner of the Samaja are being published/ have been published.

“On behalf of the members of our Union, we request you to please peruse the articles in thia website and come out with a clear picture of the ownership over the Samaja, as otherwise employer-employee relationship being in stake, we the workers are in and bound to be in highly injurious predicament”.

SoPS is yet to answer.

Exclusive Election Tribunals Essential

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Mandate 2014 is set to usher in a new era of anarchy in India as crorepatis and criminals in massive numbers are contesting this election from various political parties with corporate media at their command indulging in suppression of information and transmission of misinformation or disinformation to mislead the voters.

For criminals, the election is just a ladder to power. Criminalization of politics is so overwhelming that it is difficult to distinguish who of the political candidates is not a criminal.

The Supreme Court of India has had the experience of how the outgoing Parliament foiled its order for debarment of criminals contesting the elections.

The current polls, vitiated with active components of polarization, portend occupation of higher numbers of seats in the incoming Houses of Representatives by criminals whom law has failed to debar from entering into Legislative Bodies.

Law’s inability to debar them from contesting the elections is because of the Courts’ inability to punish them in time.

Every criminal is enjoying stupendous freedom in this country to derail prosecution by procuring multi-stage stays from Courts from lower to the highest that makes a farce of law invoked in the preliminary Court.

Law becomes a farce, as stays or bails are grated without making the same bound with a time tag.

The discretion of Courts to grant stay or bail goes against the spirit of criminal prosecution unless the same is granted for a particular time with the stipulation that if the accused fails to prove miscarriage of justice in the learned Court or prove his /her innocence within that specific time, the stay or bail shall stand automatically cancelled and prosecution shall proceed without any further obstruction from any higher court.

I have advanced this argument in these pages several times, a few of which may be studied at:

Norm should be Bail on appeal, not on anticipation


Judges should desist from making farce of their power to grant Bail

I regret to say, discretion of judges to grant stay or bail appears as discretion of judges to delay the dispensation of justice.

This is the reason why so many fellows with charges of felonious crimes pending against them since long, despite some found guilty of the offenses in learned Courts, are not in jails and death rows and are contesting the elections.

This time, it seems, there shall be more election cases than what the last election had generated. And democracy will be in dense disarray if judiciary behaves as it has behaved in the election case against union minister P. Chidambaram.

It would be gainful to recall that Union Minister Chidambaram’s pleas for dismissal of an election case filed against him for having contravened election laws and having indulged in electoral malpractices including bribing the voters and using the Returning Officer to hijack rival’s votes, has been repeatedly rejected in the Madras High Court; and, how despite that, the entire term ended, but Chidambaram could not be unseated.

I had discussed the syndrome in these articles:

Sivaganga shows how hollow has become Indian democracy


Chidambaram could not have dared to contest: But Judiciary should be ashamed of how it helped him stay in power for the whole term.

This is an instance of treachery the judiciary has played against the country. But we cannot say it for certain, because, we also know, the Courts are overloaded with cases of all characters.

Therefore, we have been insisting that, democracy being the essence of Indian Republic and Elections to Houses of Representatives being the basis of democracy, Election Cases deserve utmost attention and speediest disposal. For this purpose, we have been crying for creation of exclusive Election Benches in the High Courts of every State and in the Supreme Court or a separate Election Tribunal the way the Green Tribunal has been created.

My initial focus on this issue was captioned:

Democracy needs Supreme Court to create separate Election Benches.

It is time, the Supreme Court of India must act in this regard if Indian Democracy is to be saved from the criminals and the anti-people plutocrats.

Gnanapith award to Prativa Ray was manipulated, states Bibhuti Patnaik

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Eminent academician and author Bibhuti Patnaik has stated that Sitakant Mohapatra “purchased” Gnanapith award for Ms. Prativa Ray by way of manipulation, similarly as he had misused his position to get her nominated to executive council of the Central Sahitya Academy in 2002.

cover of chithi_spring 14In a letter to Prof. Biswaranjan, published in the Spring 2014 edition of ‘Biswaranjananka CHITHI’, Bibhutibabu has expressed deep concern over aggressive spread of feudalism in the world of letters despite extermination of kingship and zamidari. Big industrialists and ultra-high wealth accumulators have emerged as new kings and zamidars in the world of letters by way of literary awards like Saraswati and Gnanapith they have created and control. Civilian Awards like Padma for literature and fabulous cash prizes for literary works are just the fripperies of literary feudalism, he has observed.

In penning an exposure, he has come down heavily on Sitakant Mohapatra, who, according to him, had misused his position as Chairman of National Book Trust of India to get Ms. Prativa Ray nominated to General Council of India’s National Academy of Letters and has again misused his position as Chairman of the Gnanapith Selection Committee to give her the Gnanapith Award.

Bibhuti Patnaik on literary awardsDeclaring that he shall tirelessly, even if alone, continue to fight against this cultural feudalism and literary anarchy, Bibhutibabu has said that such mess in literature, so discernible today, is generated by the diseased mentality of certain persons that pull back the writers from the front row, by any means, to snatch away awards like Gnanapith and Saraswati.

The fellows who, too deficient to win, are “purchasing” these awards to decorate themselves with; and the fellows who, despite being in selection committees, are helping them in this illicit work, are despicable, he has said, while deploring how, instead of condemning these fellows for their vileness, we are saluting them.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,520 other followers