Politics


Of late there has been particularly different issues regarding an ethical administration point of view from one of the southern states of India precisely (Tamil Nadu). Among the 29 states and 9 Union Territories only Tamil Nadu departments seems to be adopting a unique practice when dealing with citizen petitions like tagging it as Accepted and Rejected.

It looks like this is giving a unique teeth to the bureaucratic staff who in order to cover up their odd doings tag the petition has Rejected even though there is a valid response which conveys the meaning as otherwise. I have enclosed a sample from HRCE department for the kind reference of the Office of Prime Minister. Honestly I don’t find any value add of this string literal other than a perceived attitude of those staff in covering up the number of complaints against them.

This is not a one-off case but is seen prevalent from GDP Portal, CmCell and Police Department also.

The sample response below was given for swindling temple money at Marundheeswar Temple, Thiruvanmiyur.

1

The following petition was submitted today to State Transport Department for the benefit of citizens of Chennai.  We would keep you posted with responses from department for the same.


This applies to whole of Greater Chennai and Chennai Suburban. In almost all of the MTC bus stops, entry and exit of MTC terminus private autorickshaws have come up with (un-)authorized stands and some of them are spotted with as affiliated to some weird trade unions. Additionally the two wheeler bikers are again causing road rash, races and stunts when the bus comes to the bus stop. I do not understand the logic of why they want to get injected between the bus and the bus stop preventing passengers from seamlessly and smoothly boarding the buses. Somewhere around in the discussion forum on the Internet a few months ago a community poster was mentioning that there might be some unholy nexus between these elements for reasons best known to them.

I would like State Transport Corporation to take up this issue with Metropolitan Transport Corporation, Traffic Enforcement and Law & Order across the city to curtail this menace of obstructing passengers from boarding the buses. It is unfortunate that when there is Article 353 to protect government servants from any type of assault preventing them from discharging their duties, there is no protective sheath for genuine tax paying citizens of the country to avail the facilities provided by the government which is once again paid for by them.

Disclaimer: The petitioner is severely limited with time due to his work nature. Additionally this is a public advisory petition. Every bit of the information has been duly captured in this complaint document and hence request for depositions to local police stations for extended time for enquiry etc is completely unnecessary and unwarranted. The petitioner may be available on the RMN (Registered Mobile Number) subject to his hectic schedules at his workplace. We would humbly request the cooperation and assistance of investigating personnel in this regard.

If the servicing operators continue to harass the petitioner for more information on call or email it would be construed as their consent to consider their calls as public nuisance and/or harassment and/or unsolicited commercial communication and shall be dealt with extant provisions thereto. We would also like to mention that the servicing operators particularly the law enforcement need not harass the petitioner seeking withdrawal of the petition citing their inability to work on the same and we would like to mention that any such withdrawal requests shall be forwarded to their leadership and we request their leadership to take significant cognizance of such withdrawal requests as demonstrated misdemeanour, gross incompetency and malevolent non compliance and their leadership is advised to initiate maximum disciplinary action against such cadre in their workforce so that such gestures are deterrent for similar offenders. We appreciate your understanding and assistance in this matter.


 

It is quite common to see IPC 353 being abused by local police and at times by public sector banks as a kind of incontestable protection for them against their incompetency. We are often stuck in the banks due to slower processing of transaction by freshly hired tellers and stranded in peak traffic snarls in highways because of mismanagement by traffic enforcement. When we challenge these people they try to protect their incompetence covertly with an unscrupulous cover of IPC 353 calling themselves as public servants when they are actually acting as our bosses.

Additionally whenever we file a law enforcement complaint we are forced to spend hours together for a formal documentation of the same and/or so-called interrogation/enquiry.

The abovesaid arguments hold good in quite a bit of other government departments like Road Transport Office, Tahsildar Office etc where a simple one hour work is stretched to more than a week involving multiple visits to them.

Quite similar to what 498a was called Legal Terrorism, I believe 353 in the current state has become a Labor Terrorism. Private employees contribute to more than 85% of the national exchequer by way of taxes and the so-called public servants who are supposed to facilitate the private workforce catering to clientele across the globe are actually deterring us from discharging our duties to our global clientele. Hence I believe 353 should also include a protection for private workforce along with accommodation to claim damages from so-called public servants for liabilities like Loss of PayHumiliation in front of global clientele.

A formal request for amendment of this law has been sent to Rashtrapathi Bhavan.

Recently Election Commission of India has launched a National Citizen Grievance Portal where one can report any issues regarding free and fair conduct of polls in our country, specifically the upcoming Lok Sabha one in April – May 2019.

However our experience with the portal as serviced from Tamil Nadu by its regional coordinates seems be failing our trust in the body because the complaints are surreptitiously closed and even allied news sources claim that reports are being dismissed without proper investigation raising eyebrows on whether there is a mole in the body which is acting hand in glove with unscrupulous politicians in the state.

A copy of the complaints are enclosed here.

We have escalated this to the office of The President of India. Stay tuned for more updates.

Recently we found an issue of rampant smoking near a tea stall in Ambattur Industrial Estate. We have tried to bring the same to the kind attention of TNPCB. However about a month later the response from the department says it does not fall within their purview, it is a public nuisance case and needs to be looked by state police department.

The state police department was not able to be reached as of publishing this note.

CpGrams: GOVTN/E/2017/00646

TNPCB

We all know that bull-fighting has been banned by the Apex court (The Supreme Court of India) following petitions from animal welfare activists across the world. Despite this, a section of people in Avur village of Pudukkottai district in the state of Tamil Nadu  has engaged in setting up a bull fight along with New year celebrations. A few people have also started sharing this as a victory message in running the sport in Whatsapp. The message has been reported to Government of Tamil Nadu vide petition number GOVTN/E/2017/00007.

The message that was captured by the editorial is below:

screenshot_20170102-142337

Around eight years back the athiest party of DMK made Pongal as Tamil New Year which was a great setback for the Hindu culture. Thankfully, Jayalalitha led AIADMK government has reversed and voided the ordinance four years back.

But till now, Kalaignar TV is involving in false propaganda during Pongal festivals calling it as New year. Furthermore, Hindu festivals are called as ‘holidays’ in their channel whereas they are called by festival names for non-Hindu observations

Petition sent to Ministry of Information and Broadcasting via MOIAB/E/2016/00252 on 2nd February 2016

Next Page »