Re: [mpisgmedia] Quota in education / intervention application inSJ pil

Hi Sarabjit,
Am very much interested in the matter of "Mixed Land Use" in the forthcoming
DMP. So please drop a line, so that I can receive mails from u directly.
MPISG concerns are too many and I cannot cope up with it.
Best,
Aruna Bhowmick.
[Helpless Citizen, Minority (by virtue of being law abiding), Common man,
brand name: "Activist"]
----- Original Message -----
From: "sarbajit roy" <[email protected]>
To: "Master plan issues in media" <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 9:36 AM
Subject: Re: [mpisgmedia] Quota in education / intervention application inSJ
pil


> Dear Gita,
>
> Glad 2 know yr intervention is allowed.
>
> This is tactically not a good petition to intervene in
> and DMP issues will probably be sidelined. Anyway
> intervenors are second class citizens in these
> matters.
>
> This so called PIL is going to meander its way through
> media hawa and will keep spiking up around October-Feb
> when nursery admissions are in the news. You will also
> get liberal doses of TMA Pai foundation judgement
> extracts (you can pick and choose your ratio
> judgements)
>
> A comparison of 294 versus balance 894 may be
> meaningful.
>
> A well chosen attack on the DSEAR will be useful and
> will endear you to everyone in that PIL.
>
> To further ingratiate yourself into the clique, you
> may consider suggesting that its high time now that
> "Land" should be under the GNCTD and that DDA has
> outlived its purpose.
>
> Insofar as my IT ACT displays of Objections and
> Suggestions to DMP-2021 is concerned. Here's how it
> should be done:-
>
> http://www.trai.gov.in/comments26jul05.htm
>
> I am sure that if TRAI could listen to me on this one
> so will DDA - nothing like a good old section 409 IPC
> Complaint to push these public servants in the right
> direction.
>
> Bye
> Sarbajit
>
> --- Gita Dewan Verma <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > my intervention was allowed. despite mr agarwal
> > (social jurist) and ms ahlawat (gnctd counsel, also
> > in
> > the mpisg petitions) and mr sabharwal (counsel for
> > dda, also in the mpisg matters) making remarks
> > amounting to *resisting*. mr agarwal said I was
> > trying
> > to get the order of 20/01/04 modified (not accurate)
> > and DB had dismissed that (without clarifying not
> > me).
> > ms ahlawat told the court that I had told her I was
> > against free-seats. mr sabharwal submitted the
> > master
> > plan is irrelevant.
> >
> > the much celebrated free-seats pil, being celebrated
> > in name of common school system and what not, is
> > down
> > to wanting to hound 294 schools as per list filed by
> > gnctd.
> >
> > ms ahlawat submitted she has given copies of The
> > List
> > to the petitioner and to dda and others can take a
> > copy from her chamber, and that it was drawn up
> > jointly by dda and l&do and gnctd, and is of those
> > out
> > of 1140 school sites allotted by DDA or L&DO that
> > have
> > freeship condition in their leases (193 with and 101
> > without the quantum specified). about the other 846
> > school sites allotted by DDA, mr sabharwal submitted
> >
> > they are nursery or primary school sites that
> > allotted
> > to mcd (which is ludicrous; most of those are the
> > ones
> > on which gnctd has issued illegal upgradation
> > permissions, as per dda affidavit of 26/10/04, with
> > reference to which mr sabarwal himself had
> > vehemently
> > urged that gnctd be directed to explain before order
> > of 27/10/04 was passed without that). counsel
> > appearing for the action committee for unaided
> > schools
> > (which had also filed an intervention application in
> > view of its petition pending before the single
> > judge,
> > in which mpisg has filed intervention and to whose
> > counsel and ms ahlawat I had given copy of that for
> > consideration of our lawful suggestions after being
> > asked to do so by J Gita Mittal on 16/05/05 after ms
> > ahalawat had submitted that the afternoon-school
> > idea
> > that action-committee had proposed to chief minister
> > had been rejected after the consideration urged in
> > court by mr gopal subramaniam, appearing for
> > action-committee on 05/05/05) mainly pressed for
> > consideration of the afternoon school option.
> >
> > the officials (dda vc, education director and
> > someone
> > from L&DO) were present. contrary to the impression
> > conveyed by news reports about the hearing on
> > 18/08/05, the court made it clear that they had been
> > called not for directions but about assisting the
> > court. meetings between authorities and schools,
> > with
> > mr agarwal and myself, were proposed by the bench
> > (but
> > I do not know if the order says that for me, mr
> > agarwal specifically asked for himself while the
> > order
> > was being dictated). mr madhukar gupta, who is
> > moving
> > on to be secretary fertilisers, made some
> > seminar-style remarks to the effect that dda looked
> > forward to norms being set by the court. the
> > official
> > from L&DO mercifully pointed out that besides the
> > 294
> > schools other sites were also relevant, but the
> > lawyers started saying other things. (later I also
> > pointed out that the list of 294 was odd, but I was
> > out-shouted, with the remarks amounting to
> > *resisting*).
> >
> > I was without lawyer today and did not follow some
> > of
> > the technicalities. since the counsel present did
> > not
> > seem very friendly, I asked the court master
> > afterwards for clarifications. he confirmed that my
> > intervention was allowed (meaning I will be allowed
> > to
> > make submissions at time of arguments before orders
> > are passed) and that I could join the proposed
> > meetings (which I dont expect to come to know about)
> > and that no date for next hearing was given and
> > might
> > be given after lunch (I did not wait since I expect
> > newspapers will report it tomorrow and the web will,
> > too, before next date of hearing).
> >
> > I am planning to call a meeting of the petitioners
> > in
> > the mpisg matter on Sunday. Any suggestions will be
> > appreciated.
> >
> >
> >
> > --- Gita Dewan Verma <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > I have filed an application for intervention in
> > > Social
> > > Jurist free-seats PIL in which further directions
> > > were
> > > given on 18/08/05, with purpose of ensuring that
> > > order
> > > of 27/10/04 (in mpisg matters) is read with its
> > > order
> > > of 20/01/04.
> > > http://plan.architexturez.net/site/mpisg/f/050823
> > > My contention is that free-seats condition is an
> > > instrumentality of DMP-2001 Neighbourhood School
> > > Plan
> > > (NSP itself being instrumentality for common
> > school
> > > system as proposed by Kothari Commission). Order
> > of
> > > 20/01/04 did not contain directions for action
> > > against
> > > ubiquitous violation of free-seats condition by
> > > schools but for GNCTD to, in effect, put in place
> > > the
> > > enabling NSP for its compliance. Order of 27/10/04
> > > directs action against violations impeding NSP and
> > > specifically notes also violations by GNCTD. As
> > > such,
> > > it complements Order of 20/01/04 and favours a
> > > different approach for its compliance than the one
> > > being pursued in its name since early 2004 and
> > being
> > > urged again now.
> > >
> > > I find resonance in Supreme Court remarks about
> > > quota
> > > in colleges. It has been asking for law to allow
> > > quota
> > > and political/ngo activists are criticising its
> > > latest
> > > verdict against quota for, I suppose, rudely
> > > reminding
> > > them the ball is still in their court. High Court
> > > order of 20/01/04 had asked GNCTD to make Rules
> > > (legislative task, to operationalise existing law)
> > > for
> > > integrating 25% EWS in schools, instead of which
> > it
> > > issued a directive for 20% BPL quota that they
> > have
> > > all been celebrating (and demanding in name of CSS
> > > in
> > > education Bill) and even after it has proved to be
> > > illusory not asking for the Rules that never got
> > > made.
> > > And Attorney General and Additional Solicitor
> > > General,
> > > who were reportedly at pains to explain to a livid
> > > Supreme Court, have both featured also in the
> > school
> > > matters in Delhi.
> > >
> > > The politics v/s law debate is very uninspiring.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > ____________________________________________________
> > > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home
> > page
> > > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > mpisgmedia mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > >
> >
> http://mail.architexturez.net/mailman/listinfo/mpisgmedia
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Yahoo! Mail
> > Stay connected, organized, and protected. Take the
> > tour:
> > http://tour.mail.yahoo.com/mailtour.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> >
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> mpisgmedia mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mail.architexturez.net/mailman/listinfo/mpisgmedia
>


Folow-ups
  • Re: [mpisgmedia] Quota in education / intervention application inSJ pil
    • From: nalini thakur
  • Replies
    Re: [mpisgmedia] Quota in education / intervention application in SJ pil, sarbajit roy
    Partial thread listing: