Saturday, 21 September 2019


The latest mini or third budget implemented through the backdoor Ordinance method is nothing but an eye wash just to divert the attention from the failures of governance from all corners. Similar is the case of Hindi agenda all of a sudden surfaced recently. The purpose is to fool the public who are ignorant about the ups and downs of the Share Market but more concerned about the ups and downs of the Commodity Market.

In reality, these astronomical financial sops are just like the bogus astronomical Audit Objections of the CAG which I elaborated in my book.

Now let us analyse the effect of these astronomical sops announced by the Finance Minister:-

First take the case of sops to the tax reduction to those companies which do not seek any deduction. Many of the companies are already availing 100% or more than 100% deduction for research etc. So what could be the tax effect? Very negligible or nil.

Secondly take the case of the mega sops to the newly formed manufacturing companies. In normal case there will not be much profit to these companies at the initial stage of production. Most of the companies would be in loss due to heavy interest liability, heavy depreciation, starting problems in marketing etc. So most of them may not be having taxable income, except carry forward of loss.

[To read free part of my book  ‘A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION’ in India, go to the below link and click “LOOK INSIDE” button:]

This being the reality, now, it is for the Finance Minister to explain to the Nation, what is the real purpose of these gimmick of showing a mirage of economic growth through IT sops other than diverting the attention of the public from price rise, employment loss, maladministration, decline in groth rate, etc.? It may also be clarified the method of calculation to arrive at 1.45 lakh crore annual effect or whether the figure is adopted from the 2G and Coalmine Audit Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India?

Tuesday, 11 December 2018


Each time only after the money laundering accused people were left the country, Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) start their swooping action-action-action. Now it is time for their grand come back. It starts with the latest extradition order of the Westminster Magistrates' Court in UK.

 But can anybody imagine what could be the total cost to the Government exchequer for this high-profile extradition trial that lasted over a year? And who's money is lost not only in the NPA scam but in these court cases and its ancillary activities in a foreign country for such a long period? And who is responsible for these loss? It is coming mainly from the poor people who stood under the scorching sun throughout the day to get their hard earned notes exchanged during the demonetisation period and paying GST on safety pin (I think 18%) to anything else including the GST on penalty on their savings bank account due to deficiency in minimum balance. And who are the beneficiaries for letting these persons escape? Identify them and saddle them for the cost incurred.

We are already acquainted with such actions in many of the cases where the accused fly away just before the filing of FIR. Whether these cases are mere coincidences, or a deliberate silence to facilitate them to escape from the scene thinking that the general public ignorant, that too when the present Government is affirming and telling every now and then “the Government is corruption free”? If these two assumptions are not the case, then definitely it could be the miracles happened because those accused persons are devotees of some supernatural power and they came to their rescue by making these agencies unconscious till they left the country.
(To read free part of the book "A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION" based on scams of India as part of my autobiography, go inside:- )

           My homepage 

Wednesday, 7 November 2018


My blog readers are already aware that recently the Hon’ble Bombay High Court set aside a judgement and order dated 16-04-2013 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench and allowed my request for treating the effective date of MACP of the 6th Central Pay Commission as 01-01-2006 instead of 01-09-2008 as fixed by the DOPT under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions. For details, go to blogs:- &

However, I would like to invite your attention to a much more important issue – i.e., the utter failure of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India in its Constitutional obligations.
CAG is bestowed with some important duties under the Constitution of India. Under Article 149, read with Section 13 of the CAG’s DPC ACT, 1971, it is the duty of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India to audit all expenditure from the Consolidated Fund of India and of each State and of each Union territory having a Legislative Assembly and to ascertain whether the expenditure conforms to the authority which governs it.

Now the question comes, how the CAG ascertained the expenditure related to MACP is conformed to the authority which governs it? It is very clear on the face of the record as already mentioned in my Representation dated 26-11-2010 routed through the CAG and now confirmed by the Supreme Court and the High Court that the implementation date of MACP is from 01-01-2006 and not from 01-09-2008 as implemented through the OM issued by DOPT. If the CAG audited it properly, this illegality could have been pointed out and such a complication could have been avoided. Instead of such real issues, CAG is after bogus, fictional, politically instigated audit objections as I already mentioned in my published book, “A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION”. (To read free part of e-Book, go to the link and click “Look inside” button:- )

Finally, what is the result of this irresponsible audit of the CAG? Now the work done after the 6th Pay Commission Implementation including the 7th Pay Commission Implementation has to be rewritten. Not only that of the currently  working employees, but that of the retired and died persons after the 6th Pay Commission. Approximately there are 1 crore serving and retired employees together. So how many man-days are required to rectify the additional work caused by the said OM and by the irresponsible audit (in spite of my pointing it out in the year 2010 in writing)?

Apart from the Constitutional duty of audit, CAG is also entrusted with a consultation power under Article 148(5) before any service condition is made for those employees working under him. So if this consulting power is used properly, instead of giving it in a routine and mechanical manner without application of mind, this simple mistake with Himalayan effect could have been avoided. Again CAG exposed its inefficiency in doing its duty to the nation and as usual, going after bogus, fictional, unrealistic and fake audit objection (at the cost of genuine ones) mostly politically instigated as illustrated in my book. (Part II of the book is nearing completion covering many departments and entities involved in scams but hushed up).


My published Books:-

  1. “A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION” available as e-book and paperback at:-  
  2. “LTC RULES MADE EASY” available as e-book at:- 
My home page: 

Friday, 7 September 2018

കേരളത്തിലെ വെള്ളപ്പൊക്കം: ചില പരിഹരിക്കാവുന്ന അനീതികള്‍ - KERALA FLOODS

കേരളത്തില്‍ വെള്ളപ്പൊക്കം വന്നു. ഇതൊരു വസ്തുതയാണ്. അതില്‍ വീട്, മറ്റു വസ്തുക്കള്‍ മുതലായവ നഷ്ടപെടവരുണ്ട്. അവരെ സഹായിക്കേണ്ടത് മനസാക്ഷിയുള്ള എല്ലാവരുടെയും കടമയാണ്. എന്നാല്‍ അതുപോലെതന്നെ അഭയാര്‍ഥി ക്യാമ്പുകളില്‍ വന്നവര്കും കുറച്ചൊക്കെ കടമയുണ്ട്. അതില്‍ ആരോഗ്യമുള്ളവരും ഈ പ്രവര്‍ത്തനങ്ങളില്‍ കുറച്ചൊക്കെ സഹായിക്കെണ്ടാതാണ്. അവര്‍ അഭയാര്‍ഥികള്‍ ആണെന്ന് പറഞ്ഞ്‌ വിരുന്നുകാരെപ്പോലെ ഇരിക്കേണ്ട കാര്യമില്ല. അവരെക്കാള്‍ കൂടുതല്‍ പ്രയഗ്നിച്ചതും ബുധിമുട്ടിയതും അവരെ രക്ഷിക്കാന്‍ വന്നവരാണ് എന്നാണ് വാര്‍ത്തകളുടെയും നാട്ടില്‍ നിന്ന് കിട്ടിയ മറ്റു വിവരങ്ങളുടെയും അടിസ്ഥാനത്തില്‍ മറുനാടന്‍ മലയാളിയായ എനിക്ക് തോന്നിയത്.

രണ്ടാമതായി മറ്റൊരു പ്രശ്നം. അതായത്, അഭ്യര്‍ഥി കേന്ദ്രങ്ങളില്‍ തിരക്കായതുകൊണ്ട്‌ ബന്ധുക്കളുടെയും സ്നേഹിതരുടെയും വീടുകളില്‍ അഭയം തെടിയവരുമുണ്ട്. അവരുടെ വീട് പോയാലും വസ്തു നഷ്ട്പെട്ടാലും അവര്‍ക്ക് സഹായത്തിനു അര്‍ഹതയില്ല എന്നാണ് കേള്‍ക്കുന്നത്. അത് ശരിയല്ല. നഷ്ടപരിഹാരം നഷ്ടത്തിന്ടെ അടിസ്തനതിലയിരിക്കണം. അല്ലാതെ അഭയാര്‍ഥി ക്യാമ്പുകളില്‍ പോയിരുന്നോ ഇല്ലയോ എന്നതിന്ടെ മാനദ്ണ്ട്തിലകരുത്.

അതുപോലെതന്നെ അര്‍ഹതയില്ലാത്തവരെ കണ്ടുപിടിച്ചു മാറ്റിനിര്‍ത്താനും ശ്രദ്ധിക്കണം. അല്ലെങ്കില്‍ സഹായം അര്‍ഹാതയില്ലതവരിലെക്കയിരിക്കും മറിയുക.  

Monday, 6 August 2018


My first question is whether the Supreme Court Judges joined earlier directly from the Bar would become junior to these new entrants from the Bench on the ground that they had no experience as High Court judge as claimed by the Central government?

If the news published by the mainstream newspapers can be believed, there is discontent among a group of Supreme Court judges who had criticised the way the Central Government dealt with the appointment of Justice Joseph to the Apex Court and decided to lodge a protest with the Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra on Monday on the ‘seniority’ issue. Justice K M Joseph will become the junior most judge in the SC in the context of the order in which the oath-taking ceremony is fixed by the Executive.

Justice Joseph’s name was sent recommended eight months before to the government. But his name was not accepted by the Executive and sent back to the Supreme Court without assigning any valid reason. Now it was again sent along with another two names in July. This time the Centre had accepted his recommendation at the same played a mischief by arranging the order of taking oath in such a way to make Justice Joseph the junior most of the three in spite of the fact that his name was earlier and the other two were not qualified/sent at that time. Under these circumstances, there is reason to believe that, Justice Joseph’s name was earlier returned back to the SC and now accepted but trying to make him junior is because of an ego issue and a revengeful mind-set the BJP-led NDA government nurtured against Justice Joseph since he as the Uttarakhand High Court Chief Justice had quashed the imposition of President’s rule in the state in 2016 and it lead to the restoration of the Congress led government.

[The book “A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION” is my own real story – My fight against corruption/scams/frauds while in Government of India service. It also expose the hurdles I faced while in service as a reaction to my fight. For reading free part, go to below link and click “look inside”:]

The claim of the Centre that Justice Joseph lacks seniority is only a lame excuse to escape from the issue. First of all, seniority from the joining as the High Court Judge is not the criteria for seniority. The date and order of joining the Supreme Court would make the seniority. Otherwise whether the Supreme Court Judges joined Supreme earlier directly from the Bar would become junior to these new entrants from the Bench on the ground that they had no experience as High Court judge?
In the above context, my last question is whether this is a warning to the judiciary showing the punishment like this and prizes like after retirement positions, etc.?  This issue I am going to elaborate from my own experiences in my autobiography part II under preparation.

My published books:-

1. Autobiography: "A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION" part 1(E-book and Paperback  ISBN:978-9352353989) available at:- . For details for shops where Paperback is available, go to page:-

2. LTC RULES MADE EASY: (Based on CCS Leave Travel Concession Rules up-to-date) available at:-

ALSO VISIT MY FOLLOWING BLOGS/WEBSITE on various subject for more information:

Sunday, 22 July 2018

കേരള ഇലെക്ട്രിസിറ്റി ബോര്‍ഡിന്‍റെ അനീതിക്ക് ഉപഭോക്ത കോടതി വിരാമമിട്ടു

കേരള ഇലെക്ട്രിസിറ്റി ബോര്‍ഡിന്റെ വാദം തള്ളി, നിയമവിരുദ്ധമായി കുടുതല്‍ ഈടാക്കിയ തുക തിരിച്ചു നല്‍കാനും, നഷ്ടപരിഹാരവും കോടതിചിലവും നല്‍കാനും ഉപഭോക്ത കോടതി ഉത്തരവിട്ടു. പരാതിക്കാരി നേരിട്ടാണ് കോടതിയില്‍ പരാതി നല്‍കിയത്.

ചേര്‍പ് പഞ്ചായത്തില്‍ പരാതിക്കാരി സ്വന്തം വീട്ടാവശ്യത്തിന് ഇലെക്ട്രിസിറ്റി കണക്ഷന് അപേക്ഷ നല്‍കിയിരുന്നു. എന്നാല്‍ 04-10-2014ന്,  വീടിനുള്ളില്‍ തന്നെ അടുക്കളയും ശുചിമുറിയും ഇല്ലെന്നു പറഞ്ഞ്‌ ഇരട്ടി ചാര്‍ജുള്ള വ്യവസായിക ആവശ്യത്തിനുള്ള കണക്ഷനാണ് നല്‍കിയത്. അടുക്കളയും ശുചിമുറിയും വീടിനോട് തൊട്ടുപുറത്തു ഉണ്ടെന്നു പറഞ്ഞിട്ടും വീടിനുള്ളില്‍ തന്നെ വേണമെന്ന് പറഞ്ഞാണ് കണക്ഷന്‍ മാറ്റികൊടുക്കാന്‍  ബോര്‍ഡ് തയ്യാറാവാതിരുന്നത്.

അതിനുശേഷം പരാതിക്കാരി വാക്കാലും എഴുത്ത് മൂലവും, വിവരവകാശ നിയമമനുസരിച്ചും പല അപേക്ഷകളും നല്‍കിയിട്ടും പ്രയോജനമൊന്നും ഉണ്ടായില്ല. അതിനു ശേഷമാണു തൃശൂര്‍ ഉപഭോക്ത കോടതിയെ സമീപിച്ചത്.

കോടതിയില്‍ പരാതിക്കാരി, ബോര്‍ഡിന്റെ പ്രവര്‍ത്തി നിയമ വിരുദ്ധമാണെന്നും അങ്ങിനെയൊരു നിയമം നിലവിലില്ലെന്നും വാദിച്ചു. ഈ വാദത്തിനെതിരായി ഏതെങ്കിലും നിയമമോ മറ്റേതെങ്കിലും വിജ്ഞാപനമോ കോടതിക്കു മുന്പാകെ ഹാജരാക്കുന്നതില്‍ ബോര്‍ഡ് തികച്ചും പരാജയപ്പെട്ടു എന്ന് പറഞ്ഞുകൊണ്ടാണ് കോടതി പരാതിക്കാരിക്ക്  അനുകൂലമായി 29-6-2018 ന് വിധി പറഞ്ഞത്.

(Home page- )

കൂടുതല്‍ വിവരങ്ങള്‍ക്ക് താഴെ കൊടുത്തിരിക്കുന്ന കോടതിയുടെ ഉത്തരവിന്‍റെ പ്രധാന ഭാഗം വായിക്കുക:-

Complaint Case No. CC/16/489
1. Smt.Jessy Joseph Manjaly...........Complainant(s)
1. Senior Superintendant-............Opp.Party(s)

6.The Forum has studied all aspects of the case and gone through all records made available. The Forum is of opinion that considering the strong objection of the complainant , it was for the opposite parties to prove the genuineness of the decision by producing proper evidence in support .We can see that the O.P. has miserably failed to produce even any rule/regulation/circular which defined the minimum requirements of a premise to be qualified for domestic/residential tariff or as commercial tariff. In the circumstances, we are bound to consider the prayer of the complainant positively.

7.In the result, the complaint is allowed. The opposite parties are directed to take immediate steps to convert the connection to domestic category .The connection will be treated as of domestic tariff with effect from 4-10-14, being the date of the connection .The arrears in this respect should be adjusted in the future bills within one year .This is in addition to compensation and cost.....
Pronounced in the open Forum this the 29th day of June 2018."
      Home page- 

Thursday, 28 June 2018


While dismissing a CIVIL APPEAL case namely, Union of India & Ors Vs. Pirthwi Singh & Ors (Diary No. 8754 of 2018), the Supreme Court of India rapped the Union of India by imposing a penal cost of Rs.1,00,000/- in its judgement dated April 24, 2018 with these remarks, “To make matters worse, in this appeal, the Union of India has engaged 10 lawyers, including an Additional Solicitor General and a Senior Advocate!  This is as per the appearance slip submitted to the Registry of this Court.  In other words, the Union of India has created a huge financial liability by engaging so many lawyers for an appeal whose fate can be easily imagined on the basis of existing orders of dismissal in similar cases. Yet the Union of India is increasing its liability and asking the taxpayers to bear an avoidable financial burden for the misadventure. Is any thought being given to this?”

{Also read my autobiography detailing my crusade against corruption while in service titled: “A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION” available in eBook format and Paper back. For details and to read free part of the eBook, go to the link:}

Earlier, the Union of India had filed a batch of appeals which was dismissed by the Supreme Court by a judgment dated 8th December, 2017 namely, Union of India v. Balbir Singh Turn. After dismissal of that batch of appeals, the Union of India filed yet another appeal on the same subject namely, Union of India & Ors. v. Ex. Nk.Balbir Singh.  This appeal came up for consideration before the Court on 9th March, 2018 and was dismissed following the earlier decision. While dismissing the appeal with a penal interest of Rs.1,00,000, it was also noted that the same was filed well after several similar matters were dismissed by the SC . 

The present appeal was filed on 8th March, 2018 which is also well after the decision in Balbir Singh Turn.  While dismissing this appeal, the SC mentioned, “We would have expected that with the dismissal of the appeal relating to Balbir Singh Turn and Ex. Nk. Balbir Singh, the Union of India would take steps to withdraw this appeal from the Registry of this Court so that it is not even listed and there is no unnecessary burden on the judges.  But obviously, the Union of India has no such concern and did not withdraw its appeal from the Registry itself. The court further stated that the Union of India should have appreciated that by pursuing frivolous or infructuous cases, it is adding to the burden of this Court and collaterally harming other litigants by delaying hearing of their cases through the sheer volume of numbers.  Court further stated that if the Union of India cares little for the justice delivery system, it should at least display some sort of concern for litigants, as many of whom have to spend a small fortune in litigating in the Supreme Court. But the question remains, whether the Government learn any lesson from this?

Also go to my Home Page: for more details of other books and blogs