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:- https://www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/ )

           My homepage https://www.manjaly.net 

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:- https://www.centralemployeesnews.manjaly.net/2018/10/macps_9.html &

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:- www.amazon.in/FRAUD-IN-THE-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/ )

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:- https://www.amazon.in/FRAUD-IN-THE-INDIAN-CONSTITUTIONebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/  
  2. “LTC RULES MADE EASY” available as e-book at:- https://www.amazon.in/LTC-RULES-MADE-EASY-date-ebook/dp/B01JO66SLK 
My home page: https://www.manjaly.net 

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.  https://www.manjaly.net  

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”: www.amazon.in/FRAUD-IN-THE-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY]

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:- www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH/dp/9352353986/ . For details for shops where Paperback is available, go to page:- https://www.facebook.com/manjaly.net/?ref=settings

2. LTC RULES MADE EASY: (Based on CCS Leave Travel Concession Rules up-to-date) available at:- www.amazon.in/LTC-RULES-MADE-EASY-date-ebook/dp/B01JO66SLK/

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- www.manjaly.net )

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- www.manjaly.net 

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: www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/}

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: https://www.manjaly.net for more details of other books and blogs

Sunday 22 April 2018


Here is a real life example of the Indian version ‘CABINET DECIDED, BABOOS DISPOSED' of the English serial ‘YES PRIME MINISTER’. If you do not believe, read and find out what the Supreme Court of India had said recently in one such episode.

While I was in Central Government service, I had filed a Writ Petition before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court challenging the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal which approved a similar issue in which a Cabinet decision was manipulated by a departmental circular issued by a Baboo (Government employee) in the Department of Personnel & Training. Now the SC rejecting the Government Appeal stated that “This is a decision of the Cabinet.  This decision could not have been modified by issuing executive instruction. The letter dated 30.05.2011 flies in the face of the Cabinet decision reflected in the Resolution dated 30.08.2008.  Thus, administrative instruction dated 30.05.2011 is totally ultra vires the Resolution of the Government”. Though the case was of the Armed Forces, the issue raised by me in the Civil Side is also the same. Hence the same decision is equally applicable in my case though it is still pending before the High Court. For your information, I am giving below the main points of the Writ Petition filed by me before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court at Mumbai to know how the Cabinet decision was manipulated and how the CAT Mumbai Bench approved such a manipulation and how the Supreme Court viewed it in its order under reference. Finally, you just imagine whether this is only a one act play or an episode in mega serial.
The question also remains, is there anybody to check these manipulations such as what is decided by the Cabinet and what is implemented by the Baboos and going on as Mega Scams? For your information, I am giving below the main points of the Writ Petition filed by me before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court at Mumbai and also giving the operating part of the decision of the Supreme Court under reference.  

{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: www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/  }

[Also read my book LTC RULES MADE EASY at:-  https://www.amazon.in/LTC-RULES-MADE-EASY--date-ebook/dp/B01JO66SLK ]

                      Shri  M.P. JOSEPH                            Petitioner
                      Union of India & ors.                         Respondents

                                2.            …….Following are the brief facts of the case:
i)             The Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Expenditure vide The Gazette Of India, Extraordinary Pt-I, Sec-I dated 29/08/2008 published the Government Resolution related to the 6th Pay Commission Report. Para 2 of the said resolution states, “The Commission’s recommendations and Government Decision thereon with regard to revised Scales of Pay and Dearness Allowance for civilian employees of the Central Government and personnel of All India Services as detailed in the Part-A of the Annex-I will be made effective from 1st day of January, 2006”.

ii)            The Assured Career Progression Scheme as modified is a part of Pay and its fixation on attaining particular period of service and is covered under Part-A item 4 of Annex-I which states as below:

Sl.           Recommendations of the Sixth                                 Decision of the
No.         Pay Commission                                                              Government
4.            The Commission has recommended                       Accepted with the
                That the existing scheme of Assured                      modification that

                Career Progression may be continued                   there will be three up-
                with two financial upgradations being                  gradations under the
                allowed as at present with the follow-                  ACP Scheme after 10,
                ing modifications: ……                                           20 and 30 years of
                                                                                                         service. …          

Hence, as already decided in the Government resolution dated 29/08/2008 cited above, the effective date of its implementation is w.e.f. 01/01/2006. There is also no delegation of power conferred on anybody to either to amend or modify or change the above decision of the Government on MACP, since it is very clear and complete in itself and there is no room for any doubt or interpretation.

iv.           … when the Government had already fixed the effective date, and did not delegate any power to anybody, changing the effective date by an Officer in the Ministry at the level of Dy. Secretary to the Government of India is without any legal validity and liable for disciplinary action for making such a colossal mistake and thereby making inconvenience and heavy financial loss to many of the employees not only in the Central Government but State Governments and Autonomous Bodies who adopt the Central Pay Commission.

v.            ….immediately after the issue of the said Office Memorandum dated 19/05/2009, various staff unions demanded the effective date from 01/01/2006 through the National Anomaly Committee (NAC). The demand was rejected as per Office Memorandum No.11/1/2010-JCA dated 06/10/2010.

vi.           ….. Petitioner, thereafter made a representation dated 26/11/2010 against the rejection. The staff unions also raised the same issue again before the NAC. However, the demand was finally rejected vide OM NO.11/2/2008-JCA dated 13/09/2012 annexed. Hence the Applicant had filed the Original Application no.145 of 2013 before the CAT in his personal capacity based on his representation.

vii.          …the Learned CAT dismissed the application, by its order dated 16/04/2013, thereby approving such a Himalayan blunder committed by the ministry officials.

iv.           The Learned CAT Bombay Bench headed and dominated by the Administrative member was totally prejudiced against the Petitioner in pointing out such a devastating mistake committed by people from the same service and failed to consider the evidence on the face of the record.

ix.           The Learned CAT was totally wrong in holding that the MACP Scheme became operative not w.e.f.01/01/2006 but with effect from 01/09/2008. It is very clear that the date of the scheme is w..e.f. 01/01/2006 as explained in para 2 above. Hence there is no room for any doubt or interpretation in this regard. However, the Learned CAT held in the reverse only for the purpose to bail out the Officers in the DOPT under whom it functions, from the responsibility of making such Himalayan blunder thereby many employees not only in Central Government but State Governments and Autonomous Bodies who follow the Central Pay Commission.

x.            The Learned CAT was also wrong in assuming that there was a small concession was recommended for those government who retired between the period 01/01/2006 to 31/08/2008 on the consideration their number would be small and not everyone retiring during the interregnum would be a case of stagnated promotions and hence eligible for 3rd  promotion. This is purely a fictional story made by the Officers of the 1st Respondent, DOPT copied and pasted by the Learned CAT without applying its mind and neither substantiated by any facts nor  covered anywhere in the decision of the Government conveyed through the Government Resolution gazette notified by the Finance Ministry, the 2nd Respondent. The Government Decision is absolute and applicable to all employees in service as on 01/01/2006 as already explained in para 2 above.

xi.           ..the Learned CAT in para 6 of its judgment wrongly and with mala-fide intension stated that the ACP Scheme figures as Paragraph 4 of Column 3 of the Government Resolution. In reality, it is not a Pragraph but item no.4 of part- A of Annexure-I which is accepted by the Government with effect from 01/01/2006 in clear terms vide para 2 of the Government Resolution quoted by the Learned CAT in para 4 of its judgment itself. But in 6 it was misquoted with the sole intention of bailing out the Officers of the 1st Respondent from such a grave mistake committed by going against the decision of the principal employer i.e., the Government of India, for which they should be charge sheeted and thrown out of service.

xii.          ..the Learned CAT again went wrong deliberately and with malafide and malicious intentions in stating in para 7 of its judgement, “In our view, the MACP is not part of either pay or Dearness Allowance. Paragraph 3 set out herein above says that the revised allowance other than
Dearness Allowance will be effective from 01/09/2008. Obviously, the same is included in Part-A of Annexure – I”. Actually, other allowances whose effective date is fixed by the Government w.e.f. 01/09/2008 is covered by para 3 of the Resolution and Part B of Annexure-I and not Part A as observed by the Learned CAT, though it is patently clear on the face of the record. On the other hand, MACP is very clearly and beyond any doubt appearing in Para 2, Part A of Annexure – I for which effective date is already fixed by the Government w.e.f.01/01/2006. Therefore, it is very much clear that, this wrong observation is made by the Learned CAT due to an over enthusiasm to bail out the DOPT Officers from the responsibility for taking action against the decision of the Government with the full knowledge that it is wrong rather than upholding the law and truth. This is never expected from a judicial authority.

 xiii.       …the Learned CAT, in para 8 of its judgment is making a bundle of lies without any basis. Firstly, it stated that the guidelines are flowing from the fountain-head of DOPT. It is totally untrue. There is no authority pointed out by the Learned CAT. It is based on presumptions and assumptions. In fact, even the Government Resolution, which is the source of financial effect was issued through the Finance Ministry and not through the said DOPT. Second untruth is that, all the Government employees including the applicant received the financial benefit under MACP Scheme in pursuance of the said OM dated 19.05.2009, whereby the Scheme of MACP was made effective from 01.09.2008. Third untruth is that, financial up gradation as per the provisions of earlier ACP Scheme was granted till 31.08.2008. The so called Scheme itself is a fraudulent/fictional story created by the said DOPT with ulterior motives, and copied and pasted by the Learned CAT in its judgment. The truth is already stated in para 2 herein above and no need to repeat it. In accordance with item 4 of part A of Annexure-I, read with para 2 of the Government Resolution issued through the 2nd Respondent, Government of India in its Constitutional  power under Article 309, decided the Scheme modifying the Recommendation of the 6th CPC  and fixing the effective date as 01.01.2006. The said DOPT,1st Respondent, without any authority or delegation of power changed this decision of the Government of India to 01/09/2008 in the disguise of the said Scheme probably to benefit some powerful Officers of the DOPT who may not be eligible if the MACP was implement as decided by the Government from 01/01/2006. Otherwise, there is no visible reason behind this amendment of the Government decision by some Officers in the DOPT and the Learned CAT going after this fiction created by the DOPT rather than the facts and law supported by records annexed with the Application by the Petitioner.

xiv.         …what Is stated by the Learned CAT in para 9 is out of context since the issue is the competence of the DOPT Officers to change the Government Decision taken under Art.309 of the Constitution of India without any delegation of power from a competent authority. The entire theory of benefit to certain employees due to the illegal amendment of the effective date from 01/01/2006 as fixed by the Government to 01/09/2008 by the said O.M. issued by the DOPT, is a fiction not supported by any facts or law. Probably some powerful Officers may be the beneficiaries for whom the entire system was misused and forced the staff side to agree with them, though it is altogether illegal and unconstitutional. That may be the reason why the Learned CAT also reached a wrong conclusion that the Government Resolution made under the Constitutional Powers and Gazette notified by the Finance Ministry can be amended to a different date by the Officers of DOPT which is in another Ministry, that too without any delegation of power to change the effective date of MACPS. It is also a perverted and wrong decision and says that an unconstitutional action can be made constitutional and legal by mere consent of parties who have no power to do so. If this perverted view of the Learned CAT is accepted, it would make a catastrophic effect in the legal system that by consent of two parties, the Indian Constitution could also be amended by these Officers for their personal benefit citing this Judgment of the Learned CAT as precedent. Therefore, this illegal amendment is made by the DOPT, i.e., the 1st Respondent, without any authority of law, and support of facts. It is merely a fictional statement that some otherwise ineligible employees may be adversely affected by the reversal against the loss of many eligible employees, had the Government decision is implemented. Therefore, acceptance of the said invalid and unreasonable argument by the Learned CAT is perverted, discriminatory, with ulterior motives, unreasonable, beyond commonsense and thus violative of Art. 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. It is also against the basic principles of Administrative Law.

xv.          …in para 11 of the judgement, the Learned CAT, again with malicious, and mala-fide intentions, suo motto, argue for the 1st Respondent as if their advocates, that though the Petitioner had challenged the competence of DOPT to issue the OM declaring date of effect of M.A.C.P benefit, neither the staff side nor the Union ever raised this question before subjecting themselves to the Joint Meeting that DOPT did not have any authority to declare the date of effect of MACP Scheme. This has no relation with the case before the Learned CAT filed by the Petitioner who had challenged the competence of DOPT as admitted by the Learned CAT. It is also a fact that the Staff side/Union had demanded the effective date from 01/01/2006. After all, they were attending a joint meeting of officials and not arguing before the High Court or Supreme Court engaging constitutional experts.  Therefore, it was not a material connected with the Petitioner’s personal Application before the Learned CAT. It cannot be worth enough to be considered as a childish argument, but a totally perverted, unrelated and unreasonable argument with ulterior motives similar to saying, before Newton’s Theory of Gravity, not only apple, but other fruits and even coconuts were falling down, but nobody had ever raised this point and hence cannot be accepted.

xvi.         ….in 12th Para of the judgment, whatever stated by the Learned CAT is totally untrue. First of all there is no complexity in the Government decision. It is very clear and unambiguous to read para 2 of the Government resolution as stated herein above. All the mess was artificially created by the DOPT Officers with ulterior motives to change the effective date from 01/01/2006 as decided by the Government in its Resolution to 01/09/2008. Otherwise, there was no need for any meeting or any agenda or anything. This is also irrelevant to the issue, since the very validity of the said O.M. and the competence of the DOPT Officers to change the effective date without any authority of law, is under challenge. All these unrelated things are stated herein the judgment is also with an intention to fish in the troubled water i.e., to bail out the DOPT Officers, by hook or by crook, from their penal responsibility for going against their employer’s decision of fixing the effective date on 01/01/2006 by changing it to 01/09/2008 without any authority, whatsoever nature.

xvii.       That, the statement of the Learned CAT in para 13 of the Judgment that, the MACP benefits have already been implemented – with effect from 01/09/2008 vide O. M. of DOPT dated 19/05/2009 is totally false and untruth. In reality it was implemented by the Government Resolution, GOI., MIN. OF FIN. NO. 1/1/2008-1 C dated the 29th August, 2008 annexed as Ex.C. It is also untrue and false that MACP is coming under any other allowances. MACP is coming specifically under item no. 4 of part A of annexure I read with para 2 of the Government Resolution which were made effective from 01/01/2006. Whereas allowances other than dearness allowance, would be effective from 01/09/2008 in accordance with para 3 of the Government Resolution and covered under Part B of Annexure – I.  The role of DOPT is only a consultancy for those items not covered in the Resolution, vide para 7 of the Government Resolution. Since the MACP is specifically mentioned in item no.4 of part A of Annexure – I, of the Government Resolution, DOPT do not have even the consultancy power. Then there is no question of power for changing the date already fixed by the Government in the Resolution. However, the Learned CAT is mixing part A of Annexure – I mentioned in Para 2 and Part B of Annexure – I of para 3 of the Government Resolution with a view to make a room for interpretation and thus to bail out the DOPT Officers from their culpable responsibility of changing the effective date fixed by the Government to suit their interests. Therefore, this is a cold blooded MURDER OF JUSTICE by the GUARDIAN OF JUSTICE i.e., the Learned CAT which should be treated as misuse of judicial process and to be treated as Contempt of Court and action should be initiated to stop such malpractices.

xviii.      That, by going out of the way in manipulating the facts as stated above, the Learned CAT is now trying to fit in para 14 of the judgment a Supreme Court judgment in the following words, “It has further been held in the case of Chandrashekar A.K. Vs. State of Kerala ( AIR 2009 SC 643 ) that revision of pay scale is essentially a policy decision, Recommendations relating to revision of pay scale requires its acceptance by the employer or the State which has ultimately to bear the financial burden.” This case is totally fitting to the Petitioner’s case in favour and not against. The recommendations relating to the MACP was already accepted by the Government of India i.e., the Employer, with certain modifications with effect from 01/01/2006 vide para 2 of the Government Resolution dated 29/08/2008. The Petitioner is not at all objecting to the Government resolution, but to the O.M. DATED 19/05/2009 issued by one of the many departments i.e., DOPT of the employer and going against the decision of the employer. Therefore, the above case is very well supporting the case of the Petitioner and not against it. However, importing an alien and unknown reason, and contradictory to the Prayers of the Petitioner quoted in para 1 of its own judgment annexed as Ex.A, the Learned CAT wrongly held that it is not the case of the Petitioner.

……Petitioner prays before this Hon’ble Court for the following:

i.             Set aside the Judgment and Order dated 16/04/2013 on ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.145 of 2013 by the Learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench at Mumbai, annexed as Ex.A, as it is not based on facts and law.

ii.            Declare partially Para 9  or entire Office Memorandum No. 35034/3/2008 – Estt.(D)  dated 19.05.2009 issued by DOPT annexed as Ex.B1, changing the effective date from 01/01/2006 to 01/09/2008 as null and void since it is issued without any authority of law.

iii.           Declare the effective date of MACPs as 01/01/2006 as already fixed by the Government of India i.e., the Employer, in its Government Resolution dated 29/08/2008 annexed as Ex.C and referred herein above.

iv.           Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other order to the Respondents  to give effect to the above directions within 1 month of the date of decision.

v.            Cost of this Petition with a direction to debit it from the 3rd Respondent’s Budget, since this petition is thrust upon the Petitioner unnecessarily on reasons mentioned above.
(Note: the Petition was admitted Bombay High Court on 09/07/2014 by issue of Rule. Reply was filed by the Respondents thereafter. Now the writ petition is pending for final hearing)

{Shortly publishing books: Leave Rules made easy and Part II of "A fraud in the Indian Constitution}

Now read what the Supreme Court decided on the issue in civil appeal  DIARY NO. 3744 OF 2016:-

“11. We are only concerned with the interpretation of the Resolution of the Government which clearly states that the recommendations of 6th CPC as modified and accepted by the Central Government in so far as they relate to pay structure, pay scales, grade pay etc. will apply from 01.01.2006.  There may be some gainers and some losers but the intention of the Government was clear that this Scheme which is part of the pay structure would apply from 01.01.2006.  We may also point out that the Resolution dated 30.08.2008 whereby the recommendation of the Pay Commission has been accepted with modifications and recommendations with regard to pay structure, pay scales, grade pay etc. have been made applicable from 01.01.2006.  This is a decision of the Cabinet.  This decision could not have been modified by issuing executive instruction. The letter dated 30.05.2011 flies in the face of the Cabinet decision reflected in the Resolution dated 30.08.2008.  Thus, administrative instruction dated 30.05.2011 is totally ultra vires the Resolution of the Government. 
12. Col. R. Balasubramanian, learned counsel for the UOI relied upon the following three judgments viz. P.K. Gopinathan Nair & Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.1, passed by the High Court of Kerala on 22.03.2017, Delhi Urban Shelter Improvement Board v. Shashi Malik & Ors.2, passed by the High Court of Delhi on 01.09.2016, K.K. Anandan & Ors. v. The Principal Accountant General Kerala (Audit) & Ors3 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, Kerala on 08.02.2013.  In our view, none of these judgments is applicable because the issue whether the MACP is part of the pay structure or allowances were not considered in any of these cases.

13. In this view of the matter we find no merit in the appeals, which are accordingly disposed of.  All pending applications are also disposed of.

J. (Madan B. Lokur)                J. (Deepak Gupta)
New Delhi December 08, 2017

Also go to my Home Page: www.manjaly.net 

Monday 2 April 2018



The book is in the form of an autobiography/memoirs of the author, who is a voluntarily retired official, ahead of more than 5 years from his regular retirement, from the INDIAN AUDIT AND ACCOUNTS DEPARTMENT (IA&AD) headed by the COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA (CAG) as Senior Audit Officer. The very purpose of his premature retirement was to write this book intended to give the public a true picture of a constitutional institution namely the Comptroller and Auditor General of India commonly known as CAG – i.e., how this institution is being misused by itself, by the Government Officials, by the Politicians and other interested parties to whitewash their scams. This is quite contrary to the image what is projected in the minds of the public through public media instigated by these interested parties to achieve their own selfish goals. This book is a real insider story from his own experience when he worked in various position in the Audit Department responsible to audit others departments and organisations.
The part I of the book starts with the Heading “CAG NOT EVEN AN ACCOUNTANT”. 
From the 2nd chapter onwards the author is unfurling his experiences in the audit side in support of the title of the book, starting with a quote from a decision of the Supreme Court of India while
dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) based on an audit objection (Draft Para) reported by the CAG in his Audit Report submitted to the Parliament. Thereafter he narrates from his own experience how the CAG manipulates the Audit Report.
From chapter 6 to 10 he narrates how he was harassed by the administration for fighting against this kind of audit manipulations. To keep the originality of the incidents, he kept the original correspondence from the charge sheet till the decision of the review petition to the CAG of India. He also narrates how he continued with further exposure of Audit Scam undeterred with the action taken by the administration against him.
In part III captioned with ‘after crucifixion and resurrection’ he narrates how he started applying the tools under the ‘RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT 2005’ to fix the CAG and the Ministry who played drama to fool the Nation by submitting inflated and fake audit paras/objections (Draft Para).

The book is ending with, “Is it not both CAG and the Ministry is fooling the Parliament and thus the people of India? Now it is for the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) of the Parliament to tell the Public what they are doing with these kinds of audit objections and replies brought before them” by the auditor CAG and the auditee Ministries.
For further details and purchase, go to the following links:
1) In the below link you can read free part of the book:
2) Facebook page of the book:
3) Home page of the Author:

Monday 26 February 2018

TOILET OR FOOD: स्वच्छ भारत अभियान‎: MURDER OF AN ADIVASI YOUTH IN KERALA - ടോയ്ലറ്റോ ഭക്ഷണമോ: കേരളത്തിലെ ആദിവാസി യുവാവിന്‍റെ കൊലപാതകം

The death of an Adivasi/tribal youth who died recently in Kerala as a result of mob beating for allegedly stealing food is bringing back my memories to the age old French novel Les Miserables written by Victor Hugo. The story of a boy who took a loaf of bread and thereafter branded as a thief during his life time.  More than that, what is saddened me is the uproar of a public personality in a public meeting recently in Kerala to the effect that he was instrumental in constructing toilets in Adivasi/Tribal areas and made mocking remarks at those who had made adverse remarks against the Prime Minister’s  Swachh Bharat Abhiyan like ‘food first and then toilet’ through social media. 

It also brings back to my memory to the outburst of a Bombay High Court division bench while hearing a public interest litigation on malnutrition deaths as reported by the Times of India, ‘MUMBAI: The Bombay high court on Wednesday lambasted the state government for its "complete apathy" and "criminal negligence" that has lead to worsening malnutrition deaths in tribal areas of Maharashtra's eleven districts, including Palghar, close to Mumbai. "This is shocking," remarked a bench of Justice Vidyasagar Kanade and Justice Swapna Joshi when told by advocate appearing for petitioner Kasturba Adivasi Mahila Sangh, that nearly 18,000 children have died in the state during 2015-2016 financial year itself.’

As a reply to the mocking remark of that famous public personality, I reiterate that the primary responsibility of the Government should be to ensure food for the poor and then only rest of the things like toilet, etc. Again time will only vouch for genuineness of the Abhiyan whether it is only in paper like many other schemes and a future toilet scam.

(Also read my book "A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION"on scams and malpractices in public administration from own experience:- http://www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/ 

Thursday 15 February 2018


If it is not a miracle then what? 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. We are already acquainted with such actions, one in the ongoing case of Kingfisher scam and now the Punjab National Bank (PNB) scam. Whether these cases are mere coincidences, or a deliberate silence to facilitate them to escape from the scene and to make the public fools, that to when the present Government is affirming and telling every now and then “My 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.

Apart from this, the statement of the PNB Managing Director’s statement could be believed to the effect that the Rs.11,300 crore scam had already been started way back from the year 2011, that too without their knowledge and even a suspicion and these lower grade persons were running such a huge scam, then the next assumption is that there is no need for such people in the higher places and the bank will go on and on without their presence. Then why to feed these people?

Then comes the next very important entity who is also not aware of these happenings is the Chartered Accountant who certified the accounts of the Bank for all these years without any hint at any stage.

(To read free part of the book "A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION" go inside :-http://www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY/)

Somehow they got two scapegoats to absolve from all the responsibilities and liabilities. Why to worry about responsibility and liability, when there is public to make up these unwarranted NPA losses through the taxes and penalty on shortage of minimum balance in the bank accounts thrust upon them by the Government during the Demonetization?

Friday 2 February 2018


I was watching the TV on the budget day awaiting for an announcement from the Finance Minister of the much delayed Rs.15,00,000/- offer to each bank account holders at least at the fag end of the term of the present Government. Not only that, I was also making my own budget as to how I could spend it. But to my shock what I heard is the announcement of a much more sugar coated scheme. It is nothing other than the announcement of the Rs. 5 lakh health scheme for the 10 crore poor and vulnerable families in the country with a population of 50 crore out of the approximate total of 125 crores. It is nicknamed as the “world’s largest government funded health care programme” may be with an eye on the Guinness/Limca book entry. It looks to me as a fairy tale when I made a rough calculation.

Suppose, the 10 crore families utilise the Rs.5 lakh assistance, the total would come to Rs.50 lakh crores. Even if only half the number of families avail the facility, total expenditure would be Rs.25 lakh crores. Against this, what the Finance Minister had said in para 59 of the budget speech that, “Adequate funds will be provided for smooth implementation of this programme”. From where? From the estimated total estimated revenue receipt for the financial yearRs.1725738 crore? (see attachment).Or by deducting it from the crores and crores black money expected from the Swiss Bank? Then what about the 15 lakh? Or this scheme is also an election promise to be ignored?      (Visit my HOME PAGE: www.manjaly.net ) 

Friday 12 January 2018


When four of Senior Judges of the Supreme Court has taken the step of going to the press, it is very clear that there is a very serious issue which they could not solve otherwise. But what the four judges of the Supreme Court has done now, I had already done years back in another Constitutional body namely the COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA when I was working there. I wrote a letter to the CAG stating many malpractices in the Department. But there was no result. On the contrary because of this I was haunted by the department. But I had also not given up. I had also retorted and finally department surrendered. since I had no access to the press as they have now, I took voluntary retirement and wrote a book namely, A FRAUD IN THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION, on the issue and published. The letter I had written to the CAG is verbatim given in chapter 5 of the book. In chapter 11 malpractices are explained. After all, the result of the 2G scam case based on the CAG Report is before the people of India.

To read free part of my book, go to the following link and go to ‘look inside’: https://www.amazon.in/FRAUD-INDIAN-CONSTITUTION-M-P-JOSEPH-ebook/dp/B00SQKTADY