Letter No.711

From
V. Sabarimuthu
26-3 Vellicode
Mulagumoodu P.O. 629167
To
All judges
The Supreme Court of India
New Delhi
Your Excellencies
The Supreme Court of India, today (26 February
2019), suggested a court appointed mediator to solve
the Ayodhya dispute. It would pass an order on 5 March
2018.
Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi tends to be
impartial. He is not particular that the case must be
heard by him. Further, he is, apparently, not interested
in the outcome of the case. These two factors, for the
first time, make him a competent chief justice.
Someone might say that the usefulness of the
Supreme Court of India would be reduced when it tries
to mediate.

However, mediation would be a better tool than
adjudication if the parties see eye to eye. Otherwise, the
parties might ultimately favour the adjudication.
The problem with court appointed mediator is that
he would not be impartial.
In fact, no man would be straightforward in all
issues. This is a limitation imposed by the Nature.
Therefore, the Chief Justice of India could have
asked the parties to choose a mediator. The condition is
that they must give an undertaking to abide by the
decision of the mediator.

The Indian Air Force (IAF) carried out a surgical
strike at a terrorist camp in Balakot in Pakistan, 350
terrorists were killed. The armed forces must be
commended. But, it must be treated as a routine action
rather than as an act of vengeance.
It should not be clubbed with the Pulwama attack
because it is customary all over the world to strike at
the terrorists.
The TV channels have not ended the discussion on
the strike. They have no other thing to discuss today.

The opposition parties also stimulate the
Government.
Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi had been using
the word ‘vengeance’ repeatedly after the Pulwama
attack.
The present man thought of cooling him down.
Therefore, the present man commended him saying that
he did not allow the militant people to achieve their
objectives by starting a war with Pakistan. The present
man achieved his objective because a possible war
ended with some war games.
Now, there must be some bad elements in Pakistan.
Their objective must be the destruction of Delhi,
Mumbai or Gujarat.
The present man is interested in protecting these
places rather than destroying Pakistan.

According to a report on 26 February 2019 (today),
the Government of India alienated the Trivandrum and
the Bangaluru airports to a promoter of the Prime
Minister of India, the Adani Group. The words used
were ‘operating and managing’ and not privatization.

Now the King of Travancore or Government of
Kerala is not the owner of the Trivandrum airport but
‘The Adani Enterprises Limited (AEL)’! This is nothing
but the circumvention of Article 39 of the Constitution
of India. In fact, this decision subverts the Constitution
of India.
Formerly Prime Mr. Minister A.B. Vajpayee
alienated the BALCO, VSNL, IPCL and 31 other PSUs
(Public Sector Under-takings). He did it when everyone
went on talking about his Kargil War.
Former Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan
Singh alienated the natural assets and the public money
in the Provident Fund and the Pension Fund while the
media diverted the attention of the people to Indian
interests in the Sri Lankan War against the Tamils.
Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi alienates the
public assets after focusing the attention of the people
to the Pulmava attack and the present surgical strike. He
boasts like Hercules although the credit must go to the
armed forces. But he does not utter a word about the
privatization of the Trivandrum and the Bangaluru
airports because he shivers like a rat to accept
responsibility. He might have done it in the hope that
the impending Balakot strike would mask this.

However, the privatization happened because of the
failure of the Supreme Court of India to adjudicate 710
letters in time.
Therefore, unless the privatization is not stayed
immediately, the Chief Justice of India and all other
judges of the Supreme Court of India must be arrested
and prosecuted.
The media today (26-2-2019) said that the Election
Commission of India is to announce the General
Election on 7 March 2019.
Any election before granting freedom to the people
is an unconstitutional action.
There exists an erroneous belief that the outcome
of the election in India is determined by the people. It is
not true. It is determined by the Supreme Court of India
Mr. Rahul Gandhi helped alienate the natural
resources and the public money by doing violence
against Articles 39 and 19 during the rule of Dr.
Manmohan Singh.
Prime Minister Mr. Narendra Modi alienated the
natural assets by doing violence against Articles 39 and
19. Further, he subverted the Constitution of India in

the pretext of a gas subsidy policy and an offset clause
policy.
Therefore, they betrayed the trust of the people.
Yet, the Supreme Court of India projects them as the
potential prime ministerial candidates.
The employee should be encouraged not only to
present their complaints but also to present them while
they are still “warm”. Further, there is prohibition
against discriminatory employment practices.
When the teachers undertook a strike for pension in
2003, the court banned it. It justified the dismissal of
over 2 lakh employees. More than 20 employees died of
heart attack. They had to withdraw the strike. They
escaped due to the intervention of the present man and
the then President of India, Dr. A.P. J.Abdul Kalam.
The teachers again resorted to strike after their
demands for pension vent in vain for over 16 years. The
court asked them to withdraw the strike. ’You are
teachers. You strike work? You must be role models to
the students. Will any sincere teacher undertake a strike
at the time of examination? You agreed to work without
pension. Why do you demand it now? You draw huge
salary. Yet you strike work! Can you see the people
without any employment? 70 per cent of the income

goes for your salary. Is it not sufficient?’ These are the
words uttered by the court.
But for the intervention of the present man, many
might have died of heart attack.
After the withdrawal of the strike, the Government,
as usual, said, ‘No work. No pay’.
The learned judges of the Supreme Court of India
are also public servants. Unlike all others, they draw
salary from the Consolidated Fund of India so that they
would not go without salary even during a tight money
period. The reason is that if they fail to adjudicate the
petitions, democracy would not survive in India.
But, the learned judges of the Supreme Court of
India failed to adjudicate 710 meritorious petitions.
Even the adjudication of one letter might have
changed the Government. Is it not dereliction of duty?
Are the charges levelled against the teachers by the
court not applicable to the judges? How can they draw
salary if they cannot or do not do their only duty?
Now, they project ‘two sore parts’ in India as the
prime ministerial candidates. They tell the people that
they can vote for anyone of them. They say that there
are no people apart from them! What a calamity is this?

The learned judges must conduct the election as
demanded by the present absent class citizen.
This does not mean that they must ask the people to
vote for the present man. This is only to say that they
must bring the salient points of letters to the notice of
the people preferably through adjudication to make
them aware of the factors that block their progress.
They must project the success stories of all people
irrespective of their caste, religion and place of birth.
Let the illiterate absent class citizens choose anyone
after this exercise.
This is letter No.711
The President of India should not tolerate whole-
sale disregard of grievances at any cost.
V. Sabarimuthu
India
26-2-2019.