An embarrassing stance - The Hindu

An embarrassing stance - The Hindu



MY letter addressed to The Hindu over this editorial - Dated March 27, 2015

Dear Sir,

Apropos your editorial “An embarrassing stance” –
The Hindu, March 27, 2015

While  many ,
including  myself would like to endorse
your criticism against the Indian Government’s stance in the UN over the
Russian sponsored vote against providing equal benefits to “Same Sex Couples” on
humanitarian grounds, I have one objection to raise over a sweeping claim that
you make and I quote:  “ Indian
law has been marked by its commitment to full safeguards against the trampling
by majority groups of the rights of minority social groups”!

This claim definitely flies in the face of facts when one
considers the recent “BEEF BAN Act” that the Maharashtra Government managed to
promulgate after it was endorsed by the President of India, that too after a
lapse of nearly 20 years! And incidentally almost all the states that were ruled
by the BJP at one time or the other were also instrumental in passing similar
laws in their states when they were in power, as were even some NON-BJP ruled
states who did this,  showing ACROSS the
FULL POLITICAL SPECTRUM, a uniform disregard for the “RIGHTS of a LARGE SOCIAL
GROUP ( straddling over Muslims, Christians and Dalits)  over their FREEDOM of CHOICE of FOOD and
CULINARY habits! As such, one is forced to conclude that in India,
discrimination over Caste, Religion, Region and Language seems endemic, not
only at an INDIVIDUAL LEVEL but also at the level of even the STATE that is
supposed to be a Democratic, Socialist and Secular Republic!

Gujarat anti-terror Bill passed finally - The Hindu

Gujarat anti-terror Bill passed finally - The Hindu

Gujarat anti-terror Bill passed
finally- The Hindu, April 1, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/gujarat-passes-controversial-antiterror-bill/article7053036.ece?

ALL  around us, since the NEW DISPENSATION at the
centre has come, not only the so called FRINGE 
ELEMENTS belonging to the Sangh have become emboldened, but also the
State Governments ruled by the BJP too are announcing one DRACONIAN ANTI
-PEOPLE LAW or the other ( BEEF BAN and now this!)

This is
in line with the CREATION of an AUTOCRATIC ORWELLIAN SECURITY / POLICE STATE!
This LAW needs to be CHALLENGED through a PIL in the Supreme Court and defeated
as the SECTION - 66 A of the IT Law got revoked through a PIL by the Supreme
Court recently! ORWELLIAN SECURITY/POLICE state in th
MAKING! 2 b Defeated in SC!

ORWELLIAN
SECURITY/POLICE state in th MAKING! 2 b Defeated in SC!

Gujarat
anti-terror Bill passed finally- The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/article7053036.ece

Supreme Court notice puts Advani, top BJP leaders in a fix - The Hindu

Supreme Court notice puts Advani, top BJP leaders in a fix - The Hindu

BABRI MASJID CASE

                                  Supreme Court
notice puts Advani, top BJP leaders in a fix- The Hindu, April 1, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/babri-case-sc-issues-notices-to-bjp-leaders/article7052514.ece?

                                  TRUTH shall eventually prevail-Satya meva
jayate!

Supreme Court notice puts Advani,
top BJP leaders in a fix - Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7052514.ece

THE CASE TIMELINE

• ›1949: Idols of Ram Lalla are placed surreptitiously under the central dome.


• › 1950: Gopal Simla Visharad files first suit in Faizabad civil court for rights to perform pooja to Ram Lalla.


• › 1950: Paramahansa Ramachandra Das files a suit for continuation of pooja and keeping idols in the structure.


• › 1959: Nirmohi Akhara files third suit, seeking direction to hand over charge of the disputed site. U.P. Sunni Central Wakf Board files fourth suit in 1961 for declaration and possession and fifth in 1989 in the name of Ram Lalla Virajman for declaration and possession.


• › 1986: District judge orders locks be removed. Site opened for Hindu worshippers.


• › 1989: The four suits pending were transferred to the High Court.


• › 1991: U.P. govt. acquires land around the structure for convenience of devotees who attend Ram Lalla darshan.


• › 1992: The mosque is completely demolished by kar sevaks on December 6, resulting in widespread communal riots.


• › 1993: Govt. takes over 67 acres of land around the area, seeks SC's opinion on whether there existed a Hindu place of worship before the structure was built.


• › 1994: Case goes back to Lucknow Bench of HC, suits heard again from 1996.


• › 2002: High Court orders a survey by the Archaeological Survey of India to find out whether a temple existed below the mosque or not.


• › 2010: Court awards two-thirds of Ayodhya site to Hindu parties, one-third to Waqf Board.

The AAP as only its leader’s voice - The Hindu

The AAP as only its leader’s voice - The Hindu

        The ‘greatness’ of a ‘landmark’ judgment- By PETER RONALD
DESOUZA- THE HINDU, MARCH 30, 2015

       http://www.thehindu.com/…/the-greatness-…/article7045767.ece

After many articles that openly eulogized the
Supreme Court bench that had recently struck down the section 66-A without
REALLY ANALYSING what TRULY was GREAT about the Judicial Order or why anybody
should be treating it as a LANDMARK JUDGMENT, one has now come across a
genuinely insightful article in The Hindu, by Peter Ronald deSouza “ The
‘greatness’ of a ‘landmark’ judgment”.

This article provides significant additional insight that
apart from the main judgment the additional observations/arguments that the
Bench of justices J Chelameswar&Rohinton F Nariman have appended to their main
Judicial Order striking down 66-A give us a “SOUND JURISPRUDENTIAL PRECEDENCE”!

This, the article rightly claims, will be helpful in taking
up Legal Battles against “ALL VAGUELY WORDED and CONFUSING/CONTRADICTORY
LEGISLATIONS” from any government as this judgment establishes that-“ It is
vagueness of operative words that must be disallowed because of its “chilling
effect ( of Section 66-a) on free speech”. Vague words are vehicles for state
tyranny. For freedom, precision is required”!

As such, author’s final conclusion that this judgment, ‘in
toto’,is both a “GREAT” as well as a “LANDMARK” JUDGMENT is truly the most
objective assessment of this judgment’s worth for all the citizens &
establishes once again that OUR HIGHER JUDICIARY especial SC Judges are best in
the World!

Most "INSIGHTFUL& must Read ARTICLE" on SC judgment on Section
66-A

The ‘greatness’ of a ‘landmark’ judgment - Hinduhttp://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article7045767.ece

Growth for a few, loss for many - The Hindu

Growth for a few, loss for many - The Hindu

                         

Growth for a few, loss for
many-By PREETI SAMPAT The Hindu, March 28, 2015

In the present AMENDED FORM, the so CALLED "Land Acquisition
Bill" is really a "FARMER'S LAND GRAB and EVICTION through JISKI
Laathi USKI Bhains rule" - Bill and needs to be fought both INSIDE and
OUTSIDE the PARLIAMENT House till it is withdrawn by this GOVERNMENT that is
proving increasingly to be a GOVERNMENT "By" the CORPORATES,
"OF" the CORPORATES and "FOR" the CORPORATES (Remember the
HUGE GIFT to the CORPORATES in the RECENT BUDGET through the 5 % Corporate Tax
Reduction that is likely to cumulatively AMOUNT to several "LAKHS of
CRORES " in the NEXT four years by the TIME this "CORPORATE
GOVERNMENT'S TERM ENDS!)

In the present form its Farmer's Land Grab Bill thro"Jiski Laathi Uski Bhains Rule!

Grwth fr few,loss fr many-Hindu

http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article7040791.ece

Mar 25 2015 : Mirror (Bangalore)

Maneka bats for cow urine to clean floor

NEW DELHI PTI

Mar 25 2015 : Mirror (Bangalore)

Maneka bats for cow urine to clean floor

NEW DELHI

PTI

A surface cleaner made from extracts of cow urine should be used in government offices instead of “chemically bad“ phenyl, union minister Maneka Gandhi has urged her colleagues in the council of ministers.

Gandhi has requested ministers to switch over to `Gaunyle' -cleaning liquid made from cow urine extracts, arguing that it “environmentfriendly“. “I would request you to replace phenyl, which is currently being used in your ministry and is chemically bad for environment, with Gaunyle,“ she said in the letter sent earlier this month.

Gandhi said the Kendriya Bhandar is now stocking the `Gaunyle'.

Phenyl is the cheap cleaning liquid which is widely used in government offices to clean floor and toilets. Gaunyle is being marketed by an NGO, Holy Cow Foundation. It is said to be environment friendly as it does not have a synthetic base like phenyl but is not as strong as the latter.

MY TAKE on this NEWS REPORT in the BANGALORE MIRROR, dated March 25, 2015

                          

                        FEW years back, a BIG HUE AND CRY was made when it appeared that Hema Malini  had RAISED QUESTIONS in RAJYA SABHA  over IMPLEMENTING a SCHEME for INSTALLATION of WATER PURIFIERS in Government Establishments since she was also simultaneously  ADVERTISING for a BRAND of WATER PURIFIERS then ( and she is still continuing to do so!), and then there was an accusation of a CONFLICT of INTEREST against her!

                       

                    Now we see that Maneka Gandhi, being a Minister, is openly ENDORSING a PRODUCT "Gaunyle," ( Purportedly a Floor Cleansing Agent made out of, hold your breath, - COW'S URINE and being marketed by an NGO, Holy Cow Foundation !)? Is there going to be a "SIMILAR HUE and CRY" over a CONFLICT of INTEREST on the PART of MANEKA GANDHI too like it was in the case of Hema Malini ( as mentioned above)?

                       

              However One is left wondering whether Madam Minister is FOLLOWING  a DIKTAT from ORGANISATION that treats COWS to be more IMPORTANT than HUMAN BEINGS or it is is her own INITIATIVE? But in either CASE, it appears that there  is a QUESTION of CONFLICT of INTEREST here?!

                          

Few Yrs BACK HEMA ws Hauled fr MKTNG water Purifier!MANEKA endorsing COWURINE? 

Maneka bats fr cow urine 2clean flor http://epaperbeta.timesofindia.com/Article.aspx?eid=31820&articlexml=Maneka-bats-for-cow-urine-to-clean-floor-25032015006056

Centre plans security guidelines - The Hindu

Centre plans security guidelines - The Hindu









                  Centre plans security guidelines- The Hindu, March 25, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/centre-plans-security-guidelines/article7028883.ece



                       



                  Governments will never  GIVE UP attempts to Gag PEOPLE ,even aftr they get RESOUNDING slaps from  the Supreme Court!







                  Govts. wl nvr GIVE UP attempts 2 Gag,evn aftr getting RESOUNDING slap frm SC!

Centre fr security guidelines-The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7028883.ece

Who will win the Cup? Not India, say bookies - The Hindu

Who will win the Cup? Not India, say bookies - The Hindu

                      Who will win the Cup? Not India, say bookies- The Hindu,
March 24, 2015

                   http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/who-will-win-the-cup-not-india-say-bookies/article7026017.ece?homepage=true&utm_source=MostPopular&utm_medium=Homepage&utm_campaign=WidgetPromo#comments

               

BUT going in there as an "UNDERDOG"
has its own advantage and many a time it results in a SLIGHTLY WEAKER TEAM
TURNING the TABLE against a STRONGER TEAM! So let us hope and pray that even
this advantage comes to our aid and TEAM INDIA passes tomorrow's TRIAL by FIRE
against the stronger AUSSIES Team successfully!

                                 

        

          BOOKIES
could be quite DECEPTIVE & there is ADVANTAGE for UNDERDOG!

Who will win the Cup?Not
India,say bookies-Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/article7026017.ece

SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A - The Hindu

SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A - The Hindu







Petitioner Shreya Singhal flashes the victory sign in New Delhi after the Supreme Court struck down the Section 66A of the Information Technology Act on Tuesday. Photo: R.V. Moorthy

March 25, 2015, @ 2.30 AM

 

SC strikes down ‘draconian’
Section 66A- The Hindu, March 25, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-66-a-of-the-it-act-finds-it-unconstitutional/article7027375.ece?

Petitioner Shreya Singhal flashes the victory
sign in New Delhi after the Supreme Court struck down the Section 66A of the
Information Technology Act on Tuesday. Photo: R.V. Moorthy

It
invades right to free speech, every expression used in it is nebulous’

Section 66A of the Information
Technology Act is unconstitutional in its entirety, the Supreme Court ruled on
Tuesday striking down a “draconian” provision that had led to the arrests of
many people for posting content deemed to be “allegedly objectionable” on the
Internet.

“It is clear that Section 66A
arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free
speech and upsets the balance between such right and the reasonable
restrictions that may be imposed on such right,” said a Bench of Justices J.
Chelameswar and Rohinton F. Nariman. The definition of offences under the
provision was “open-ended and undefined”, it said.

The Bench turned down a plea to
strike down sections 69A and 79 of the Act, which deal with the procedure and
safeguards for blocking certain websites and exemption from liability of
intermediaries in certain cases, respectively.

In the judgment, the court said
the liberty of thought and expression was a cardinal value of paramount
significance under the Constitution. Three concepts fundamental in understanding
the reach of this right were discussion, advocacy and incitement. Discussion,
or even advocacy, of a particular cause, no matter how unpopular it was, was at
the heart of the right to free speech and it was only when such discussion or
advocacy reached the level of incitement that it could be curbed on the ground
of causing public disorder.

The court then went on to say
that Section 66A actually had no proximate connection with public order or with
incitement to commit an offence. “The information disseminated over the
Internet need not be information which ‘incites’ anybody at all. Written words
may be sent that may be purely in the realm of ‘discussion’ or ‘advocacy’ of a
‘particular point of view’. Further, the mere causing of annoyance,
inconvenience, danger, etc., or being grossly offensive or having a menacing
character are not offences under the [Indian] Penal Code at all,” the court
held.

Holding several terms used in
the law to define the contours of offences as “open-ended, undefined and
vague”, the court said: “Every expression used is nebulous in meaning. What may
be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance
or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another.”

The court pointed out that a
penal law would be void on the grounds of vagueness if it failed to define the
criminal offence with sufficient definiteness. “Ordinary people should be able
to understand what conduct is prohibited and what is permitted. Also, those who
administer the law must know what offence has been committed so that arbitrary
and discriminatory enforcement of the law does not take place,” the court said.

SC rejects Centre’s plea

Striking down Section 66A of
the Information Technology Act as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court on
Tuesday rejected the Centre’s plea that it was committed to free speech and
would ensure that the provision was administered in a reasonable manner.

MY TAKE on this NEWS REPORT in The Hindu, Dated March 25, 2015

March 25, 2015, @ 2.30 AM

SC strikes down ‘draconian’
Section 66A- The Hindu, March 25, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-66-a-of-the-it-act-finds-it-unconstitutional/article7027375.ece?

                     The SUPREME COURT has Once
again proved that our HIGHER JUDICIARY& especially SUPREME COURT, is ONE
PILLAR of our DEMOCRACY that has REMAINED totally UNCORRUPTED as well as
remained as VIGILANT, INDEPENDENT& COURAGEOUS as it was when it got
established for the FIRST TIME under an EXECUTIVE order of the PRESIDENT&as
per the CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS!

                   Hats off to our Higher
Judiciary& more so to Ms Shreya Singhal, the petitioner who went with a PIL
against Section 66-A to Supreme Court on behalf of two Pune Based Girls who
were hauled up by the Maharashtra Police for making some innocuous comment by
one of them&for "LIKING" that comment by the other who was her
friend,under this DRACONIAN SECTION 66-A!

                       Now all the INTERNET USERS can BREATH
FREE since the "DAMOCLES SWORD in the FORM of this DRACONIAN SECTION
66-A" has been dismantled in ONE SWIFT STROKE by SUPREME COURT that has
upheld FREEDOM of SPEECH&EXPRESSION as INVIOLABLE  RIGHTS bestowed up on all CITIZENS by our
CONSTITUTION!

                         The BIGGEST BLOW in
favour of FREEDOM of SPEECH & EXPRESSION by SC!

SC strikes down ‘draconianSection
66A - The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7027375.ece

SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A - The Hindu

SC strikes down ‘draconian’ Section 66A - The Hindu







Petitioner Shreya Singhal flashes the victory sign in New Delhi after the Supreme Court struck down the Section 66A of the Information Technology Act on Tuesday. Photo: R.V. Moorthy

March 25, 2015, @ 2.30 AM

 

SC strikes down ‘draconian’
Section 66A- The Hindu, March 25, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-66-a-of-the-it-act-finds-it-unconstitutional/article7027375.ece?

Petitioner Shreya Singhal flashes the victory
sign in New Delhi after the Supreme Court struck down the Section 66A of the
Information Technology Act on Tuesday. Photo: R.V. Moorthy

It
invades right to free speech, every expression used in it is nebulous’

Section 66A of the Information
Technology Act is unconstitutional in its entirety, the Supreme Court ruled on
Tuesday striking down a “draconian” provision that had led to the arrests of
many people for posting content deemed to be “allegedly objectionable” on the
Internet.

“It is clear that Section 66A
arbitrarily, excessively and disproportionately invades the right of free
speech and upsets the balance between such right and the reasonable
restrictions that may be imposed on such right,” said a Bench of Justices J.
Chelameswar and Rohinton F. Nariman. The definition of offences under the
provision was “open-ended and undefined”, it said.

The Bench turned down a plea to
strike down sections 69A and 79 of the Act, which deal with the procedure and
safeguards for blocking certain websites and exemption from liability of
intermediaries in certain cases, respectively.

In the judgment, the court said
the liberty of thought and expression was a cardinal value of paramount
significance under the Constitution. Three concepts fundamental in understanding
the reach of this right were discussion, advocacy and incitement. Discussion,
or even advocacy, of a particular cause, no matter how unpopular it was, was at
the heart of the right to free speech and it was only when such discussion or
advocacy reached the level of incitement that it could be curbed on the ground
of causing public disorder.

The court then went on to say
that Section 66A actually had no proximate connection with public order or with
incitement to commit an offence. “The information disseminated over the
Internet need not be information which ‘incites’ anybody at all. Written words
may be sent that may be purely in the realm of ‘discussion’ or ‘advocacy’ of a
‘particular point of view’. Further, the mere causing of annoyance,
inconvenience, danger, etc., or being grossly offensive or having a menacing
character are not offences under the [Indian] Penal Code at all,” the court
held.

Holding several terms used in
the law to define the contours of offences as “open-ended, undefined and
vague”, the court said: “Every expression used is nebulous in meaning. What may
be offensive to one may not be offensive to another. What may cause annoyance
or inconvenience to one may not cause annoyance or inconvenience to another.”

The court pointed out that a
penal law would be void on the grounds of vagueness if it failed to define the
criminal offence with sufficient definiteness. “Ordinary people should be able
to understand what conduct is prohibited and what is permitted. Also, those who
administer the law must know what offence has been committed so that arbitrary
and discriminatory enforcement of the law does not take place,” the court said.

SC rejects Centre’s plea

Striking down Section 66A of
the Information Technology Act as unconstitutional, the Supreme Court on
Tuesday rejected the Centre’s plea that it was committed to free speech and
would ensure that the provision was administered in a reasonable manner.

MY TAKE on this NEWS REPORT in The Hindu, Dated March 25, 2015

March 25, 2015, @ 2.30 AM

SC strikes down ‘draconian’
Section 66A- The Hindu, March 25, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/supreme-court-strikes-down-section-66-a-of-the-it-act-finds-it-unconstitutional/article7027375.ece?

                     The SUPREME COURT has Once
again proved that our HIGHER JUDICIARY& especially SUPREME COURT, is ONE
PILLAR of our DEMOCRACY that has REMAINED totally UNCORRUPTED as well as
remained as VIGILANT, INDEPENDENT& COURAGEOUS as it was when it got
established for the FIRST TIME under an EXECUTIVE order of the PRESIDENT&as
per the CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS!

                   Hats off to our Higher
Judiciary& more so to Ms Shreya Singhal, the petitioner who went with a PIL
against Section 66-A to Supreme Court on behalf of two Pune Based Girls who
were hauled up by the Maharashtra Police for making some innocuous comment by
one of them&for "LIKING" that comment by the other who was her
friend,under this DRACONIAN SECTION 66-A!

                       Now all the INTERNET USERS can BREATH
FREE since the "DAMOCLES SWORD in the FORM of this DRACONIAN SECTION
66-A" has been dismantled in ONE SWIFT STROKE by SUPREME COURT that has
upheld FREEDOM of SPEECH&EXPRESSION as INVIOLABLE  RIGHTS bestowed up on all CITIZENS by our
CONSTITUTION!

                         The BIGGEST BLOW in
favour of FREEDOM of SPEECH & EXPRESSION by SC!

SC strikes down ‘draconianSection
66A - The Hindu http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7027375.ece

Will revoke AFSPA in a phased manner: Mufti Sayeed - The Hindu

Will revoke AFSPA in a phased manner: Mufti Sayeed - The Hindu

  

                    Will revoke AFSPA in a
phased manner: Mufti Sayeed- The Hindu, March 23, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/will-revoke-afspa-in-a-phased-manner-mufti-sayeed/article7024092.ece

                         

                 With the HEAD
CRUSHING  "BETAL" ( that is
Bharatya JUMLA Party ) riding ON his shoulders, this VIKRAM ( MUFTEE MOHAMED
SAYEED) is surely DAYDREAMING if he thinks that he will get the Bharatya JUMLA
Party at the centre to agree to his STRATEGY of a HEALING TOUCH through  "Winning HEARTS and MINDS of Kashmiris"
plan by REVOKING AFSPA in phases!

With-BETAL-B JUMLA P-riding ON hs
shoulder,this VIKRAM is DAYDREAMING!

Will revoke AFSPA in
phases: Mufti Sayeed-Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/article7024092.ece

With-BETAL-B JUMLA P,riding
ON hs shoulder,this VIKRAM is DAYDREAMING!

Will revoke AFSPA in
phases Mufti Sayeed-Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/other-states/article7024092.ece

Shashi Kapoor gets Dadasaheb Phalke Award - The Hindu

Shashi Kapoor gets Dadasaheb Phalke Award - The Hindu













Shashi Kapoor gets Dadasaheb Phalke Award- The
Hindu, March 23, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/veteran-actor-shashi-kapoor-gets-dadasaheb-phalke-award/article7024571.ece?

                             

                   He deserves the
prestigious DADASAHEB PHALKE award mainly on 3 COUNTS! (1)For producing most
memorable movies like Junoon ,Kalyug,36 Chowringhee Lane,Vijeta & Utsav.

                  

                  In first the first two  movoies,
Junoon & Kalyug , Famed Shyam Bengal was director,With"36 Choringhee
Lane Shashi Kapoor introduced Aparna Sen as director who won many international
awards for her very first movie & later directed many such award winning
movies,In vijeta it was Govind Nihlani,Shyam Benegal's Famed Cinematographer
who held the megaphone as director & lastly in Utsav,he introduced Girish
Karnad as its director!

          

                 These art films & Making directors of INTERNATIONAL FAME out of
APARNA SEN & GIRISH KARNAD was his BIGGEST contribution!

           
(2)THE 2nd biggest contribution was his British & American films
made nder the banner o Merchant Ivory Proudctions, run by Ismail Merchant &
James Ivory like -The Householder, Shakespeare Wallah, Bombay talkie &
Heat  &Dust“!

            

                     (3)Last majopr contribution from him was his "PRITHVI THEATRES that
he ran despite losses to encourage THEATRE & few performances in his own
films- Junoon, Kalyug, Vijeta, Utsav &out side films like Dharamputra,
Waqt, Deevar, Kala Pathar, Namak Halal!

                         

             

                  

                              Started as Child star(AWARA),became mega-star&producer&Ran
Prithvi Theatre!

 Shashi Kapoor gets Dadasaheb Award-Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/article7024571.ece

                      Deserved this for HUGE
BODY of work as Actor(English&Hindi)&PRODUCER!

Probe ordered into derailment - The Hindu

Probe ordered into derailment - The Hindu



Locals were the first to reach the spot who rescued passengers until rescue and relief teams from Lucknow and Rae Bareli rushed to the area. Expressing grief over the accident, Mr. Prabhu tweeted: “Neglect of past or limited budget resource can’t be the reason for accidents ...We are prioritising safety as thrust area ... even sourcing extra budget money for improving rail safety and ageing infrastructure.”

This Comment from the Railway Minister needs to be treated
as one THAT is an OBLIQUE ATTEMPT  at
PASSING the BUCK to the PREVIOUS DISPENSATION ( UPA-II Government)!

                 
"Expressing grief over the accident, Mr. Prabhu tweeted: “Neglect
of past or limited budget resource can’t be the reason for accidents ..

                      This certainly will qualify as
being a "Too Clever By Half" attempt by the CURRENT INCUMBENT Mr.
Suresh Prabhu at putting the blame of a railway accident that has happened 10
months after NDA Government has taken over on to the previous government!

Railway Minister Suresh Prabhu's comment is clearly
"Too Clever by Half"!

Probe ordered into derailment - The Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7015925.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/drivers-timely-action-prevents-headon-collision/article7016248.ece#comments

Driver’s timely action prevents head-on collision - The Hindu

Driver’s timely action prevents head-on collision - The Hindu

Driver’s timely action prevents head-on collision- The
Hindu, March 21, 2015

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/drivers-timely-action-prevents-headon-collision/article7016248.ece#comments

                 

                      This
Comment from the Railway Minister needs to be treated as one THAT is an OBLIQUE
ATTEMPT  at PASSING the BUCK to the
PREVIOUS DISPENSATION ( UPA-II Government)!

                 
"Expressing grief over the accident, Mr. Prabhu tweeted: “Neglect
of past or limited budget resource can’t be the reason for accidents ..

                     
This certainly will qualify as being a "Too Clever By Half"
attempt by the CURRENT INCUMBENT Mr. Suresh Prabhu at putting the blame of a
railway accident that has happened 10 months after NDA Government has taken
over on to the previous government!

Railway Minister Suresh Prabhu's comment is clearly
"Too Clever by Half"!

Probe ordered into derailment - The Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7015925.ece

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/drivers-timely-action-prevents-headon-collision/article7016248.ece#comments

Railway Minister Prabhu is trying 2
b "Too Clever by Half"!

Driver’s timely action prevents head-on collision- Hindu
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/article7016248.ece