IS ORISSA CHIEF MINISTER ACTING FOR THE CRIMINALS?

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Is Orissa’s Chief Minister Naveen Patnaik acting for the criminals? The question pains me. But crimes against Orissa are too painful to feel the pain in raising this question.

Let me come to the subject.

The most revered humanitarian and founder leaders of Orissa, whose penances at Satyabadi had built up Orissa’s first section of learned, competent citizens to meet the requirements of modern Orissa at her most critical juncture of resurrection, were subjected to brutal conspiracies and their brainchild – the Samaja – was hijacked by criminals, who forged Utkalmani Gopabandhu’s Will to legalize their offense.

It was found that two former ministers of Orissa – Lingaraj Mishra and Radhanath Rath – were involved with hijacking of the Samaja by forging the Will of its co-founder Gopabandhu Das.

The newspaper, with emotional support of the people for being the newspaper of the Satyabai Panchasakha has been earning thousands of crores of rupees. But its entire revenue is being looted by the Servants of the People Society (SoPS), a body of miscreants that have killed the principal object of the organization, but have been using the forged Will of Gopabandhu in continuous crime.

When Save the Samaja Forum (SSF)  moved the RNI to drop SoPS from the ownership register of Samaja, and an inquiry was assigned to ADM of Cuttack by the RNI, the offenders filed the forged copy of the Will as genuine and yet, in its forwarding written submission confessed that only the Satyabadi Press, not the Samaja was made over to SoPS by Gopabandhu in his Will.

So, it is admittedly the fact that, the SoPS has occupied the Samaja without any legality or authority and has been looting its revenue to the tune of thousands of crores of rupees, which should have been made available to develop the Panchasakha’s Bana Bidyalaya to the stature of Jatiya Bana Bidyalaya University. Instead of developing the Bana Bidyalaya, the criminals operating under the cover of SoPS have given it starvation death, by misappropriating all the revenue generated by the Press and the Paper.

As ORISSA MATTERS continued to expose the felony, the CMO partnered with the exposed offenders and silenced the police when the Director General of Police was contemplating action against them.

We had to run from pillars to posts to retrieve Gopabandhu’s original Will in hope against hope that once the original Will would be in his hand, the Chief Minister shall not hesitate to initiate action against the offenders. We got the original Will and notified him of the same. He kept mum.

Besides ORISSA MATTERS, a specific site addressed to the subject – savethesamaja.com – was created, which carried all the reports published in the former site, with repetition thereof in social media Face Book in a specific page styled “savethesamaja”, where appreciations are rising every day.

For the convenience of non-netizens, SSF has published a compilation of those well documented postings in a book under the title “The Samaja in Maze of Forgery” available in well known book shops including A.K.Mishra.

Orissa’s greater interest is so calling and the necessity to retrieve the Samaja from the criminals that have occupied it by using a forged Will of Gopabandhu is so urgent and recovery of the multi-thousand crores of rupees they have looted from Orissa’s iconic paper by using the forged Will of Gopabandhu is so very necessary for resurrection of the Bana Bidyalaya to its desirable status of a “Jatiya Bana Bidyalaya University, that, SSF wanted an appointment with the Chief Minister to apprise him of the facts on presenting him a copy of the compilation – The Samaja in Maze of Forgery – so that the Government understands its responsibility to the people of Orissa in this specific matter. But surprisingly the Chief Minister has not yet shown the minimum courtesy of answering to our request, as if by being apprised of the crime committed against the people of Orissa, he shall commit a crime!

The Chief Minister is supposed to be the strongest sentinel of Orissa. But, his conduct shows, he is hand-in-glove with the criminals.

It pains to come to this observation.

Therefore, I put this question to all the fellows that have kept the habitual nonchalant Naveen Patnaik clamped on Orissa like filarial worms continue to keep human body loaded with the unwanted elephantine growth: Is Orissa Chief Minister acting for the criminals?

If not, I request all the BJD members to prevail upon their leader to heed to our request dated May 04, 2015, to give us time to be apprised of the issue, or if he still shies, to procure from the market the book “The Samaja in Maze of Forgery” wherein documentary evidences of forgery and loot are given, to read it deeply, to locate the felonies, to act against the criminals that have swindled multi-thousand crores of rupees from the Samaja revenue by using the forged Will of Gopabandhu, to take over the Samaja with immediate effect in view of the admitted and proven fact that Gopabandhu had never made over the Samaja to the Servants of the People Society, to recover the swindled money from that society sans any compromise and to resurrect the Bana Bidyalaya in the Bakula Bana complex where the Panchasakha had established it and had brought to it national fame more than that of Shanti Niketan till Nobel prize made Rabindranath a world celebrity. Let them discipline their leader, so that there shall be no room for us to question: Is Orissa’s Chief Minister acting for the criminals?

Advertisements

Forgery in the Samaja: Trade Union’s FIR registered Against SoPS Members and IAS (Rtd) Suresh Chandra Mantry

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

The forgery committed on Gopabandhu’s Will having been exposed, President of Utkalmani Newspaper Employees Association Sri Deviprasanna Nayak had put the information before the IIC of Cantonment Police Station, Cuttack on May 12, 2015 demanding criminal action against the members of the Servants of the People Society as well as a retired IAS officer Suresh Chandra Mantry and a former Editor of the paper Sri Gopalkrushna Mohapatra, for use of the forged Will despite knowing that the same is forged. After inordinate delay of around three weeks, the IIC has registered the FIR on May 31, 2015, under sections 420/465/467/468/471/34 IPC, which are the major penal provisions against the crime of forgery. The punishments under these sections are very stiff.

Section 420 stipulates that “whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

Section 465 mandates, “Whoever commits forgery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

Section 468 provides for life imprisonment or imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years and fine. Under this section whosoever is not give life imprisonment, shall be punished with imprisonment up to ten years with fine. Its language is: “Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, moveable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any moveable property or valuable security, shall be punished with *[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine”. * Subs. by Act 26 of 1955, s. 117 and Sch., for “transportation for life” (w.e.f. 1-1-1956).

Section 468 provides that “Whoever commits forgery, intending that the *[document or Electronic Record forged] shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine”. * Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, sec. 91 and Sch. I, for “document forged” (w.e.f. 17-10-2000)

But Section 471 is for users of forged Will. The fellow who uses a forged Will shall be punished with imprisonment and fine. It says, “Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any *[document or electronic record] which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged **[document or electronic record], shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such **[document or electronic record]. * Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, sec. 91 and Sch. I, for “document” (w.e.f. 17-10-2000). ** Subs. by Act 21 of 2000, sec. 91 and Sch. I, for “document forged” (w.e.f. 17-10-12000)

And, Section 34 provides punishment to gang of criminals. It says, *”When a criminal act is done by several persons in furtherance of the common intention of all, each of such persons is liable for that act in the same manner as if it were done by him alone”. *Subs. by Act 27 of 1870, sec. 1, for the original section.

So, the criminals in the forte of the Samaja and SoPS are now to face the law that calls for imprisonment and fine.

The two fellows who had forged the Will of Gopabandhu – former ministers of Orissa and editors of the paper, Radhanath Rath and Lingaraj Mishra –  have died before their crime was detected. Another criminal Manu Bhai Patel has died recently. Another accused – Santosh Kumar Muduli is also dead. Udaynath Sadangi whose name is in the written information is also dead. The trade union shall demand for posthumous punishment to them as they were individually and collectively perpetrators and users of the forgery.

Some other fellows who have been named in the FIR, but not shown as accused, will hopefully come to books by the time the charge sheet would be ready.

The accused enlisted by the investigating officer, pending final updatation of the list, are: (1) Manubhai Patel, (2) Raj Kumar, (3) Deepak Malviya, (4) Vimsen Yadav, (5) Prasanna Vadan Mehta, (6) Onkar Chand, (7) Niranjan Rath, (8) Kirtibhai Pandya, (9) Ajay Kumar, (10) Gopalkrushna Mohapatra, (11)Suresh Chandra mantry, (12) Santosh Kumar Muduli and (13) Lingaraj Mishra. The first and the two last accused persons are, as mentioned supra, dead.

(Note: The 12th accused is not an accused in reality. He is one of the victims of the offenders. The IIC has inadvertently mentioned his name and prefixed it with a nonextistence mark, in place of, according to him, late Radhanath Rath.)

The living culprits have a gang of hounds from the pull of retired IAS officers, IPS officers, and Judges in their service as advisors, who are lobbying for killing of this FIR. They have also a powerful ally in Chief Minister’s Office, who, despite being a junior officer is being regarded as ‘Super Chief Minister’ from whom Cabinet Ministers and Secretaries including the Chief Secretary are getting instructions as if from the Chief Minister. His protection to Samaja hijackers is a great obstacle in action against located culprits that stay safe in the ramparts of the Gopabandhu Bhawan. The inordinate delay in registration of the well documented FIR is because of their pressure.

Book CoverWe in orissamatters.com have regularly investigated into and detailed the crime and our book “The Samaja in Maze of Forgery”, very ably compiled by Sri Deviprasanna Nayak is a highly well documented book of rare meticulousness that has become an instant seller. The first edition is at the verge of necessitating a second edition, according to its publisher Sri Pabitra Mohan Maharatha. The reports of orissamatters.com are being posted by the ‘Save the Samaja Forum’ in savethesamaja.com and the ‘save the samaja’ page in social media: Face book. It is noteworthy that the page is getting ever increasing ‘like’s everyday, which indicates that the people all over Orissa have been keeping alert eyes on this matter and appreciating the exposure.

So, despite lobby by the pack of hounds – former IAS, IPS, IFS Officers and Judges – the case cannot die sans action.

With this case, a new chapter in the history of mass action against crime by fellows, who have been dazzling under the arch of journalism misusing the media power of the Samaja, is going to be written in golden letters.

Orissa, keep watch.

Truth Prevails: Samaja Occupiers Exposed Over Fraud and Forgery

Release of the booksamaja in maze of forgery news

BEST OF CELEBRATION OF MAY DAY IN BHUBANESWAR: SSF LAUNCHED ‘SAMAJA IN THE MAZE OF FORGERY’

May Day had the best of celebration in Bhubaneswar as an exploited employee of Orissa’s premier daily ‘The Samaja’ Sri Gagan Parida launched a milestone book on forgery, corruption and exploitation of workers in the major news daily, the founders of which were the most revered humanitarian leaders known as Panchasakha of Satyabadi, headed by Utkalmani Gopabandhu Das.

Book CoverThe book is ‘Samaja in Maze of Forgery’. It is a compilation of articles of Journalist Subhas Chandra Pattanayak published in orissamatters.com. President of Utkalmani Newspaper Employees Association (UNEA), journalist Deviprasanna Nayak has compiled it.

The book has exposed how two former ministers of the State, one of who was the paper’s longest time editor, and being so, had bagged India’s third highest civilian honor – Padma Bhusana, had forged the Will of Utkalmani Pt. Gopabandhu Das to grab the ‘Samaja’ under cover of the Servants of the People Society (SoPS) and how since then the illegal occupiers of the renowned paper have been exploiting the workforce in blatant violation of industrial/labor laws by way of corrupting the State Administration and misusing the process of Law.

Subhas Chandra PattanayakIn introducing the book, author Subhas Chandra Pattanayak alleged that two former education ministers – Lingaraj Mishra and Radhanath Rath – had forged the Will of Pandit Gopabandhu to grab the Samaja under cover of the SoPS and had pushed the pride of Orissa – The JATIYA BANA VIDYALAYA to starvation death.

The book further exposes, he said, how a later editor of Samaja, Ms. Manorama Mahapatra, daughter of Radhanath Rath, had also forged the signature of a sub-editor to deny him his legitimate rank and salaries.

The book exposes how huge amount of rupees are swindled from the revenue of the Samaja by the Servants of the People Society, by using a forged Will of Gopabandhu and how the Registrar of Newspapers for India is sleeping over the allegation of ‘Save the Samaja Forum’, and how the District Judge office at Cuttack was used as a ‘breeding bed of forgery’ by the illegal occupiers of the Samaja.

The book is full of documentary evidences of the serious crimes committed by Radhanath Rath who was editor of the Samaja till his death and other two editors and members of the Servants of the People Society.

The book mentions how the workers are perishing under unfair labor practices, without getting regularized even after serving the major daily newspaper for more than 30 years, he said.

gagan paridaOne such worker is Sri Gagan Parida. He has been pushed into instant termination of his thirty years long continuous service, the moment he urged upon the management to designate him as a regular employee so that he could draw the benefits available under the labor laws. Like him. About 20 persons who had been working everyday regularly for decades in hope of regularization of their services have been summarily dismissed as they wanted to be regularized.

Save the Samaja Forum (SSF) that has published the book preferred to launch the book in the hands of Parida as he is the man who has worked in the paper for the longest period without being regularized.

Release of the book

Held in Lohia Academy auditorium with joint convener of SSF, eminent journalist Prasanta Patnaik in the chair, the meeting was addressed by Subartta editor Pradyumna Satapathy, Samadrusti editor Sudhir Patnaik and eminent author and founder editor of Chithi, political scientist Prof. Biswaranjan.

Adhyapak BiswaranjanProf. Biswaranjan called upon the Government to initiate action against the SoPS and retrieve from it all the money it has taken from the Samaja revenue for revival of the Bana Vidyalaya, as suggested in the book, without any loss of time, as publication of the Will of Gopabandhu that the occupiers of the Samaja are using in all official forums along with the signed probated copy of the real Will, has established that the occupier of the Samaja have forged and have been using the forged Will of Gopabandhu.

Sudhir Patnaik

 

Sri Sudhir Patnaik expressed absolute solidarity with SSF and demanded that in view of the exposure, the State Government should take prompt action against the miscreants and stop the Samaja from being further looted by unauthorized people.

Pradyumna SatapathyA single moment should not be lost, roared Sri Pradyumna Satapathy, in punishing the fellows that have evidently forged the Will of Gopabandhu and have swindled till date the revenue of the paper, while keeping the employees intimidated under hire and fire policy. He expressed total solidarity with the SSF in the noble cause and warned the intellectuals of the state that future will not pardon if despite publication of the irrefutable evidences of forgery, they stay silent spectators. He called upon the State Government to wake up to the occasion and save the icon paper of the State, founded by the noblest of noble souls like Utkalmani Gopabandhu and is four friend collectively famous as the Panchasakhas of Satyabadi.

Felicitations were offered to two great fighters from amongst the workers of the Samaja. They are Sahid Ramesh Chandra Patnaik and Sangrami Pitambar Mishra.

L.Senapari for Ramesh Patnaik

Sahid Ramesh Chandra Patnaik was summarily dismissed after putting up two decades long service without any allegation or charges. The labor officer had recommended his case for adjudication in the Industrial Tribunal. But, misusing media power, the government was dissuaded to refer his case to the tribunal. Industrial Disputes Act stipulates that no labor court of Industrial Tribunal can take cognizance of an Industrial Dispute unless referred to by the Government. Thus disadvantaged, Patnaik had gone to civil court that found the action of the management illegal. But instead of acting an ideal employer, the management knocked down the case in the Orissa High Court and forced the poor worker to seek justice, if he could, in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court struck down the High Court order and awarded a sum of Rs.2,000,00/- to be paid by the management within two months. But by then, Patnaik had passed away under slow starvation. To his co-workers, he became a martyr in the long battle for justice. So, on the occasion, he was felicitated posthumously. On his behalf, President of Cuttack District Journalists Association, Lalatendu Senapati received the felicitation.

felicitation_Pitambar Mishra

The second worker to be felicitated was Journalist Pitambar Mishra. He was a sub-editor whom without issuing any appointment letter, the management was using in reporting the evening and night city of Cuttack, over and above his desk job in daytime. After putting up eleven years of service, when he prayed to be regularized as a sub-editor in which rank he was originally engaged, he was summarily dismissed. His case, however, was referred to the Labor Court, Bhubaneswar. But, the management challenged the maintainability of the case under the plea that he was not an employee of the Samaja. The management, to the horror of Mishra, produced an agreement in a stamp paper where Mishra’s relation with Samaja was “principal to principal”, not employee to employer. Ms. Manorama Mohapatra had signed the agreement on first part and Mishra was shown to have signed it as the second part. Mishra challenged it as a forged agreement produced by the management to deny him his dues. His disputed signature was sent by the Court to the State Handwriting Expert and Forensic investigation established that Mishra’s signature was forged. With such clear evidence of forgery committed by the management, the reference went in favor of Mishra and because by then he had exceeded the superannuation age. Instead of ordering for his reinstatement, the Court commuted his legitimate dues and asked the management to pay the same immediately. But, the habitually litigant management has challenged the Labor Court award in the High Court, forcing Mishra to suffer starvation. The SSF, therefore, decided to felicitate Mishra for the fighting spirit he has displayed against exploitation by the powerful media house.

From the audience, strong supports were expressed with Tusarkant, a known conscience-keeper who shares his original thinking with the society writing prolifically in the media, stressing upon speedy but planned action against the wrongdoers.

Devi Prasanna NayakPresident of Utkalmani Newspaper Employees Association, well-known desk-journalist Devi Prasanna Nayak detailed how internecine rivalry amongst the members of SoPS, which has evidently kept the Samaja under unauthorized occupation, has demoralized the workers and how the dedicated employees of the Samaja have been subjected to concocted cases and stage-managed enquiries and illegal dismissals.

Prasanta PatnaikPresident Sri Prasanta Patnaik announced that the SSF shall stand with the employees of the Samaja in their battle against exploitation and called upon the Government to initiate penal action against members of SoPS who are yet using the forged Will of Gopabandhu for their personal and collective benefit. The SSF campaign shall continue till SoPS is ousted from ownership of Samaja and the paper of the people is retrived from illegal ownership. He thanks the employees of the Samaja for their principled fight and called upon all labor unions to stand with the employees of the Samaja in their days of stark disadvantage. He called upon the RNI to peruse the exposure of forgery made in the released book of Subhas Pattanayak and deregister immediately the SoPS as owner of the Samaja.

photo(20)

 

Coordinator of SSF Pabitra Mohan Maharatha coordinated the event.

Samaja finds Manubhai unworthy of editorial obituary

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak
Manubhai Patel alleged to have grabbed presidential chair of Servants of the People Society, which allegation he could not legally refute till his death yesterday, is found unworthy of editorial obituary in Samaja, the paper of Orissa that SoPS has illegally occupied by using a forged Will of Pt. Gopabandhu Das, its forefront founder.

The front page of Samaja has carried in its edition of today the news of Manubhai’s death. Had he been a legitimate President of SoPS, which even the paper under his occupation projected, the editorial column could have gone blank in his honor or the paper could have paid respect to him with an editorial obituary. But today’s Samaja editorial is an obituary on India’s lost hope in ICC Cricket World Cup 2015.

If this is not noteworthy, what else is, in Orissa today?

A former editor Radhanath Rath, whose forgery helped SoPS to occupy Samaja, had put it on records that Manubhai had taken huge amount of money from the Samaja funds to use in his electioneering with assurance to return the same after elections and despite several reminders, he had not returned the money.

Danda Nirodh Mishra, a former IAS whom Manubhai in his previous avatar as SoPS President had appointed as General Manager of Samaja, has informed the Police Chief at the call of his conscience that the amount of Rs.96 lakhs which he had told the police in FIR to have been misappropriated by Brajabhai and others, was actually misappropriated by Manubhai and in a letter he had confronted Manubhai with the swindling he had made, which, if disclosed, may put him to jail.

Many more such acts of money swindling from the Samaja funds by Manubhai Patel is known to the insiders of the Samaja.

Perhaps, therefore, their collective conscience has refused the editorial obituary in his honor.

Ramesh Pattnaik: Martyr in the battle against exploitation in Samaja

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

As has already been shown, the history of Samaja under Servants of the People Society (SoPS) is a history of treachery, forgery and scourgery.

This write-up will narrate how a low paid employee of Samaja namely Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik breathed his last in a long fight for justice on the battle field of Law that spanned from a labor office at Cuttack to the Supreme Court at New Delhi, as his mighty employer, after having illegally dismissed him, had misused media power to obstruct adjudication of his dispute under the Industrial Disputes Act and yet again had foiled the relief granted to him by the lowest Civil Court, Cuttack by using the forum of the High Court of Orissa.

If anything, he is a martyr amongst the workers in the battle for justice in the ramparts of Law.

Anti-worker I.D.Act

bijubabu watchig scpTwo and half decades ago, I had set fire to Industrial Disputes Act in front of the Orissa Legislative Assembly when it was in session, to shock-awake the State Government to the need of reference of a case of dismissal of a Journalist (Vevekanand Dash) to the Industrial Tribunal. His powerful employer being the son-in-law of the Chief Minister of that time, the Minister of Labor had blocked the reference taking advantage of a provision in this Act that no industrial dispute raised by a worker can be taken into cognizance by a labor Court or Industrial Tribunal, despite Conciliation Officer’s recommendation, unless the State Government refers the dispute for adjudication. The then Leader of Opposition Biju Patnaik had witnessed my action, but as he also belonged to the class of exploiters, kept mum in the Assembly over the anti-worker provision in the I.D.Act.

Ramesh Pattnaik was the first victim of this provision in Orissa.

Rath and the rule of terror

Radhanath Rath, whom an anti-people Government had decorated with Padma Bhusan, was running a rule of terror in the Samaja organization. He was a ruthless oppressor and to him, the Samaja employees were just like subjects in a fiefdom. He was hiring and firing them as he liked. He was deriving a sadistic pleasure by keeping the employees intimidated. He had promulgated a standing order not by signing the same with the employees, but with an outsider behind back of the employees. He had ruined the employees’ collective morale to such extent that their trade union was accepting his hegemony in its affairs without any objection. We see trade union activism has grown amongst employees of Samaja only after demise of Rath. This speaks volumes of how Rath had kept the employees intimidated constantly.

And to keep the employee constantly intimidated, he was subjecting them to unfair labor practices as he liked. An example of his whimsical action was Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik.

He was, all on a sudden, given the shock of suspension on 9 April 1969. Rath was expecting that he would go and fall at his feet praying for withdrawal of the suspension order. He could have derived a sadistic pleasure from that. But, instead of falling at his feet, Ramesh preferred a complaint before the Labor officer. He was dismissed from service on 4 July 1969 under prevention of a domestic enquiry having found him guilty of charges framed against him.

Denial of reference under I.D.Act

Pattnaik challenged the illegal order of dismissal before the Labor Officer. Due to non-cooperation of management the conciliation failed.The Conciliation officer sent the failure report to the higher authorities with his recommendation for adjudication. But Rath used his tremendous media power to get the recommendation of the labor law implementation authorities rejected on 5 March 1070.

Browbeating the Civil Court

Ramesh knew of the design and understood that unless the government refers his dispute for adjudication, the Labor Court/Tribunal shall take no cognizance of his case. Therefore he had, without any prejudice to his industrial dispute, invoked the Civil Court jurisdictions on 14 Nov 1969 for declaration that the termination of his service was null and void and that he continued to be in service despite the order of dismissal and was entitled to the emoluments for the period subsequent to the date of dismissal.

In order to browbeat the Civil Court, heavyweight advocates were engaged to oppose the civil case under the plea that Pattnaik being an industrial worker, the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to entertain his case. The Munsif (Presiding Officer of the lowest Civil Court) in his order dated 12 Dec 1974 rejected the management plea and ordered that the suit was maintainable in his Court. He further declared that natural justice was denied to Pattnaik before dismissing him. But, surprisingly he refused to give him the relief sought for, interpreting employment of Pattnaik in Samaja as a contract of personal service.

Law is a conundrum and judges are not punished for wrong interpretations of law.

Appeal and after

Severely disadvantaged by the Munsif’s order that dismissed his suit despite finding how natural justice was denied to the him, Pattnaik approached the First Appellate Court who by its order on 17 Oct 1974 remanded the case to the Munsif with instructions to record findings on the additional issues to be framed consequent upon the amendment of plaint.

Hearing the case afresh, the Munsif said that Pattnaik was entitled to a decree of Rs.852.70 as compensation for “wrongful dismissal” and he was also entitled to pendent lite and future compensation at the rate of Rs.165 per month until he attends the age of 60 years or until his death whichever is earlier. But shockingly. the said Munisif rejected Patnaik’s claim for incremental pay, gratuity and bonus.

Pattnaik moved the Appellate Court again against this later part of the Munsif’s order whereas the management filed cross objections to the Munsif’s finding that the dismissal was “wrongful”.

The First Appellate Court dismissed the management’s cross objections and confirmed that Pattnaik’s dismissal was wrongful.

Rejecting the Munsif’s earlier observation that Pattnaik’s employment in Samaja was a matter of a contract of personal service, the First Appellate Court held that, his service had already acquired “a statutory status” by virtue of his conditions of service being governed by the Standing Orders. The AC therefore ruled that the dismissal of Pattnaik was contrary to law and he was entitled to the emoluments of the service since his dismissal till reinstatement, as his service shall not be treated as broken.

Samaja dragged the matter to High Court

An ideal employer should have seen his own fault in the mirror of the concurrent findings of both the courts that Pattnaik’s dismissal was wrongful and could have amended its wrong steps. But Rath was too anti-worker to honor the judicial wisdom that went in favor of the workman. He took the case to the High Court of Orissa, by using the SoPS. Biswanth Das and Others Vs Ramesh Chandra Patnaik and Another commenced.

The illegal occupiers of Samaja did not challenge the concurrent finding of both the Civil Courts that the order of dismissal of Pattnaik was wrongful inasmuch as it was made in violation of the principles of natural justice as well as the standing orders; but they challenged the Appellate Court’s orders that Pattnaik be treated as in continuous service with emoluments from the date of dismissal.

While thus admitting that their action against Pattnaik was “wrongful”, the wrong-doers told the High Court that once having invoked the conciliation power of the labor officer, the wrongly dismissed workman had no right to move the Civil Court. A single judge bench of the High Court relied upon another single judge verdict to say that, the wrongfully dismissed workman had no right to move the Civil Court, even though the State Government had blocked his right to be heard in the Industrial Tribunal. This judgment was delivered on August 9, 1978.

Ah! August 9 !

Ah! August 9, the day the poor exploited population of India had added their strength to Gandhi’s voice to give the ‘Quit India’ call to the British! What irony! A poor worker’s case was rejected by the State Government to be referred to the Industrial Tribunal for adjudication and the High Court nullified the relief given to him in the Civil Court by saying that the industrial adjudication was the only avenue available to him for redress of the wrong done to him, in the circumstance of the case, even though the I.D.Act says, no Labor Court or Industrial Tribunal can take cognizance of any industrial dispute unless referred to by the Government. What irony! What a great irony on the day of an anniversary of ‘quit India movement’ that the working class had made a success!

Law is a conundrum

Law is a conundrum and judges are free to interpret the laws and deliver their verdicts as their wisdom dictates, even if that denied justice to the wronged worker.

Heroic death of a Martyr

But the wronged poor man was having an exemplary workman spirit too real to acquiesce into accepting the single judge of the High Court as the last word in Law. He went in appeal to the Supreme Court.

He was physically and financially ruined. He had disposed of ancestral landed properties to sustain his family of six members including two sons and two daughters – all school going – and to meet the litigation cost.

Enforced idleness had already put him in slow starvation. Before he got justice in the Supreme Court, he breathed his last.

The great fighter carrying in his body the sufferings and determinations of the working class to overcome the sufferings, and epitomizing the spirit of the working class to fight against exploitation, died a heroic death.

Baton of fight carried by the wife

After his death, his wife Smt. Prasannaa Pattnaik took up the baton of fight from her husband’s funeral pyre and made herself and her children the substitutes for the Appellant in the case before the Supreme Court of India.

The Supreme Court disapproved the judgement of the single judge of the Orissa High Court and passed an order on allowing the appeal of Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik.

This order is very significant. I quote the relevant portion of the judgement below:

“We have heard learned counsels for the parties. During the pendency of this appeal, the workman died. His widow and four children have been brought on record as legal heirs. We are prima facie of the view that the High Court fell into error in reversing the judgment of the first appellate court. It is, however, not necessary for us to go into the merits of the controversy. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, specifically that the first appellate court granted relief to the workman as back as march 1976, we direct the respondent-management to pay a sum of Rs. two lacs as compensation to the widow of the workman within two months from today”.

It was a moral victory for Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik and his family. It had come to them on 23 January 1996.

January 23 revered in Orissa in matter of her two great sons – Veer Surendra Sai and Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, became a day of posthumous victory of the Martyr amongst her working children, Ramesh Chandra Pattnaik.

Fight not over

But the fight against the oppressive management of Samaja is not yet over. Devi Prasanna Nayak, Subash Chandra Singh and others have been fighting for justice to the exploited employees of this this paper even today, and the State Government is continuing to ignore the unfair labor practices and exploitation resorted to by the illegal occupiers of the paper.

Forgery in Samaj: Former Editor Manorama Mohapatra Cannot Avoid Imprisonment

Subhas Chandra Pattanayak

Whoever commits forgery, with the intention to use the forged document for the purpose of cheating, “shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine”, mandates Section 468 of Indian Penal Code. In view of this, former member (administration) and Associate Editor of the Samaja Ms. Manorama Mohapatra is bound to be imprisoned with fine.

Her father, Radhanath Rath, who, as editor of the Samaja, had hoodwinked the entire nation to fetch the third highest civilian award – Padmabhusan, had tampered with Gopabandhu’s draft Will that he had taken dictation of, and subsequently had co-manufactured a forged avatar thereof to grab the Samaja. Now it is seen, Manorama has forged the signature of a Sub-Editor of the same paper to cheat him out of his salary dues. Victim of her forgery is Pitambar Mishra on whose debacle the details have been placed in the preceding posting.

UNSARANGI ON SAMAJ UNDER RR Mishra was exploited by Manorama’s father Radhanath Rath for around a decade since 1986. On grabbing the Samaja, Rath had become its de facto owner by transforming the same to a family domain in the guise of Servants of the People Society. If any first hand evidence is required, one may get it from notes of the newspaper’s legendary news-editor – also publisher for many years – the Gandhian in letter and spirit, late lamented Udaynath Sarangi published in his serial write-up, captioned Lauha Paradara Antarale (Behind the Iron Curtain). An excerpt from the first episode, boxed by its publisher ‘Sambad’ is inserted here for all Oriyas to peruse. Roughly translated into English, it reads, “Pt. Gopabandhu has gifted away his institute to the race (of Oriyas). It has acquired the present stature with the help and cooperation of the people of the land. Neither there is investment of a single pie in it from the property of any individual nor has any individual any share in it. Its stature is the result of collective endeavor. It is a national institute. Let the Samaja and the institute (its establishment and Satyabadi Press) be salvaged from the family grip (of Radhanath Rath) and restored as a national property, so that, that would be the most appropriate respect for and preservation of memories of Gopabandhu”.

After exploiting the Samaja as his private property since the death of his collaborator in the forgery of Gopabandhu’s Will under cover of the Servants of the People Society, Rath had most cunningly made his daughter Manorama a member thereof handing her over the reign of the paper. She was made the boss both in administrative and editorial sectors. She was member (Administration) and Associate Editor. The press was being managed and the paper was being edited under her control. She was representing the management in its real sense.

A living symbol of her father’s exploitation, Sub-Editor-cum-News Reporter Pitambar Mishra had raised a dispute before the Labor Laws Implementation Authorities seeking regularization of his services with due amount of wages to which he was entitled under the Wage Board Award for Working Journalists. Rath had recruited him as a News Reporter for Rs. 150/- only per month. After giving him an additional duty to work as a Sub-Editor too, he was paid Rs.250/- per month. No letter of appointment was given to him as per practice of Rath, though he was acting without rest from early morning to late in the night as a journalist in both the areas – as a Sub-Editor as well as a News Reporter. He was one of many such hands in the establishment of the Samaja in the regime of Rath, who was using maximum space of the paper to project himself as a kind and benevolent person! Towards the end of his life, members of SoPS dared to make their presence felt in management of funds of the paper and the iron curtain epitomized by Rath started to crack.

In that confusing situation, SoPS having started to disregard various steps of Rath, Pitambar apprehended that, unless he raises the necessary industrial dispute, his decade old service to the paper may get lost in the labyrinth of managerial chaos.

So, he moved the District Labor Officer to step in. The DLO issued a statutory notice to the management asking why it should not be enforced by Law to regularize the services of Pitambar Mishra.

The management got the notice on 6.9.1997 and the next day on 7.9.1997, the journalist was not allowed to enter into the Samaja premises. The GM orally informed him that his services were no further required.

The DLO entertained conversion of his dispute from a case for regularization of service to a case for reinstatement in service.

Dispute Referred to Labor Court

Consequently, the State Government in the Labor and Emplyment Department referred the matter to the Labor Court, Bhubaneswar for adjudication under Sub-Section (5) of Section 12 read with Clause (ci) of Sub-Section (1) of Section 10 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 vide order No. 15552/LE, dt. 31.12.1998. The term of reference was:

“Whether the termination of services of Sri Pitambar Mishra, Sub-Editor/News reporter by the management of “the Samaj” with effect from 7.9.97 is legal and or justified? If not, to what relief Sri Mishra is entitled?

The Court answered, “the termination of services of Sri Pitambar Mishra, Sub-Editor/News Reporter by the management of “The Samaj” with effect from 7.9.97 is neither legal nor justified”. He was entitled to the relief of reinstatement with back wages”, the Labor Court concluded.

The reference was bound to be answered like this, as the management clearly knew that they have acted absolutely illegal and unjustified in summarily terminating Sri Mishra’s services immediately after receiving the notice of his complaint and no Court would ever approve their action.

Heinous Design

The only way for them to escape was denial of employer-employee relationship with Mishra. For this purpose, they devised a fake agreement with a forged signature of Mishra depicting therein that the relationship between him and the Samaj “is that of Principal to Principal and not that of employer or employee”. And, challenged the maintainability of the reference on this ground.

The so-called agreement was shown to have been signed on the 8th day of June 1995 to stay alive for two years. It means, the said agreement was bound to expire on 7th day of June, 1997. If it was so, how was it that the workman was working, as admitted by the management, till 7th of September 1997? Management’s averments make it clear that, when he was orally informed on 7.9.1997 that his services were not required onwards, the General Manager had not known of the agreement. The said agreement was also not the management’s proof of non-existence of employer-employee relationship when the dispute was under conciliation. Interestingly, when the so-called agreement was dated 8.6.1995, letter No.52/GM/94 dated 28.4.1994 reveals that the workman had already executed that agreement ! How can an office order issued on 28.4.94 speak of a document created on 8.6.95 ? This impossibility became possible only because, none of these two documents is genuine. Both of them were manufactured to harass Journalist Pitambar Mishra. Both of them were backdated and in backdating them by different persons, the dates depicted in both of them had inadvertently been so different.

I am giving below photo copies of relevant portions of these two documents for a comparison.

52:GM:94manufactured agreement

The comparison makes it clear that there is a gap of 14 months between the office order and the agreement. If the the agreement was executed on 8.6.95, how could the office order be pregnant with the same agreement that is dated 28.4.94 ?

How could the order based on the agreement be issued 14 months before the signing of the agreement ?

Manufactured by Manorama

Obviously, none of them was in existence on the relevant days.

They were manufactured by Manorama Mohapatra after the case was registered as Industrial Dispute No.9 of 1999 and proceeded in the Labor Court to the disadvantage of the management. And under the impact of the consequential shenanigans, attempts were made to create the said two backdated documents by two authorities of the management, such as the order dated 28.4.94 by one R.C.Mishra and the agreement dated 8.6.95 by Manorama Mohapatra. Due to lack of coordination in the flow of mala fide intension to teach a lesson to the workman who dared to drag them to the labor Court, the dates of the documents manufactured at their respective cabins became so drastically different.

When the document created by R.C.Mishra on the letterhead of the Samaja on 28.4.94 was meant to deny the workman confirmation in the post of Sub-Editor, the agreement manufactured by Manorama Mohapatra on 8.6.95 was, besides being an instance of use of Indian Stamp Papers for illegal purpose, carried forged signature of the affected workman.

Gene of forgery

Manorama Mohapatra, daughter of Radhanath Rath, who, as shown earlier in these pages, had created a forged avatar of Gopabandhu’s Will to occupy the Samaj, had become a member of SoPS by way of  nepotism and had become Member in charge of administration as well as the de facto Editor of the Samaja under the designation of Associate Editor. She was formerly a class-I officer in College Branch of Orissa Education Service, a Chief Executive of Orissa’s Academy of Letters. Yet, just to cause a poor and low paid employee debarred from getting his due position and wages, she created, sans any qualms, as if she inherits the gene of forgery, the signature of Pitambar Mishra on the said manufactured agreement typed on Indian Stamp Paper.

Disputed signature found forged

From the picture posted above, it is clear that the first attempt having failed, the forgery was done on the second attempt.

But very apt is a verse of ancient Oriya wisdom that says, “Papa Karuthibu Andhara Ghare, Bihi Lekhuthiba Tala Patare” , meaning, even if a sin is perpetrated inside a dark room, God Almighty records it in tamperproof letters like the Oriya people write on palm leafs. Precisely it says, “sin cannot be kept hidden”.

And, science also agrees. Howsoever cleaver be the criminal, he or she leaves behind clues that expose the crime along with its perpetrator, say the criminologists.

The crime of Manorama Mohapatra that she committed by forging the signature of Journalist Pitambar Mishra has been exposed by science.

Let us look again at the above picture.

It is the end portion of the manufactured agreement with the forged signature of Pitambar Mishra. It shows, the first attempt to forge his signature having failed, that has been repeatedly struck-through and then, below that struck-through signature, the signature of Pitambar Mishra has been penned. We shall later see how this signature is forged. But, at the moment, we shall peruse the photo copy of the authentication part of the agreement in question.

Collective Crime

When Pitambar Mishra is shown to have signed for and on behalf of the News Representative constituting the second part of the agreement, Manorama Mohapatra has signed for and on behalf of the Samaj constituting the first part thereof.

Manorama’s then known blue-eyed-boy Brajakishore Das, sub-editor, Samaj, Cuttack has signed as witness No.2 and a designation-less ineligible signature is attributed to witness No.1.

Who took the dictation of the agreement, from whom, where and when; and who typed the agreement was a must to have been written on the body of the agreement typed as it is on Indian Stamp Paper. But this is conspicuous by its absence. So, it is clear that, it is Ms. Manorama Mohapatra who has prepared the agreement on the Stamp Paper and forged Pitambar Mishra’s signature thereon to derail the Industrial Dispute 9/1999 in the Labor Court in order to debar Sri Mishra from getting his position and wages. The two witnesses taken into the scanner, it is a collective crime.

Proof of Forgery

Now let us see, how the signature claimed by Manorama to be of Pitambar Mishra on the body of the manufactured agreement is a forged signature.

When the State Government referred Mishra’s dispute to Labor Court, Bhubaneswar for adjudication, the management of Samaj questioned the maintainability of the dispute by denying employer-employee relationship between them and Mishra. And, in support of their contention, they produced the agreement in question that at Para 8 in page 3 says, “The relationship between the news representative (Pitambar Mishra) and the Samaj is that of Principal to Principal and not that of an employer or employee”.

Pitambar was shocked. He vehemently protested against production of an agreement, which he never had made and signed.

The labor Court did a mistake.

Instead of asking the management to prove that Mishra’s signature was genuine, it  asked the poor, unpaid and jobless workman to prove that his signature was forged !

And, he was asked to deposit a heavy sum of money towards cost of handwriting examination, which was beyond the capability of Mishra to deposit.

So his case was dismissed and the reference was answered in favor of the management.

When the Orissa High Court went through the records, it quashed the order of the Labor Court, directing it to resume the case while not intervening with the Labor Court direction to the workman on cost of his signature examination in the State Handwriting Bureau. Mishra with much difficulty could be able to deposit the cost and the Labor Court sent his disputed signature along with 7 sets of specimen signatures of Pitambar Mishra obtained on seven sheets of paper by him in presence of and witnessed by the Advocate for the management. Mishra’s signature on his application to Chairman, Lok Sevak Mandal (management) dated 12.11.92 as well as his signature on his application to the same authority on 4.5.94, which were admitted by the management to be genuine signatures of Mishra received by them, were also sent as admitted signatures of the workman to the State Handwriting Bureau in Crime Investigation Department (CID), Crime Branch (CB) of Orissa Police, Rasulgarh, Bhubaneswar, vide letter No.1615/LC dt. 25.9.2010. The specimen signatures taken on 7 sheets were marked S-1, S-2, S-3, S-4, S-5, S-6 and S-7, where as the signature on his application dated 12.11.92 was marked S-8 and the one on his application dated 4.5.94 was marked S-9. The disputed signature on agreement dated 8.6.95 was marked X-1. The ‘Government Examiner of Questioned Documents’ in the HWB was asked to examine and tell “whether the person who wrote S-1 to S-9, also wrote the signature marked X-1”.

On careful and thorough examination of “the documents in original from all angles of handwriting identification with the help of scientific aids under suitable condition”, the Examiner reported that, “Both the sets of signatures (Specimen and admitted signatures marked S-1 to S-9 and the disputed signature Marked X-1) differ in their general writing habit such as skill, speed, movement, line quality, size and proportion of letters etc” and declared that “The disputed signature marked X-1 contain hesitation, pen stop at unnatural places, slow drawn movement, poor line quality etc, which are the symptoms of forgery found present in the disputed signature”. Here below is the photo copy of the conclusive observation of the Examiner of Questioned Documents.

CONCLUSIVE PART

Opinion of the Handwriting Bureau Authority that establishes that Pitambar Mishra’s signature was forged on the body of the agreement dated 8.6.1995, which was manufactured by Ms. Manorama Mohapatra for and on behalf of the management, is also given below:

opinion of handwriting bureau

Raising fictitious grounds to delay the proceedings in the Labor Court, the management had filed a petition there, praying for sending another signature for examination. That was rightly rejected, in view of the fact that the disputed signature was proved as forged signature on scientific examination by the State Handwriting Bureau and the examiner, as C.W.1, had already been cross examined by the management wherein nothing was made out to show any defect in the examination of the signature and the report of HWB.

The management had then wanted to recall the Handwriting expert for fresh cross examination. But the management withdrew the same petition pleading pendency of a case it had preferred in the High Court on the same subject. The said case of the management failed in the the High Court, with the Judge concluding that, in rejecting the petition of the Samaj for sending the signature again to the Handwriting Expert the labor Court had neither committed any irregularity nor illegality.

Thus, it is established that, the Samaj management has forged the signature of Pitambar Mishra on the body of a manufactured agreement in order to deny him his legitimate position and wages by derailing the judicial process.

Criminal Negligence by Police

Sri Mishra filed FIR in the Cantonment Police Station on 20.7.2011 seeking action against the forgery. As he was not furnished with a copy thereof, he resubmitted the FIR to Deputy Commissioner of Police, Cuttack, by Speed post on 25.7.2011. Tracking records shows that the same was delivered to the DCP on 26.7.2011.

But the Police is yet to come out of its cocoon of criminal negligence. If not, law shall force it to act.

Finally, Jail

Then what would happen to Manorama Mahapatra? Unless Pitambar Mishra, her victim, shows her mercy, she cannot avoid imprisonment in view of the provision of IPC quoted at the beginning. So also the two fellows who have authenticated the forged signature as genuine by signing as witnesses. And, another fellow, under whose instigation the forgery is understood to have been committed and who had, as the lone management witness, deposed under oath that the questioned signature was the genuine signature of Pitambar Mishra, will also be prosecuted and jailed, because the signature he had shown as genuine signature of Pitambar Mishra, has been proved to be forged on the basis of scientific examination in the Handwriting Bureau. That fellow is Chaudhury Sangram Keshari Mishra, whom the Samaj management  has, for his litigant mischief and anti-labor habit, rewarded with unending pay packages from the funds that the workmen so laboriously generate for the newspaper. Under wrong and mischivious advice of such fellows, the iconic newspaper of Orissa, co-founded by the immortal humanitarian leader Utkalmani Pandit Gopabandhu Das, has become a scheming exploiter of workers and has generated scores of Industrial disputes, where it has never won, but always failed.