Vigilance check for agents at RLA

Chandigarh, January 24
The vigilance cell of the UT police today conducted a check at the Registering and Licensing Authority (RLA) to find out if unscrupulous agents luring people into preparing driving licences and registration certificates were active.

Sleuths conducted a check as a preventive measure following the busting of a fake licence scam in October past year. Inspector Dulip Rattan said they randomly checked some persons who came for licences to see if agents were involved.

Past year, the cell had arrested six persons in the fake driving licence scam. The accused used to provide licences by forging the signature of DSP (Traffic) Vijay Kumar.

The police had recovered 28 files based on fake papers prepared by the accused from the office of the RLA at Sector 17. Investigation revealed that the accused had documented more than 200 driving licences by using fake stamps and signatures.

The scrutiny of the files recovered had revealed that the beneficiaries had not appeared for driving test at the Chandigarh Traffic Park in Sector 23. Their files were found to be having valid serial numbers.

Negligent cops punished

Increments forfeited for varying periods of time

Chandigarh, January 24
Three police officials, found guilty of mishandling the Khushpreet kidnapping-for-ransom case, have been awarded major punishment for their negligence.

The three, including inspector Udeypal Singh, former SHO of the Sector 34 police station, sub-inspector Narinder Patial, the then in charge of the Burail police post, and the then investigating officer sub-inspector Balraj Singh, have been punished with forfeiture of increments.

Inspector General of Police PK Srivastava issued the orders of their punishments recently.

While inspector Udey Pal Singh has been awarded punishment of forfeiture of increments for four years, both sub-inspector Narinder Patial and sub-inspector Balraj Singh have been punished with forfeiture of increments for two years.

Five-year-old Khushpreet was kidnapped for ransom from Burail village in December 2010. A police trap to arrest the kidnappers failed and the body of the child was recovered from a pit in Mohali on January 5, 2011.

This is for the first time that senior police officials have acted against the negligent cops ever since an earlier departmental inquiry conducted by DSP Kulwant Singh Pannu indicted the three policemen for negligence while handling the case. The inquiry report was submitted on June 22 last year. Earlier, senior police officials had also issued them a reduction in rank notice asking them to reply why their current ranks should not be reduced.

All three officials were earlier suspended following a magisterial probe in January last year and were reinstated in May. On October 14 last year, the police complaint authority (PCA), too, criticised the police for not taking any action against the three officials despite them being indicted in both a magisterial and a departmental probe.

The three were found guilty of taking the ransom calls lightly in the beginning, which had resulted in a delayed police action. Both inquiry reports had indicted inspector Udey Pal Singh, inspector Narinder Singh Patial and sub-inspector Balraj Singh and had pointed to the culpabilities of the police officials for mishandling the kidnapping-for-ransom case. 

India tells Norway to settle kids’ custody issue

New Delhi, January 23

As an Indian couple battles in Norway for the custody of their two children - taken away and sent to foster care by the Child Protective Services, India today asked the Scandinavian country to work out a settlement with the family of the two children.

External Affairs Minister S M Krishna called Norway’s Charge d’affaires Aslak Brun to his residence to discuss the issue and later spoke to his Norwegian counterpart.

Talking to reporters, he said he has come to the conclusion after the talks that a reasonable settlement could be worked out.

"This (settlement) has to be worked out with the family of the children," Krishna said when asked if any other solution to the issue was acceptable to the Indian government. Three-year-old Abhigyan and one-year-old Aishwarya, children of Anurup and Sagarika Bhattacharya, an NRI couple living in Stavanger, Norway, were taken under protective care by Barnevarne (Norwegian Child Welfare Services) in May on the grounds that they were not looked after properly by their parents.

Barnevarne has placed them in foster parental care as per the directive of the local Norwegian court, mandated under Norwegian laws.

Asked about the couple’s visa that is likely to end in early March, Krishna said Norway was willing to accommodate the Indian government to the extent possible within the limits of jurisdiction. "If there are visa issues, I think it can be worked out," he said.

India has over the last two months issued a couple of strong demarche to Norway on its decision to separate the two Indian children from their NRI parents and conveyed that it felt it was "an extreme step and unjustified".

Plea to keep legal education out of Bill

New Delhi, January 23

The Bar Council of India (BCI) today submitted a memorandum to Human Resource Development (HRD) Minister Kapil Sibal, urging him to keep the legal education out of the purview of the proposed Higher Education and Research Bill 2011.

Taking legal education away from the BCI, which was regulating it now, and bringing it under a super regulator of the HRD ministry would have an adverse impact on the autonomy of the council and the universities providing such education, the memorandum said.

BCI chairman Ashok Parija told reporters that the council and its state bodies were committed to opposing the controversial clauses of the Bill. Office bearers of the council and the state units had a meeting and resolved to prevent the government from interfering with the autonomy of the legal profession and the Advocates Act, he said.

Lekh Raj Sharma, Chairman of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana, said there was no way the advocates would allow the government to tinker with the Advocates Act or facilitate the entry of foreign law firms into India. 

CONSUMER COURTS

Forum fines MC Rs 5,000 Had charged interest on house tax

Chandigarh, January 23
The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has slapped a fine of Rs 5,000 on the Chandigarh Municipal Corporation (CMC) for charging penal interest on house tax from a sector 18 resident.

The district forum, comprising president PD Goel and members Rajinder Singh Gill and Madanjit Kaur Sahota, has also directed the opposite parties to refund Rs 6,656 besides Rs 2,000 as costs of litigation to the complainants.

The complainants, Shwinder Kaur and her son Sanjit Singh, had submitted that the opposite parties served a notice on them demanding property tax for 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09, and consequently they deposited the property tax within the stipulated period. They alleged the opposite parties forced them to pay the property tax for 2004 to 2006 totalling Rs 20,196 with penal interest, which they had paid on May 28, 2010, under protest that the charging of penal interest was unjustified and illegal. Despite several reminders and notices the opposite parties failed to refund the excess amount.

The counsel for the Assistant Collector (Tax), Municipal Corporation (opposite party no.1) and the CMC, through its Executive Officer (opposite party no. 2) pleaded that the opposite parties had issued a consolidated-property-tax-demand notice for Rs 13,540 on February 21, 2006 and the same was delivered at SCO No. 95, Sector 40-C, Chandigarh through a messenger. It had been pleaded that in case the complainants failed to deposit the property tax within one month of the issuing of the notice, they were liable to pay interest at the rate of 18 per cent from the date of the issuing of the notice. The opposite parties had also made the plea that the complaint was not maintainable as per Clause 24 (i) of Property Tax Bye-Laws, 2003.

Goel said the opposite parties had raised the specific plea that the notice regarding the consolidated property tax was delivered through the messenger. But, they have failed to prove that the said notice reached the complainants, as they have neither produced any acknowledgement duly signed by them nor the affidavit of the messenger, who delivered the said notice to the complainants. Thus the opposite parties are not entitled to charge the interest, he added.

ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਡਰੱਗ ਮਾਫੀਏ ਤੇ ਗੈਂਗ ਹਿੰਸਾ ਖਿਲਾਫ ਸਖ਼ਤ ਕਾਨੂੰਨ ਬਣਾਏਗੀ-ਉੱਪਲ

ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਦੇ ਮੰਤਰੀ ਟਿਮ ਉੱਪਲ ਹੋਰਨਾਂ ਸ਼ਖਸੀਅਤਾਂ ਨਾਲ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਫੇਰੀ ਸਮੇਂ।

ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ, 23 ਜਨਵਰੀ - ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਦੇ ਪਹਿਲੇ ਦਸਤਾਰਧਾਰੀ ਸਿੱਖ ਮੰਤਰੀ ਟਿਮ ਸਿੰਘ ਉੱਪਲ ਨੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਫੇਰੀ ਦੌਰਾਨ ਕਿਹਾ ਕਿ ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਸਰਕਾਰ ਦਿਨੋ-ਦਿਨ ਵਧ ਰਹੀ ਗੈਂਗ ਹਿੰਸਾ ਤੇ ਡਰੱਗ ਮਾਫੀਏ ਖਿਲਾਫ ਸਖਤ ਕਾਨੂੰਨ ਬਣਾਏਗੀ ਅਤੇ ਦੋਸ਼ੀਆਂ ਨੂੰ ਵੱਧ ਸਜ਼ਾਵਾਂ ਲਈ ਹੋਰ ਕਦਮ ਚੁੱਕੇਗੀ। ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਪੱਤਰਕਾਰਾਂ ਨਾਲ ਗੱਲਬਾਤ ਦੌਰਾਨ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਇਲਾਕੇ 'ਚ ਗੈਂਗ ਹਿੰਸਾ 'ਤੇ ਦੁੱਖ ਪ੍ਰਗਟਾਇਆ ਤੇ ਭਰੋਸਾ ਦਿਵਾਇਆ ਕਿ ਆਉਂਦੇ ਸਮੇਂ ਗੈਂਗ ਹਿੰਸਾ ਖਿਲਾਫ ਬਿੱਲ ਸੰਸਦ 'ਚ ਪੇਸ਼ ਕੀਤਾ ਜਾਵੇਗਾ। ਕੈਨੇਡਾ ਦੇ ਲੋਕਰਾਜੀ ਸੁਧਾਰਾਂ ਦੇ ਰਾਜ ਮੰਤਰੀ ਟਿਮ ਉੱਪਲ ਨੇ ਆਪਣੀ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਫੇਰੀ ਦੌਰਾਨ ਗੁਰਦੁਆਰਾ ਖਾਲਸਾ ਦੀਵਾਨ ਸੁਸਾਇਟੀ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਵਿਖੇ ਵੀ ਹਾਜ਼ਰੀ ਲੁਆਈ ਤੇ ਵਿਸ਼ੇਸ਼ ਇਕੱਤਰਤਾ ਨੂੰ ਸੰਬੋਧਨ ਕੀਤਾ। ਇਸ ਮੌਕੇ ਉਨ੍ਹਾਂ ਨਾਲ ਵੈਨਕੂਵਰ ਦੱਖਣੀ ਹਲਕੇ ਤੋਂ ਐਮ. ਪੀ. ਵੇਅ ਯੰਗ, ਉੱਘੇ ਆਗੂ ਸ: ਬਲਵਿੰਦਰ ਸਿੰਘ ਵੜੈਚ ਤੇ ਸੁਸਾਇਟੀ ਦੇ ਪ੍ਰਧਾਨ ਸ: ਸੋਹਣ ਸਿੰਘ ਦਿਉ ਸਮੇਤ ਵੱਡੀ ਗਿਣਤੀ 'ਚ ਭਾਈਚਾਰੇ ਦੀਆਂ ਸ਼ਖਸੀਅਤਾਂ ਹਾਜ਼ਰ ਸਨ।

Bajaj Allianz told to pay Rs 79,207 to complainant

Mohali, January 22

The Mohali District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum has directed Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company Ltd to reimburse a resident of Sector 70 here for loss/damage to his car to the tune of Rs 79,207 with interest, thereon, for the relevant period and also the costs of litigation.

Balbir Singh had in a complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, said he had got his Skoda-Octavia (Rider), model 2005, insured with the company. The car came in contact with water on September 2, 2010, while being driven on the road dividing Sectors 70 and 71, Mohali. As a result thereof, the engine of the car broke down.

The matter was reported to the company and on its instructions the car was brought to the workshop of Krishna Auto Sales, Chandigarh. After that, the company sent a surveyor, Saravjeet Singh, to the workshop. On his instructions, engineers and mechanics of the workshop opened the engine and removed the damaged parts with a view to assessing the loss.

After that, the surveyor prepared his survey report and submitted it to the company. On the instructions of the surveyor, the workshop repaired the engine of the car and made the same in a proper running condition. The workshop prepared a bill of repair charges totalling Rs 96,520.

On the directions of the surveyor, the complainant paid the repair charges from his pocket. The surveyor gave an assurance that Rs 96,520 would be reimbursed to him by the company. Instead of reimbursing the same, the company settled the claim for Rs 17,313 only and denying the claim to the remaining amount on the ground that “internal parts inside the engine body cannot be damaged merely by coming in contact with water” and that as per the policy terms and conditions, the loss was not covered by the policy. Condition No.2 (a) says “consequential loss, depreciation, wear and tear, mechanical or electrical breakdown, failures or breakages” is not covered. The complainant said he was entitled to the reimbursement of the remaining amount as well.

The complainant alleged deficiency in service on the part of the company and sought directions to its representatives concerned in the case to pay him the remaining charges of loss/damage to the tune of Rs 79,207 with interest thereon, compensation for harassment and agony and litigation expenses.

However, the company branch office concerned and the claim department stood by their letters reiterating that the remaining amount of Rs 79,207 could not be reimbursed to the complainant on account of Condition 2 (a) of the terms and conditions. They also pleaded that their surveyor assessed the loss to the tune of Rs 17,313 only and they had paid this amount to the complainant. Denying any deficiency in service, they sought the dismissal of the complaint.

After careful consideration of the arguments and evidence, the forum bench, comprising BS Mehandiratta, president, Dr SS Dhaliwal, member, and HK Ghuman, member, allowed the complaint and directed the company on January 16 to reimburse to the complainant the remaining amount of loss/damage to the car to the tune of Rs 79,207 with interest thereon at the rate of 9 per cent per annum with effect from December 3, 2010 (the date on which they paid the amount of Rs 17,313) till the date of actual payment. They were also directed to pay to the complainant the costs of litigation totalling Rs 3,000.