Feeds:
Posts
Comments

ઇસ્લામની સ્થાપના તુલસીદાસે કરેલી અને સનાતન ધર્મની સ્થાપના બીલ ક્લીંટને કરી હતી. ભાગ-૨

આપણે ટીવી સીરીયલમા જ્યારે કોઈ એક એપીસોડ જોઇએ ત્યારે જાહેરાતો માટેના બ્રેકની તાત્કાલીક પહેલાં, “ ‘સીરીયલનું નામ’  અને પછી ચાલુ હૈ“ એમ નીચેની લાઈનમાં લખેલું બતાવે છે. તેમજ “આગે હૈ” અને પછી શું આવશે તેનો એકાદ હિસ્સો બતાવે છે.

સીરીયલની શરુઆતમાં પૂર્વે બતાવેલા એપીસોડમાં જે બતાવેલું તેનો ઉપસંહાર “આપને દેખા” કે “અબ તક દેખા” કે “તમે જોયું” કે એવી કોઈ  હેડ લાઈન હેઠળ બતાવે છે.

“ગયા એપીસોડમાં આ રહી ગયું” એવું આપણને બતાવતા નથી.

પણ, આપણા આ બ્લોગમાં “આ રહી ગયું” એમ કહીને આ બ્લોગના પહેલાભાગમાં જે રહી ગયું તે કહીશું.

“આ રહી ગયું”

કોઈકે વાયરલેસ સંદેશો મોકલ્યો છે. તે વ્યક્તિના અતિમનસમાં ઉભી થયેલી શંકા આપણા અતિમનસમાં પહોંચી છે.

તુલસીદાસે સ્ત્રીને (પોતાની સ્ત્રીને) મારવાની વાત કરેલી તેને મહમ્મદ સાહેબે સુવ્યવસ્થિત રીતે રજુ કરી. અને ઓછામાં ઓછી હિંસાને પ્રસ્થાપિત કરી. સમાજની અહિંસક પ્રણાલીઓ તરફ જવાની ગતિને આધારે આપણે મહમ્મદ સાહેબને તુલસીદાસના અનુગામી સિદ્ધ કર્યા એમ સ્વિકાર્યું.

પણ હવે તમે જુઓ. તુલસીદાસના રામને તો એક જ સ્ત્રી (પોતાની સ્ત્રી) એટલે કે પત્ની હતી. જ્યારે કુરાન તો પુરુષને ચાર પત્ની કરવાની છૂટ આપે છે.  ચાર સ્ત્રી માંથી એક સ્ત્રી તરફ જવું એ વ્યવસ્થાની ભૌતિક હિંસાની પળોજણમાં ન પડીએ તો માનસિક રીતે અહિંસા તરફની ગતિ થઈ કહેવાય. એટલે તુલસીદાસજી તો મોહમ્મદ સાહેબના અનુગામી જ કહેવાય ને?

ના જી. તમે તમારી વાતમાં મર્યાદા બાંધો અને પછી તારવણી કરો તે બરાબર નથી. તુલસીદાસની સીતાને અગ્નિપરીક્ષા કરવાનું કહેવામાં આવે છે. એટલે પુરુષનું એક પત્ની વ્રત અને અગ્નિપરીક્ષા એ બેનો સરવાળો કરીએ તો સરવાળામાં આવતી હિંસા, પુરુષની ચાર પત્ની કરવાની કરવાની હિંસા કરતાં અનેક ગણી વધી જાય છે. એટલે અહિંસાની બાબતમાં તુલસીદાસ કરતાં મહમ્મદ સાહેબનું કુરાન ઘણું આગળ છે. એટલે તુલસીદાસ મહમ્મદ સાહેબના અનુગામી છે તે તર્ક ધ્વસ્ત થાય છે. ઇતિ સિદ્ધમ્‌

બીજું શું રહી ગયું હતું?

સનાતન ધર્મને હિસાબે સ્ત્રી જાતિની કોઈ પણ વ્યક્તિને ગાળ પણ ન દેવાય.

કારણ કે મારા પિતાશ્રી કહેતા હતા કે સ્ત્રી માત્ર દેવી સ્વરુપ છે. એટલે સ્ત્રીને આપેલી તે ગાળ, દેવીને જાય અને આપણને પાપ લાગે.

તુલસીદાસજી કદાચ એમ સમજ્યા હશે કે “ ‘સ્ત્રીને ગાળ ન દેવાય’.   ગાળ ન દેવાય એમ જ કહ્યું છે ને! ‘તાડન ન કરાય’ એવું ક્યાં કહ્યું છે? એટલે સ્ત્રીને તાડન તો થાય જ ને વળી.” આમ તુલસીદાસમાં પ્રમાણભાનની પ્રજ્ઞા ન હતી.

ઇતિહાસ કે પુરાણોના વાચન વિષે તુલસીદાસના શોખની વાત ન કરીએ તો સનાતની રાજાઓ સ્ત્રી સાથે યુદ્ધ કરવાનું ટાળતા હતા. આ પરંપરા હેઠળ જ, ભિષ્મે શિખંડી સામે શસ્ત્રોનો ત્યાગ કર્યો હતો. રામ અને લક્ષ્મણે પણ આમ તો સુર્પણખા સામે પોતાનો બચાવ જ કરેલો. અને આ સ્વબચાવમાં જ સુર્પણખાને રામ દ્વારા અજાણતાં નાકે અને લક્ષ્મણ દ્વારા કાને વાગી ગયેલું હશે. પણ વાલ્મિકી અને તુલસીદાસને અતિશયોક્તિની ટેવ હતી તેથી તેમણે નાક અને કાન કાપી નાખ્યા એવી વાત વહેતી કરેલ. વાસ્ત્વમાં તો રામે અને લક્ષ્મણે ગડગડતી મુકી હશે. એટલે કે ભાગી ગયા હશે. કારણ કે એક સ્ત્રી સામે લડવામાં પરાજયની નાલેશી હતી.

રાવણ વિષે પણ એવું કહેવાય છે કે તે એક સ્ત્રી સૈન્ય સામે હારી ગયેલો. રાવણે એકવાર ભૂલ કરી હતી. આ ભૂલમાંથી તે શિખ્યો હતો કે સ્ત્રી સાથે જીવ્હાદ્વારા કે શસ્ત્રો દ્વારા પણ લડવું નહીં.  કારણ કે હાર કે જીતની જે શક્યતાઓ છે તે બંનેમાં નાલેશી સિવાય કશું નથી.

રાવણ, તે પછી સ્ત્રીની સાથે બાખડવાનું ભૂલી ગયો હતો. તેથી જ તેણે સીતાજીનું હરણ કરેલ પણ સીતાજીને કનડ્યો ન હતો. સ્ત્રીઓને ન કનડવાની આ પરંપરા માનવો અને સુરોમાં હતી. પણ આ પરંપરા અસુરોમાં ન હતી. અને તેના ફળ તેમણે ભોગવએલા તે આપણે સુપેરે જાણીએ છીએ.

એવું કહેવાય છે કે અશોકે કલિંગ ઉપર ચડાઈ કરી તો તેણે પુરુષોના સૈન્યને તો જીતી લીધું પણ તે પછી જે સ્ત્રીઓનું સૈન્ય આવ્યું તેને જીતવામાં તેના હાંજા ગગડી ગયેલા. અને તે પછી તેણે યુદ્ધ નહીં કરું તેવી પ્રતિજ્ઞા લીધેલી અને બૌદ્ધ ધર્મ અંગીકાર કરી લીધેલો. જોકે નવા સંશોધન પ્રમાણે તે દુશ્મનોને ધમકી આપ્યા કરતો હતો, કે કલિંગના જેવા તમારા હાલ કરીશ.

મૂળ વાત ઉપર આવીએ તો આ પ્રમાણે પુરુષો માટે કોઈ ખુશીનો સમય હોય તો ફક્ત એટલો કે “ઢોલ, ગંવાર, શુદ્ર પશુ નારી, યે સબ તાડનકે અધિકારી” એ બોલાતું સાંભળીને ખુશ થવું.

અને સાંભળી લો, કે સ્ત્રીઓને (પત્નીઓને) પણ આ વાતની ખબર છે કે પુરુષો (પતિઓ), આ પંક્તિઓ સાંભળી ખુશ થાય છે. તેમને માટે આ એક માત્ર સુખ બચ્યું છે તે પણ સાંભળવાનું. તેથી ઘણી સ્ત્રીઓ જ્યારે સુંદરકાંડની કેસેટ વાગતી હોય ત્યારે પોતાના પતિને ખુશ કરવા અને મજાક ઉડાવવા આ કડીઓનો વારો આવે ત્યારે ટેપરેકોર્ડરનું વોલ્યુમ મોટું કરી દે છે જેથી પતિ દૂર બીજા રુમમાં હોય તો પણ સાંભળી શકે. પુરુષોએ સ્ત્રીઓની આ મજાક કરવાની સ્ટાઈલને દાદ દેવી પડે.

તુલસી રામાયણના પાઠક, શ્રી અશ્વિન ભાઈ પાઠક પણ જાણે છે કે પુરુષોને આખા રામાયણમાં આ કડીઓ જ સૌથી વધુ ગમે છે એટલે અશ્વિનભાઈએ આ કડીઓની આગળ પાછળની દશે દશ કડીઓ માટે જુદો અને લંબાવેલો સુર રાખ્યો છે.

ચાલો ….  એ બધું તો જાણે સમજ્યા. પણ બીલ ક્લીંટને સનાતન ધર્મ સ્થાપ્યો એમ કેવી રીતે કહી શકાય?

આ સમજવા માટે તમારે મહાજનોનું તર્કશાસ્ત્ર સમજવું પડશે.

ધારો કે તમારે કોઈને અમુક રીતે ચીતરવો છે તો તમે એવા કેટલાકના નામાંકિત વ્યક્તિઓ વિષે વિવરણ કરો કે જેઓ ઉપરોક્ત “અમુક રીત”ના ન હતા.

આ કંઈ સમજાયું નહીં. કંઈક ફોડ પાડો.

ધારો કે તમારે એમ કહેવું છે કે કોઈ એક નિશ્ચિત વ્યક્તિ જેને તમારે ટાર્જેટ કરવો છે, તે વ્યક્તિ તટસ્થ રીતે વિચારી શકતો નથી. તો તમારે તમારી દૃષ્ટિએ જે વ્યક્તિઓ તટસ્થ હતા તેમને વિષે વિવરણ કરવું. એટલે આપો આપ સિદ્ધ થઈ જશે કે તમારો ટાર્જેટ વ્યક્તિ તટસ્થ નથી. તમારે ફક્ત એમ જ કહેવાનું કે આવી હેસીયત આનામાં (ટાર્જેટેડ વ્યક્તિનું નામ), ક્યાં છે?

કોઈ દાખલો?

કોઈ વ્યક્તિ તટસ્થ ક્યારે કહેવાય?

તટસ્થ એટલે શું?

તટ એટલે કિનારો. જે કિનારા ઉપર છે તે વ્યક્તિને તટસ્થ કહેવાય. વૈચારિક રીતે કહીએ તો જે  વ્યક્તિ સાક્ષી ભાવ રાખીને સમસ્યાનું કે ઘટનાનું અવલોકન કરે અને તે પછી અભિપ્રાય આપે તેને તટસ્થ કહેવાય. આપણા મોદીકાકા એ સાક્ષીભાવ ઉપર એક પુસ્તક લખ્યું છે. પણ બધા ગુજરાતી ભાષાવિદ મહાજનોને ખબર ન હોય તેમ એક મહાજને બીજાઓના સાક્ષીભાવ વિષે વિવરણ કરી સિદ્ધ કરી દીધું કે મોદીકાકા ક્યારેય સાક્ષી ભાવે જોઈ નહીં શકે. તે હડહડતા આરએસએસવાદી છે. ઇતિ સિદ્ધમ્‌.

પણ આપણી વાત તો બીલ ક્લીંટન અને સનાતન ધર્મની છે.

બધા મહાજનોનું તર્કશાસ્ત્ર ભીન્ન ભીન્ન હોય છે. સનાતન ધર્મ ગમે તેવો હોય તો પણ તે એક પત્નીવ્રત પુરુષને શ્રેષ્ઠ માને છે. નિયમ નહિં તો પ્રણાલી તો આવી જ છે. વળી જો નિયમ હોય તો નિયમ તોડવાની પણ પ્રણાલી છે.

જેમ જેમ ભારતીય વધુ સત્તાવાન થતો જાય અથવા કોઈ એને ટોકનાર ન હોય અથવા જે તેને ટોક્નાર હોય તેના કરતાં તે વધુ સક્ષમ હોય તો તે તેનો લાભ લેવાનું ચૂકતો નથી. ટ્રાફિકનિયમોના પાલનની બાબતમાં, વેતનની સામે કામ કરવામાં, ટેક્સ ભરવામાં, તર્કના વિતર્ક કરવામાં આપણે તેની આદતો જાણીએ છીએ.

આપણા ભારતીય બંધારણની અંતર્ગત હિન્દુ કોડ બીલમાં એક પત્નીવ્રતનો સમાવેશ કરવામાં આવ્યો છે. પણ જો કાયદામાં બારી ન રાખીએ તો આપણે હિન્દુ શાના? એટલે હિન્દુઓને રખાત રાખવાની છૂટ  રાખવામાં આવી છે. આ જોગવાઈ શરતોને આધિન છે. ધારોકે “શરતોને આધિન” ન હોત તો પણ હિન્દુઓને કંઈ ફેર ન પડત. જો પાશ્ચાત્ય મહાજનો તુક્કા લડાવવામાં બેનમુન છે તો આપણા મહાજનો સ્વબચાવ અર્થે તર્કની બાબતોમાં બેનમુન છે.

આપણો આ બ્લોગ “મહાજનો”, “સ્ત્રી તાડન”, અને “તર્ક” ના પરિપેક્ષ્યમાં સીમિત છે.

આપણા ગુર્જરભાષાના એક મહાજને વાલ્મિકીના રામને વાલ્મિકી રામાયણના આધારે કહેલ કે રામને એક જ પત્ની ન હતી. કારણ કે રામ “સ્ત્રીણાં પ્રિયઃ” એમ વર્ણિત હતા. એટલે કે સ્ત્રીઓને પ્રિય હતા. સ્ત્રી એટલે પત્ની. સ્ત્રીણાં પ્રિયઃ એટલે સ્ત્રીઓને પ્રિય હતા એટલે તેમની પત્નીઓને પ્રિય હતા.

હવે જ્યારે તુલસીદાસ “નારી” શબ્દનો અર્થ પત્ની કરે તો “સ્ત્રી”નો અર્થ “પત્ની” થઈ જ શકે. આ વાત આપોઆપ સિદ્ધ થાય છે. સીતાજી કોઈ પણ કારણસર વનવાસ જવા માટે “રામની વાંહે થયા” તેથી કરીને કંઈ એમ સિદ્ધ ન થાય કે રામને તે એક માત્ર પત્ની હતી. એવું પણ હોય કે બીજી પત્નીઓને સીતાજીના (સુપરવીઝન), ઉપર વિશ્વાસ હોય, તેથી તે બધીઓ રામની “વાંહે ન થઈ” હોય.

જો કે “મહાજનશ્રી”ના આવા અર્થઘટન ઉપર શોર બકોર થયેલો. પોસ્ટખાતાને પણ ઠીક ઠીક કમાણી થઈ હતી. પણ આ જુદો વિષય છે.

નિયમ, નિયમનું અર્થઘટન, નિયમનું પાલન અને જનતાના પ્રતિભાવની પરિપેક્ષ્યમાં જોઇએ તો બીલ ક્લીંટન હિન્દુ ધર્મમાં સુસ્થાપિત છે.

જાતીય વૃત્તિ, જાતીય સંબંધ, પરસ્પર સંમતિ અને નિયમનો સુભગ સમન્વય એટલે ગંગા નાહ્યા.

કોઈ એક ખેલાડી હતો. નામ તો યાદ નથી. પણ ૧૯૯૨-૯૩ની ઘટના છે. એક સ્ત્રી તેને મળવા હોટેલ ઉપર ગઈ. પરસ્પર સંમતિથી સંબંધ બંધાયો. પણ પછી તે ખેલાડી તે સ્ત્રીને વળાવવા માટે હોટેલની રુમના દરવાજા સુધી ન ગયો. એટલે તે સ્ત્રીએ, તે ખેલાડી સામે બળાત્કારનો કેસ માંડ્યો. મારા ખ્યાલ પ્રમાણે તે સ્ત્રી આ કેસ જીતી ગઈ હશે. કારણ કે સ્ત્રીનું માન ન સાચવવું તે એક ગુનો છે. જો ઉપરોક્ત સ્ત્રી પોતાનો કેસ જીતી ગઈ હોય તો તે યોગ્ય જ છે. ન્યાયાલયે પણ ચૂકાદો આપ્યો છે કે જો લગ્નનું પ્રોમીસ આપ્યું હોય અને કોઈ વ્યક્તિ તે સ્ત્રીની સાથે જાતીય સંબંધ બાંધે અને પછી તેની સાથે લગ્ન ન કરે તો તેને બળાત્કાર જ કહેવાય.

Bill Clinton

બીલ ક્લીંટનના કેસમાં આવું નથી.

બીલ ક્લીંટન મોનિકાના સંબંધો વિષે શોરબકોર તો યુએસમાં પણ થયો. પણ જહોન કેનેડીના મરી ગયા પછી જેક્વેલીને કરેલા પુનર્લગ્ન વિષે જેટલો શોર થયેલો તેના દશમા ભાગ જેટલો પણ નહીં. યુએસમાં વિધવા વિવાહ નવી વસ્તુ નથી. પણ યુએસની જનતા, યુએસમાં નેતા માટે, ભીન્ન માપદંડ રાખે છે. જેક્વેલીને જ્યારે એરીસ્ટોટલ ઓનાસીસ સાથે લગ્ન કર્યું ત્યારે યુએસની જનતાએ કાગારોળ મચાવી દીધી હતી. આબેહુબ જેક્વેલીનના પુતળા બનાવીને વેચવા કાઢ્યા હતા. કિમત ૧૦૦૦૦ થી ૨૫૦૦૦ રુપીયા કે ડોલર હતી. જેક્વેલીનને અપમાન જનક સ્થિતિમાં મુકી દીધી હતી. ભારતમાં મોટાભાગની પ્રજા બહુ વાંચતી નથી. પણ સ્ત્રીઓનું અપમાન કરનારો અમુક વર્ગ જરુર છે.

ટૂંકમાં પુરુષ અને સ્ત્રી બંને માટે યુએસમાં અને ભારતમાં ભીન્ન ભીન્ન માપદંડ છે. જો કે યુએસમાં સમાન સીવીલ કોડ છે. ભારતમાં નથી.

જે સંબંધો સીધા ન હોય તેવા સંબંધોને કારણે ભારતના મહાજનો જેવા કે ઓશો આસારામ, સંત રજનીશમલ, અને એવા ઘણા બધા ચમક્યા છે કે જેમણે ભય અને લાલચને “પરસ્પર સંમતિ” હતી કે “મસ્જિદમાં ગર્યો’તો જ કોણ” એવું સિદ્ધ કરવાની કોશિસ કરી છે.

તમે કહેશો કે સંત રજનીશમલ ઉપર ક્યાં કોઈ કેસ થયેલો?

અરે ભાઈ એમ મુખ્ય મંત્રીઓને ઉથલાવવામાં ઉસ્તાદ એવા ચિમનભાઈ પટેલે, બળવંતરાય મહેતાને ક્યાં  ઉથલાવેલા? ચિમનભાઈ પટેલે બળવંતરાય મહેતાને ક્યા કારણસર ઉથલાવ્યા ન હતા?

બળવંતરાય મહેતા વિમાન અકસ્માતમાં ગુજરી ગયા એટલે બચી ગયા. એ પ્રમાણે સંત રજનીશમલ વહેલા ઉકલી ગયા એટલે જેલમાં જવામાંથી બચી ગયા.

તમે કહેશો કે પણ આમાં બીલ ક્લીંટન હિન્દુધર્મના સ્થાપક કેવી રીતે કહી શકાય?

લો બસ. તમે તો એવી વાત કરી કે “સીતાનું હરણ થયું પણ પછી તે હરણની સીતા ક્યારે થઈ?”

જુઓ જાણે વાત એમ છે કે સત્ય વાતાવરણથી સિદ્ધ કરી શકાય અથવા સત્ય તર્કથી સિદ્ધ કરી શકાય. પણ સંત રજનીશમલ તો કહે છે કે તેઓ તર્કમાં માનતા જ નથી. કારણ કે તર્ક તો માહિતિ ઉપર આધાર રાખે છે. જેની પાસે માહિતિ વધુ હોય તે વ્યક્તિ,  જેની પાસે ઓછી માહિતિ હોય તે વ્યક્તિને પરાસ્ત કરી શકે. અથવા તો આપણે આપણી આસપાસ આપણા જ વળના એકઠા કરેલા હાજી હા વાળાઓની બહુમતિ થી પણ સત્ય સિદ્ધ  કરી શકીએ છીએ. જેમકે શંકર સિંહ વાઘેલા, કેશુભાઈ પટેલના સમર્થકોને “હજુરીયા” એમ કહેતા હતા.

ચાલો એ વાત જવા દો.

શાણા માણસો જે અભિપ્રાય આપે તેને તો સાચો માનવો જ પડે કે નહીં?

દુનિયામાં શાણું કોણ છે?

યુએસએ શાણું છે. કારણ ગમે તે હોય પણ યુએસનો પ્રમુખ દુનિયાનો કાકો ગણાય છે. શાણા માણસના દેશમાં રહેતા માણસોને પણ શાણા જ ગણવા જોઇએ. યુએસમાં રહેતા ભારતીયો કે જેઓ યુએસના નાગરિક છે તેમને પૂછો. પણ તે પહેલાં તેમને એક વાર્તા સંભળાવો.

૧૯૫૫ -૧૯૬૦ દરમ્યાન એક રાજકીય વિવાદ ચાલતો હતો કે “મુંબઈ” મહારાષ્ટ્રમાં જવું જોઇએ કે ગુજરાતમાં જવું જોઇએ?

અમારે ભાવનગરમાં એક સ્યામ સુંદરભાઈ હાસ્ય કલાકાર હતા. જેમ સંસ્કૃત સાહિત્યમાં કહેવાય છે કે “બાણોચ્છિષ્ઠં જગતસર્વમ્‍” (જગતમાં જે કંઈ લખાયું છે તે બધું જ કવિ બાણે લખી નાખ્યું છે. એટલે જે કંઈ કહેવાય છે તેમાં કશું નવું નથી. એટલે કે જગત, કવિ બાણનું એંઠું ખાય છે)

સ્યામસુંદરભાઈની વાર્તા કંઈક આ પ્રમાણે હતી.

મંડળીમાં ચર્ચા ચાલતી હતી. “મુંબઈ”ની સમસ્યાનો ઉકેલ કેવી રીતે લાવવો?

એક વયસ્ક “કાકા”એ કહ્યું કે આ સમસ્યાનો ઉકેલ છે.

આપણે મુંબઈના ભાગ પાડો.

વિરાર ગુજરાતને આપો, અને અમ્બરનાથ મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો, વસઈ ગુજરાતને આપો, કલ્યાણ મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો, બોરીવલી ગુજરાતને આપો થાણા મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો, અંધેરી ગુજરાતને આપો, મલાડ મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો, ઘાટકોપર ગુજરાતને આપો, વડાલા મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો, વાંઈદરા ગુજરાતને આપો અને સાયણ મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો …. રાજકપુર મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો અને નરગીસ ગુજરાતને આપો.

હે …  હે …  હે… કાકા તમે ગઢ્ઢે ગઢપણે આમ રાજકપુર નરગીસનું નામ લો તે તમને શોભે નહીં. જરા ઉમરનું તો ધ્યાન રાખો.

“કાકા”એ કહ્યુંઃ એમાં મેં ખોટું શું કહ્યું છે? રાજકપુર મહારાષ્ટ્રને આપો અને નરગીસ ગુજરાતને આપો. એમાં ખોટું શું છે?

“અરે કાકા, રાજકપુર – નરગીસનું નામ તમારાથી નો લેવાય.”

“લે વળી ઈમાં શું?. જેમ રાયપુર છે, જેમ કાનપુર છે, નાગપુર છે, એમ રાજક-પુર છે.”

“કાકા… તમે તો ભારે કરી… ઠીક ચાલો … તમે રાજકપુરનું તો રાજક-પુર કર્યું …  પણ આ નરગીસનું શું?

“લે …. કૈર વાત… પણ નરગીસ તો આપણામાં છે ને … પછી સુ લેવાને વાંઈધો …

આ રીતે આપણ ભારતીય યુએસ નાગરિકોને પણ કહી દેવાનું કે બીલ ક્લીંટન તો આપણામાં છે ને … અને સાથે સાથે હિલેરી ક્લીંટન તો લટકામાં મળે છે…

Hillary Clinton

શિરીષ મોહનલાલ દવે

ટેગ્ઝઃ એપીસોડ, ચાલુ હૈ, આગે હૈ, આપને દેખા, તમે જોયું, આ રહી ગયું, અતિમનસ, તુલસીદાસ, સ્ત્રી (પોતાની, પત્ની, અહિંસા, હિંસા, અગ્નિપરીક્ષા, એક પત્નીવ્રત, ચાર પત્ની, સનાતન ધર્મ, સ્ત્રીને ગાળ ન દેવાય, પ્રમાણભાનની પ્રજ્ઞા, રાવણ, શિખંડી, ભિષ્મ, સુર્પણખા, સીતા, અશોક, કલિંગ, સ્ત્રીસેના, ખુશ થવું, સુંદરકાંડ, અશ્વિનભાઈ પાઠક, મહાજનોનું તર્કશાસ્ત્ર, બીલ ક્લીંટન, ટાર્જેટૅડ વ્યક્તિ, મોદીકાકા, કોમન સીવીલ કોડ, ઓશો આસારામ, સંત રજનીશમલ, પરસ્પર સંમતિ, મસ્જીદમાં ગર્યો’તો જ કોણ, સીતાનું હરણ થયું, હરણની સીતા, હજુરીયા, દુનિયાનો કાકો

 

Advertisements

WHO HAS NOT APPLIED MIND …?

The elections of Karnataka state Assembly are over.

The election result produced a hung assembly

BJP got 104 Seats,

Indian Nehruvian Congress got 78 seats,

JDS+ got 38 seats

And

Others got 2 seats

Somehow it appears that there is a flaw somewhere in the process of calling for proving the majority.

Who are the parties?

(1) Governor of Karnataka

(2) Nehruvian Congress and JDS

(3) BJP

(4) Supreme Court Judges

SC at flaw

(1) Governor of Karnataka what was his role?

(1.1) to invite the leader of the First Single largest party, to take an oath as CM,

(1.2) to ask the CM to appoint the provisional temporary speaker from the elected members to swear in,   

(1.3) to ask the CM to prove his majority on the floor of the house

(1.4) the CM should prove the majority support within 15 days on the floor of the house, not elsewhere,

(1.5) the CM to form the government after proving the majority support on the floor

Is there any flaw at the end of the Governor?

No. There is no flaw in inviting the leader of the First Single largest party to take an oath as CM, because it was as per the guide line prescribed by the Sarkaria Commission in its report and it has been approved by the SC.   

Was there any flaw in the appointment of Mr. Bopiah as provisional speaker of the house?

No. There was no flaw in his appointment because he was the senior most under the criteria of length of service in a cadre. Allegation against him of being bias was set aside by the SC long back in some other case. He had also worked as provisional speaker previously too.

Is there any flaw in asking the CM to prove the majority on the floor of the house?

No. There was no any flaw in asking him to prove the majority on the floor of the house. This was in accordance to the Supreme Court ruling in some other case that the majority has to be proved on the floor of the house, not elsewhere.

Is there any flaw in asking to prove the said majority support within 15 days.

No. There was no flaw in giving a maximum period up to 15 days for the job entrusted to the leader of the First largest single party. 15 days period is the legal period.

Why 15 days period is termed as the legal period?

Something related with multiple subjects and objects to be dealt with, a time limit of minimum 15 days has to be given, to avoid injustice to person/persons/party/parties. If the time period has the relation with a single person with no gathering, searching the matter related document/documents i.e. documental studies, then 72 hours’ time limit is justified. Here in our subject matter, this was not the case. Here it is a policy matter where the whole party’s members have some SAY. These SAYs are to be compiled and needed to arrive to several decisions related with alliance including the alliance to me made or not, through discussion within the party and then through consensus an amicable solution with or without some terms and condition. The leader of a party cannot take decisions at his whims in a democratic country. Hence the 15 days’ time limit given was a well justified limit.

Therefore the decisions of the Governor was foul-less and flawless.

The further details on this justified time limit we would see later.

(2) Nehruvian Congress and JDS

These are the petitioners. We do not know whether Nehruvian Congress is the First Part of the petitioner or the Second Part. Similarly about the JDS. Irrespective of the First Part or Second Part, the BJP lawyer should have asked to clarify. Leave this aside, it is the right of any person/organization to submit a petition. It is up to the discretion of the SC to get convinced or not. We would examine this point further  under the actions of the SC.

(3) BJP, is off course the opposite party. Action of BJP and SC we would discuss together.

(4) Supreme Court:

Who has issued instructions?

Governor has issued the instructions.

If the governor’s instructions are challenged then the Governor becomes the defendant. BJP cannot become either an opposite party or a defending party. But here, BJP being the first largest single party, its interest is affected if the SC does not hear BJP.

As for the Governor, the Governor cannot be called before any court. When this is the position of the Governor, then, it implies that the Governor must have an unchallengeable power, to take the decision. But no authority is allowed to take arbitrary decision in a democratic country. The decision should be taken with discretion.  Discretion means reasonable and justifiable.

The task before SC was to decide whether the instructions issued by the Governor contained any flaw and to rule on:

(1) To entertain the petition or not, when the Governor has discretionary power.

(2) If yes, then whether any instruction of the Governor was discretionary or arbitrary? If the SC finds prima-facie in the petition that any instruction of the Governor contains flaw, then the SC can entertain the petition.

The SC has ruled that the 4th instruction of the Governor was arbitrary.  That is the time limit given for proving the majority within 15 days contains a flaw.

On this point, the SC has a flaw in its order.  SC changed the time limit from 15 days to two days.

The petitioner parties, viz. the  Nehruvian Congress and the  JDS or vice versa, can come with dirty hand, is understandable, through their record of history. But the legal matters are heard, point to point with its relevance.

e.g. Indira Gandhi had spoken fourteen lies on oath, before the Allahabad HC, when her election was challenged by Rajnarain. But at that time, the HC had not ruled, that all of her, rest of the statements were also false. Similarly here, if the petitioners have come with the dirty hands, then this was required to be proved in the court. If the Opposite party proves this, then the petitioners are liable to be punished.

How and why the matter was so urgent that it should be heard at mid night?

It is said that the appointment of Protem speaker, by the leader of the BJP, can play a foul game. But SC can say that this is hypothetical ground. Court cannot give its verdict on hypothetical assumption. Hence SC should have rejected the petition and could have asked the petitioners to come after the appointment of the Protem Speaker.

The pray for the reduction of time limit for the reason of horse trading.

This point is also hypothetical. Horse Trading applies to every party, and if the factor of horse trading is to be considered, then it is to be applied to all.

Otherwise also, the point of preventing Horse Trading cannot be entertained. Because the petitioner One and the petitioner 2 gets full liberty for Horse Trading and that to for indefinite period. They can do the horse trading during the forming of government and after word also while negotiating on terms and conditions of common minimum program.

The point of petitioner coming before the Court with dirty hands lies here:

To have an alliance among two or multiple parties is a policy matter of each party.

To have an alliance, there needs to have terms and conditions which are supposed to be in concurrence with the party principles. Whether these terms and conditions are in concurrence with party principles or not, there needs an expert opinion and the members of the party must have a SAY to it. All these things can be decided only by the General body meeting of the party. Even the Central Working Committee is not authorized to change the policy of the party without the concurrence of the general body.

What should be or what is the procedure to decide such “policy issue” in a democratic set up?

The party president can call for an emergency general body meeting. But political parties are having members in lakhs. Therefore there are state committees. State committees further dependent on district, tehsil and city committees. They have to give suggestions and to elect delegates for the general conference. These delegates will submit the SAYs of members in the general conference. Then the central working committee would compile the SAYs and take the decision as per the delegated power under the constitution of the party. If any member of any Committee inclusive of MLA, if does not agree with the decision/s of the central working committee, he/she has the right to leave the party if he is in minority. No question arises of he being in majority because in that case the proposal gets rejected.

If the alliance has been done before the declaration of the Assembly elections, all these procedure can be followed. And a member against any terms and conditions of alliance or even against the alliance itself, would not file his candidature in assembly election and even he could resign from the party.

If the alliance is proposed after the poll, how to follow the line of democratic spirit to have the alliance?      

It is mandatory to follow the aforesaid procedure to maintain the spirit of the democracy. On the plea of an urgency no party can overlook the basic characteristic of democracy. Further there is no urgency because if the matter is delayed even beyond 15 days, there was no scope of breakdown of the constitution.

Generally for calling any meeting, a notice of 15 days in advance is required for committee of any level with an agenda. In case of an urgency and a known single agenda, a notice of 72 hours is OK at lower level. But when the higher level committee is dependent on the suggestions of the lower level committees, inclusive of electing and sending delegates to the general body meeting at the Head Quarter, 72 days’ notice is not feasible. That is why 15 days’ time period was ok.

Democratic spirit is the transparency and accommodating every body’s SAY so that it can reflects the opinion of general members to the central working committee. Now, in case of post poll alliance even if all the above procedure is followed and accordingly the alliance to a party is approved by a party, an elected member of a party may not agree to the alliance. It is the liberty and the right of that elected member/s to disagree with the post-poll alliance.

Now it is matter of controversy, that in such a case the elected member/s should resign from the MLA-ship or not?

If he/she resigns from the party is understandable. The party can dismiss the member that can also be understandable.

But whether the MLA is the representative of the people of the constituency or the representative of the party? This point is controversial for some people.

Whether the party is superimposing on MLA or people of the constituency are superimposing on MLA?

In democracy the people are the supreme. Thereby in democracy, the MLA should act according to the desire of the people of the constituency.

If while canvassing the contestant of a party has not made mention about a could be alliance to a party, but on the contrary the contestant had abused and derogated the opponent party/parties and its contestant, in that case if that contestant wins the elections the contestant becomes the MLA, and that MLA is not supposed to resign from MLA-ship, because he has not lost the faith of his people.

It is on record that SC has ruled that the people are supreme even above the constitution in democratic countries, then a party cannot terminate any MLA on the ground of the MLA has lost the faith of the party. People are supreme not the party, not the SC, not the house and not the constitution. The burden of proof that the MLA has lost the faith  of the people, lies with party. If any law is not in concurrence with the aforesaid burden of proof, the law is null and void.  

The Supreme Court has not considered the characteristic of the democracy. The party leaders have no arbitrary power for having an alliance. The SC appears to have been taken for granted that the central working or its president enjoys the arbitrary power.  They cannot have such arbitrary power in democracy.

Further the SC has not cared to see or the SC appears to have been overlooked the mandatory procedure to be followed by the petitioner parties to have an alliance reflecting the approval of general body. This is the big flaw in the decision of SC.

The SC has not examined and it has overlooked the mandatory characteristic of parties in a democratic country in passing the order of curtailed time limit of to 72 hours.

We can conclude that it appears;

SC has not taken “ an alliance with another party” is a policy related matter.

SC over ruled that a party should maintain transparency in a democratic country,

SC has approved that non-democratic parties are allowed to function in politics of a democratic country.

SC found on hypothetical ground that there could be horse trading at the end of opposite party (BJP) without examining any past records of it.

SC found no scope for horse trading between two petitioning parties even though they have unlimited scope for indefinite period.

or the SC has not applied mind

As for the BJP, we do not know as to why it has not represented its own case in view of the democratic principles of transparency and mandatory procedures to compile the members’ voice.

If the party is already having its pre-planned strategy of dealing with the matter, it is ok.

Amit Shah is considered to be the modern Chanakya who followed the philosophy of Lord Krishna who had said “ShaTham Prati ShaThyam Samacharet” शठं प्रति शाठ्यम्‌ समाचरेत्‌”.

Shirish M. Dave

 

 

WOW !!! WHAT A CULTURE … of Nehruvian Congress … !!!

The elections of Karnataka state Assembly are over.

The election result produced a hung assembly

BJP got 104 Ssats, Nehruvian Congress got 78 seats, JDS+ got 38 seats and others got 2

Now as per the guide line prescribed under Sarkaria Commission report, the Governor is supposed to invite the leader of the first single largest party to form a government provided it has submitted the claim.

Supreme Court Approval:

It is specifically mentioned in the report, this first single largest party should be invited to form the government. Any alliance formed, after the poll results, would be over looked. Supreme Court too, had approved this criteria.

The BJP leader had submitted his claim.

The Governor of Karnataka state, invited the leader of the First Single largest party viz. BJP who had secured 104 seats.

What is the view of INC (Indian Nehruvian Congress)?

When the vote counting was in progress, and the Nehruvian Congress realized that it has no scope of getting sufficient seats to qualify as the first single largest party, and it has also realized that BJP is to get qualified as a first single largest party, Nehruvian Congress announced that it would support the 3rd single largest party to form the government. i.e. the leader of 3rd single largest party must submit its claim to form the government.

This looks very much funny

Nehruvian Congress is well known for its corruption, fraud, lies and scandals. It was also known to the Nehruvian Congress leaders that if it submits its claim to form the government, then JDS (Janata Dal Secular) would not support the Nehruvian Congress. That is why Nehruvian Congress tempted JDS to submit its claim to form the government. Nehruvian Congress propagated heavily its opinion under its so-called democratic understanding that the BJP should not submit its claim. BJP which is the First Single Largest Party if submits its claim it would be immoral, undemocratic and murder of democracy. If the Governor invites the 3rd Single largest Party viz. JDS, it would be full of moral values, democratic and constitutional.

That is according to Nehruvian Congress, the Governor of Karnataka state must reject the claim of 1st Single Largest party. 2nd largest party is not willing to submit its claim hence the governor must invites 3rd single largest party to form its government.

Does this not look ridiculous?

It may look ridiculous, but Nehruvian Congress has its own “Humpty Dumpty Dictionary” to define political terminologies.

NIKAMMA

WHY THE SARKARIA COMMISSION AND THE SUPREME COURT HAS IGNORED THE ALLIANCE FORMED AFTER ELECTIONS?

The governor has to use his/her discretion as to who can form the stable government.

More the number of parties more to be prone to unstable.

Parties having less number of seats can form an unstable government. A well-known evidence is available in Indian political history. To keep the first single largest party away from forming the government, 2nd and 3rd and 4th single largest parties supported the  fifth single largest party to form the government and the leader of the fifth single largest party was having the strength of one seat. It was the leader himself.

Here, in the case of the Karnataka election, the situation is not exactly the same. But if the two post-election allied parties where the party having small seat strength becomes the leading party then they are more prone to give unstable government. Otherwise also they have no well thought out, program, discussion, mutual understanding of the issues and policy matters. They are more prone to get collapsed. Had they been pre-poll alliance they could have settled, issues and policy and could have prepared common minimum program. There could be a differences among elected members and can have serious problem in post poll alliances.

 Nehruvian Congress had never clear concepts about democracy. It is beyond their brain. JL Nehru was self-recognized socialist. “Socialist” means traditional communist. However there is little difference between the ideology of JL Nehru and Communist. By virtue of vicinity of MK Gandhi and his struggle for independence from British through the non-violence and democratic way, JL Nehru was not in position to talk of autocracy. Let us keep this topic away, but inherently Nehruvian Congress believes in autocracy. It appears like that.

POST-POLL ALLIANCE AND DEMOCRACY

If you have a say, if you are heard, if you are honored, if you are replied then you are living in a party honoring the democratic values.

But in a post-poll alliance, there is no scope for a member to submit his SAY, no chance to be heard, no scope to be replied. Leave aside the point of being honored.

IS IT THAT POLITICAL PARTY IS A HERD?

Nehruvian Congress does not understand the meaning of Pre-poll alliance and post-poll alliance.

Party is formed by its principles and policy. Like minded persons form a party. Give a name to the party. An alliance with some other party, is a policy matter. Before taking a decision on any matter, related with policy, it is mandatory in democracy, to discuss the matter in a general body meeting, so that the members can submit their SAY. Then a resolution is to be passed.

What to talk of general body? A resolution approved by the then Nehruvian Congress ministry in power, was torn out by Rahul Gandhi the prince of Sonia. Sonia is the wife of Rajiv Gandhi, Rajiv Gandhi was the son of Indira Gandhi, Indira Gandhi was the daughter of Jawahar Lal Nehru and Jawahar Lal Nehru was failed in ICS competitive examination of British, the father of Jawahar Lal Nehru Moti Lal Nehru. Moti Lal Nehru was one of the founder member of Indian National Congress. This Moti Lal Nehru asked Mahatma Gandhi to settle JL Nehru in politics.

When India was on verge to get independence, the central working Committee had called for the proposals for the post of Prime Minister. No provincial Committee had put forward the name of Jawaharlal Nehru for PM-Ship in 1946, despite of this, Jawahar Lal Nehru did not withdraw his candidature for PM-Ship, despite of Mahatma Gandhi brought this point to his notice. Jawaharlal Nehru ignored the verdict of his party and gave an indirect message that if he would not be made leader of the party he would generate a split in the party. At that time India was facing crucial issue  of maintaining united India after independence. At that crucial time JL Nehru indicated symptoms of breaking of the party. This became the basic culture which was put forward by Nehru. The daughter of JL Nehru, viz Indira Gandhi, not only degraded heavily, but murdered not only the political values but also the social values of the Indian politics.

Despite of serial defeats Nehruvian Congress is not ready to improve its culture. The leaders of Nehruvian Congress feel that they have all liberty to blame anybody on any issue and can abuse anybody by any name.

The governor of Karnataka invited the leader of 1st single largest party to form the government. The Nehruvian Congress party went to the Supreme Court at midnight and challenged the governor’s decision, as being undemocratic and unconstitutional. Nehruvian Congress asked the SC to put a stay on the governor’s decision. The Supreme Court did not give any stay on the decision of the governor, and it also rejected demand. Further the court asked the governor of Karnataka to appoint a provisional Speaker of the house to conduct voting of the elected members to see if the invited leader possesses the clear majority or not on the floor of the Assembly.

The Governor appointed Mr. Bopaiah as the speaker from the elected members of house.  

Nehruvian Congress started agitation against the order of Supreme Court. Called the governor by abusive words and further threaten the country that there would be blood shed on the roads.

Nehruvian Congress also challenged the appointment of provisional speaker viz. Mr. Bopaiah stating that the provisional speaker is a bias one on the record and not even he is the senior most.

As for allegation “Bias” it had been already decided by the SC and the allegation was set aside by the Supreme Court long back in some other case.

As for the seniority it is difficult to understand the logic of the Nehruvian Congress leaders. According to the Nehruvian Congress, the definition of the seniority is the oldest member among all the other members in the house.

Funny part is that nowhere such definition existed. Even in Government services the seniority is based upon length of service in the same cadre. Mr. Bopaiah had completed more than two terms as MLA and he was the speaker twice.     

NEHRUVIAN CONGRESS LEADERS CALLED THE GOVERNOR AS A DOG OF BJP.

Nehruvian Congress leaders are heavily active on calling by names the person they dislike, irrespective of the post occupied by the targeted person. The targeted person could be an ordinary MLA, a MP, a Minister, a Chief Minister, the Prime Minister, a Governor or even a Supreme Court Judge too. Nehruvian Congress leaders belong to a dynastic party where a person belonged to the Nehruvian dynasty, is only honorable, none else unless he/she is faithful to the dynasty.

RaGa says our party possesses a school of thoughts, we believe in love, we believe in uniting the nation, we have sacrificed for nation, we care for democratic rights of people, we care for poor, whereas the BJP leaders have no principles, they hates others, they divide the nation, none of them have fought for independence, they are autocrat, they do not care for the poor mass.

Actually all these statements very well applies to themselves. We do not need to go into the proof. The very recent approach of its one of the leaders under a discussion on TV channels, proves that how much hypocrisy they possessed. E.g. A leader calls Narendra Modi a murderer of democracy because he attended the marriage ceremony of the daughter of Nawaz Sharif and gave a saree in gift to his wife in Pakistan. Recall, Indira Gandhi had gifted a portion of POK (which was captured by Indian military in the Indo-Pak war 1971) to Bhutto under Shimla Pact. The same Nehruvian Congress woman had put 66000+  persons inclusive of veteran Mahatma Gandhians, behind the bars for indefinite period without any existence of the offence at their end and without any prosecution.

Nehruvian Congress men are calling the Governor of Karnataka a dog. When this was opposed in a TV Channel under a discussion, the leader was not found apologetic, but he defended “I love dogs” and then diverted the matter. Means if you love dogs, there is nothing wrong, you have permit to call a dog to anybody. This is the logic of leaders of Nehruvian Congress.

What is the fault with other animals? We love every animal. All the animals are innocent, thankful and lovely. It may be cow, horse, donkey, pig, or a fox too. Should we call these leaders of Nehruvian Congress a fox or a donkey? But I think that would the insult of these animals.

Further, look at this …

Nehruvian Congi leaders called him NIKKAMMAA in 1997 then toppled him

Nikkammaa means USELESS. ” निकम्मा”

Now they want to oblige him by tempting his son to become the Prime Minister. This is the level of their words.

Congress has to wait for the full process of JDS is invited and proves its majority on the floor of house. Failure of Yadurappa is not enough.

Shirish M. Dave

There is poem in Gujarati, where a Camel says: “Here in this world no body is straight;

Parrot’s beak is not straight, crane’s neck is not straight, Dogs tail is not straight, Elephant’s trunk is not straight, Buffalo’s horns are not straight, Tiger’s nails are not straight … “ On hearing this,  the fox said to the camel, that as for other animals only one limb is not straight, but as for you, all your eighteen limbs are not straight.

Nehruvian Congress is like Camel.  

Some persons listed at the end of this blog, reported themselves as prominent persons and self established intellectual persons. They have shown their sensitivity on the recent atrocity incidents in India.

LACKING IN COMMON SENSE:

It is a matter of common sense that India is a large and thickly populated country. When British left this country it was hardly having its share in the world trade and production. Generally it was exporting raw material and importing finished goods.

Somehow or other Nehru took over the rein and he ruled with huge majority for nearly two decades. By that time India remained poor. Once in the parliament Dr. Lohia had announced “out of 50 crores of population, 40 crores persons’ daily income is less than four Annas(25 paise).” Nehruvian Congress corrected the figure while replying to the statement, that it was not 25 paise, but 27 paise.

We know that it does not make any difference. But this was the outcome of Nehru’s rule of nearly two decades.

During this period Nehru introduced reservation by caste. But did not take care to look as to who took the benefit. Indira Gandhi also ruled with huge majority for more than two terms inclusive of two years with autocracy. She expanded the scope of reservation to more castes. Both the Nehruvians kept this type of reservation as a permanent feature. Ambedkar was for reservation only for untouchables and that too for a limited period of 10 years.

None of the Nehruvian cared to see as to how the reservation functions. i.e. Who are getting benefitted all the time,  and who are deprived of the reservation despite of being Dalit?

NEHRUVIANS WANTED THE RESERVATION SHOULD WORK LIKE THAT ONLY.

i.e. Those lower caste families who have improved their status would continuously take the benefit of reservation. These beneficiaries were their own people and they were to keep hold on vote-bank to misguide their own people. Nehruvian Congress was fond of creating this situation which was most favourable for them under “Vote Bank Politics”.

A State Governor’s son/daughter was entitled for reservation but a poor Dalit with little less percentage to the son/daughter of a Dalit caste Governor was miss the  reservation. 

This policy of Nehruvian Congress still works with minor correction.

POLICY OF IDENTIFYING A PERSON BY CASTE AND RELIGION

To identify a person by its caste had created heavy class conflict during Nehruvian Congress rule since 1970 when Indira Gandhi float “Garibi Hatao”.

Indira Gandhi deep rooted the Caste-ism in 1971. In nineteen eighties and nineties there were riots also. During Nehruvian Congress rule they instigated the riots so that the hatred get expanded and become very deep rooted. This was the culture Nehruvian Congress.

DROPs OF A DEVIL’s BLOOD

Just like a devil blood drop, dynastic cultural parties took birth due to the success and victories of Nehruvian Congress under vote bank politics. 

Now let us come to the point about the sensitivity of these elite persons of the list, who wrote a letter to the Prime Minister indicating their great concern on atrocity on Dalits and Muslims.

Yes. Now the gang has added Dalits. Previously the gang used to talk of Muslims-Christian mix. The idea behind the adding Dalits is to keep them away from rest of Hindus. Because Dalits are still poor and less literate and thereby they can be mislead very easily.    

WHO IS THIS GANG?

These persons are termed as “academics”. “Academics” is a quite confusing term. Similarly the same is with “learned”, “Educated”.

Literally an Academic means a studious or an expert in a field who is much more than a learned. Learned means it is simply holding some certificates, just like our Man Mohan Singh who was committed to Nehruvians’ instructions.

ARE THEY QUALIFIED?

A person has to be qualified to opine on an event. He/she is supposed to be “Educated person”. “Educated person” is that person who has understood the issue and he/she has the capacity and expertise to solve the issue.

“Conflict between or among communities” is a social issue.

After all, every issue barring “science and technology”, all are the social issues. Social workers supposed to be sensitive on social issue without discrimination.

A SOCIAL ACADEMIC IS SUPPOSED TO BE A SOCIAL SCIENTIST.

A Social scientist must know the historical back ground of an issue at hand. A social scientist must have the sense of proportion and the sense of comparability. The social scientist is not supposed to play a “Blame Game”. The social science is also a science. A scientist is not supposed to play a Blame Game.

But suppose a social scientist wants to show his research work and want to submit the REPORT then what should be done?

It appears from the letter addressed to the Prime Minister, these self recognized academics have jointly signed the letter. They do not have sense of proportion and they have not gone through deeply into the issue. An Academic must be studious. But here they have not studied the issue.     

A community may be composed of a Class, a Service, a Caste, a Religion, a Region, a Language… 

HAVE A LOOK AT THE HISTORY

(1) JL Nehru had kept the Indo-China boarder knowingly insecure all the time. This was a big factor for India’s quick defeat. It causes a CAKE WALK VICTORY FOR CHINA. Minimum 3000+ soldiers were killed, due to the folly of Nehru.

Image result for IMAGES OF 1962 INDO CHINA WAR

To ask the security forces to sacrifice despite of prolonged military infiltration of China, was not a sensitive issue?

(2) Indira’s folly/scam was the Simla pact, where the victory achieved by the Indian army was converted to total defeat.4000+ Indian soldiers were killed in that war.

Was it not a sensitive issue?

Untitled

(3) Union Carbide defective deal belonged to Indira Gandhi. Bhopal Gas hazard was the out come.25000+ persons were died and 500000+ were injured for life time.

Was it not a sensitive issue?

Image result for IMAGES OF VICTIMS OF BHOPAL GAS HAZZARD

(4) Anderson was provided with Government vehicle by Arjun Singh in association with Rajiv Gandhi to have a free pass to leave India.

Was it not a sensitive issue?

(5) Hundreds of Hindus’ temples were demolished in Kashmir before and after the Babri Mosq demolition.

Were these not sensitive?

(6) In 1989-90 thousands of Hindu women were raped, tens of thousands of kashmiri Hindus were murdered and lakhs of Hindus were driven out. All these were done with the pre-planned and openly using loud speakers on Mosqs and on Jeeps, asking Hindus to adopt Islam or to runaway or be ready to get murdered.

Image result for IMAGES OF VICTIMS OF HINDUS IN KASHMIR IN 1990

Farukh Abdullah had run away like a coward. Nehruvian Congress did nothing to establish human rights of Hindus. No investigation, No FIR, No arrest, No prosecution, what to talk of punishment to the culprits?

Farukh and his son were not even disqualified for elections. On the contrary their failure was rewarded by establishing them as the CM of J&K by Nehruvian Congress by extending support to them.

This was the unparallel breach of human and natural rights of Kashmiri Hindus in the world history, where the Muslims inclusive of locals and Muslims across the boarder jointly executed butchery, under the willful inactions and negligence of local political Muslim leaders and the Nehruvian Congress leaders.

What sensitivity by these signatories had been shown?

Related image

(7) Even after this also, several carnage took place where Hindus were identified,  driven out of buses and  straight way shoot to death.

Had these signatories shown any sensitivity?

(8) Please note that, in Kashmir, or in Kerana or elsewhere no Muslim was killed. Hindus were only killed.

(9) Besides this terrorists attack by Muslims of cross border with and without association of local Muslims, during Nehruvian Congress party rule, was maximum. It was a total failure of Nehruvian Congress government’s intelligence services, or the Nehruvian Congress in association with their cultural allies made the intelligence service ineffective or the same has been ignored willfully. When the defense top officers had complained that the defense have no spare parts, what to talk of services.

On these terrorists attack, the Nehruvian Congress government was a total failure.

Had these signatories written a letter to the then Prime Minister?  

(10) To talk about riots of 2002, is a fashion of some gangs so called intellectuals. But they never link the riots with the blazing of Sabarmati Express Coach C-6, at Godhra Railway station under a pre-planned conspiracy of a local district head of Nehruvian Congressman.

Victims were 59 Hindus because they were Hindus and returning from Ayodhya. In the post Godhra riots, both the communities had suffered. Hindus were also killed and Muslims were also killed. In the police firing of that Modi Government, Hindus were killed much more. Otherwise also Hindus were killed in unaccounted stabbing organized by the Muslims community, which was continued round the year.  

(11) Before Bombay Blast attack, the Government of India had issued instructions to costal security guards, to inspect the ships in the Arabian sea leniently. This was under the pressure of an allied party’s top leader, of Nehruvian Congress. This gave a smooth way for the terrorists of Bombay blast, to enter India through western sea coast.

(12) During Nehruvian Congress lead Government, there was a common feature of having terrorists’ attacks.

Had these signatories exhibited their concern?

All these indicate, that this lot of signatories is not educated. This lot has acted under Nehruvian Congress and its culturally allied parties’ political agenda. If this is not correct then they must be fool or childish.

Now let us scrutinize the list of these lost so-called literate people;

THE CONTENTS OF THIS LIST.

Bengalis are 53 and they are 14 in Calcutta. Can CPIM & TMC & Nehruvian Congress not manage to get signed this much ?

Persons belonged to Kerala, Chennai, Hyderabad and Bangalore is 26. Can CPIM and Nehruvian Congress no manage this much?

Christians are 13.and Muslims are 11. Most of them are against NaMo. They can manage easily.

Persons studying or serving in Foreign Universities are 70. They party with above lot. Otherwise also they are prone to mislead.

In Gujarat the persons from  IIM and SEPT  of Ahmedabad are 5. Among these five, three are female and 2 are male. All these five are non-Gujaratis. They failed to find a single Gujarati to sign. How marvelous?

If you count like this; take Bengalis, Hyderabadis, Bengaloris and Chennait including those studying serving  in foreign countries,  and then add Christians and Muslims plus JNU and Ramjas Delhi and Delhi University you have a clear cut picture of the conspiracy.

There is no intellectual lot in Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, MP….  Etc… of rest of India.

What a funny picture?

They could have found some people for the name sake from these states. But who will work so hard.

Thereby this gang has obtained signatures from their own contacts. Yellow journalism gives them out of proportion coverage, instead of scrutinizing the matter. Yellow journalism of India is very well lacking from investigative approach. Yellow journalism is always concentrating how to construct the matter with emotional sentences. In one case they had given 40 crores to distribute among media to not make noise against a deal in UPA government.

One Odd man Sudhir Chandra is detailed as Historian . Vinita Chandra from Ramjas College must be knowing him.

Another odd man a Chinese female Ying Chen working in USA has signed.

Ms Kiran Asher might be knowing her.

We can do some more research, but it would be useless once fact is established.

Many of these so called educated persons might be carrying an impression that why had they kept mum on greater evil acts took place during Nehruvian Congress rule (as narrated above) on an excuse that they were walking with perambulator.

If it is really like that, then also they are not pardonable. Because many of those issues are alive on date. E.g. The Kashmiri Hindus are not re-established in their home. Still they are refugees.

Besides this, when Narendra Modi lead government taking action to re-establish them, then the local Muslim leaders start agitating against re-establishment activities on flimsy and un-sustainable ground of demography. The same people did not react when the Hindus were being driven out. Why? If you can drive out a community then also demography gets changed. Why did you not agitate to secure the human rights of Kashmiri Hindus?

None of these elite signatories has made any noise when atrocity cases took place during Nehruvian Congress Government. These cases were of the order of 40000 every year?

In fact these signatories and their sponsoring political gang is enjoying the atrocity on Dalits. The caste-ism is not supported by any Hindu scripture and the caste-ism though ready to die, but the Nehruvian Congress party lead gang, wants the caste-ism should prevail for secure their vote bank. It is a weak part of Hinduism so far it is survived. However the elites of Indian society are trying to uplift Dalits and trying to bring them in main stream.

The Nehruvian Congress openly dividing the nation based on not only Caste, but also based on Religion, Region and Language ….

The divisive culture of Nehruvian Congress lead gang is known to wise people of India very well. That is why the said gang is trying for survival at any cost to the nation. The gang is spreading and floating false, twisted, misinterpreted issues and news to create a negative atmosphere for the Narendra Modi lead government.

People have identified the gang.

NARENDRA MODI GOVERNMENT IS THE ALL TIME THE BEST GOVERNMENT.     

TRUTH PREVAILS, NOT UNTRUTH.

COPERATION OF ALL, DEVELOPMENT OF ALL

THESE ARE THE SLOGAN OF NARENDRA MODI GOVERNMENT.

These fellow signatories and their sponsored parties and some sick media  would be ashamed of their deed, when they will find the developed India by 2014 under the government lead by Narendra Modi.

As per email received by me they are as under:

Odd persons : Do you know the history of the back ground? You must know that India is changing very fast under the leadership of Narendra Modi. There are gangs who possess political agenda to capture power at any cost to the nation.

Better do not poke your knows where you are not educated.

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

किसी भी नगरको/ग्रामको/विस्तारको बदसूरत और गंदा कैसे किया जाय … 

गत ब्लोगमें हमने गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीकी व्यवस्थाका संक्षेपमें विवरण किया था. और यह प्रश्न चिन्ह लगाया था कि क्या गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी गंदा और अराजकता वाला विस्तार बनने के काबिल है?

हम कुछ गीने चूने परिबलोंका विवरण करेंगे.

किसी भी विस्तारको बदसूरत करनेमें और अराजकतायुक्त करनेमें प्रजाकी मानसिकता भी प्रभावशाली होती है. यदि नियम (बाय लॉज़ – कानून) बनानेमें उसकी उपेक्षा की तो “विस्तार”में अराजकता फैल सकती है. अराजकताकी शक्यताकी हम बादमें चर्चा करेंगे.

विस्तारको बदसूरत करने वाले परिबल, आकृति (डीज़ाईन)बनावटकी गुणवत्ताका चयन (स्पेसीफीकेशन)  और  कामकी कुशलता का मिश्रण है. यदि आकृति ठीक नहीं है तो क्षतिग्रस्त होनेकी क्षमता अधिक होती है. यदि आकृति सहीं हैकिंतु गुणवत्ता कनिष्ठ प्रकारकी है तो भी उसकी क्षतिग्रस्त होने की शक्यता अधिक है. यदि ये दोनों सही है लेकिन कामकी कुशलता (पुअर वर्कमेनशीप) यथा योग्य नहीं है तो भी वह निर्माण क्षतिग्रस्त हो सकता है.

निर्माण परिपूर्ण होनेके बाद ऐसे प्रकारके निर्माणके, रखरखाव में अधिक खर्च आता है. दुरस्त करने की गतिक्षतिग्रस्त होनेकी गति से कम है तो भी निर्माण गंदा बदसूरत हो सकता है.

एक बात ध्यानमें रखना चहिये कि हम जो उदाहरण लेते हैं वह आज तो छूटपूटकी घटनाए हैं. लेकिन यदि रखरखाव शिघ्राति  शिघ्र नहीं किया गया तो क्षतिग्रस्त विस्तारकी घटनाओं वाले स्थल, बढते जायेंगे और अंतमें विस्तार बदसूरत दिखेगा.

यातायात मार्गकी चौडाईः  आंतरिक मार्गकी चौडाई, आज तो जो दो लेन (१+१=२) वाली है वह सही लगती हैलेकिन भविष्यमे पांच सालके बाद) याता यातकी समस्या हो सकती है. मुख्य मार्ग जो चार लेनका (२+२=४) है उसके विषयमें भी ऐसा कहा जा सकता है.

08 good main road

आंतरिक मार्गोंकी और मुख्य्त मार्गोंकी  आकृतिसूचित गुणवत्ता और निर्माणकी गुणवत्ता सही है.

09 good internal street road

सायकल मार्ग (द्विचक्र वाहन यातायात) भी सही ही है.

किंतु पदयात्रीयोंके लिये जो मार्ग है उसकी आकृति और निर्माणकी गुणवत्ता सही नहीं है.

पेड पौधेंकी जो भूमि है वह नीची है और फुटपाथके दाहिने बाजु का स्तर उंचा हैऔर निर्माणकी वर्कमेनशीप पुअर होने से फुटपाथके किनारे के पत्थर निकल जाते है. यदि इनको शिघ्राति शिघ्र रीपेर किया जाय और किनारे वाले पेडपौधोंकी भूमि उंची कि जाय तो फुटपाथको क्षतिग्रस्त बनने की घटनाओंको रोका जा सकता है.

01 can break at any time

क़ोंट्राक्टरोंका अपना काम होनेके बाद सबस्टांडर्ड रीसरफेसींग वर्क.

05 gas agency does not reinstate properly

जैसे कि गेस एजंसी जब अपना लाईन बीठाती है तो जो खोदाई होती है उनको ढंगसे री-सरफेसींगका काम नहीं करती है. ईनमें गोदरेज प्रोपर्टीज़ की तरफसे शायद नीगरानी नहीं रक्खी गई है. तो इनकी क्षतिग्रस्त स्थलोंकी छूटपूट घटनाएं मिलती है.

मानवीय असभ्यताः
06 why to walk on footpath

रहेनेवालोंको भी नियमका पालन करना चाहिये. लेकिन यदि गोदरेज प्रोपर्टीज़वाले उनको दंडित नहीं करेंगे तो उनकी आदतमें सुधार लाना असंभव है.

 

यदि फुटपाथ है तो निवासीयोंको फुटपाथ पर चलने की आदत डलनी चाहिय

स्वच्छता पर आघात

पशुओंके प्रति दया भावना का प्रदर्शन करना भारतीयोंकी आदत है. इस आदतके गुणदोषमें  पडें परंतु यह दयाभावना के कारण गंदकी फैलानी नहीं चाहिये.

07 we want to feed animals at the cost of cleanliness

स्वच्छताके उपकरण और स्वच्छता कर्मचारीयोंकी नासमज़ः

सफाई कामदारोंकी समज़ है कि उनको केवल पेडपौधोंके पत्तेकागज़के टूकडे,प्लास्टिक बेग्ज़ और उसके टूकडे … आदि ही को कचरा समज़ना है. कुत्तोंकी वीष्टागाय भेंसका गोबर आदि को उठाना सफाईके अंतर्गत नहीं आता है. इसके कारण जब वे सुखकर मीट्टी बनजाता है तब वह हवामें उड जाता है.  वैसे तो गायभैंस कम दिखाई देते है इसलिये ऐसी घटनाएं  छूट पूट मिलतीं हैकिंतु भविष्यमें इनमें वृद्धि हो सकती है.

गोदरेज प्रोपर्टीज़का काम व्यापारी और निवासी आवास पैदा करना है  कि अवैध व्यवसाय दिलाना

गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी में कोमर्सीयल केंद्र है. सीटी सेंटरमें कई सारी सुयोग्य तरिकेसे निर्मित दुकाने हैं. इसका निर्माण परिपूर्ण नहीं हुआ होगा.

लेकिन हमारे कुछ व्यवसायी लोगोंको मुफ्त मे व्यवसाय करने की जगह चाहिये. इसकी दो वजह है. एकः यह कि पुलीस या तो सुरक्षा कर्मीको खुश रखना और मुफ्तमें जगहका व्यवसायके लिये उपयोग करना.

हाथ लारी” एक ऐसा ही व्यवसाय है. जिसमें व्यक्ति एक हाथ-लॉरीमें सब्जी-तरकारी फैलाके ग्राहकोंकी प्रतिक्षा करता है. और ग्राहक भी उसकी लॉरीमेंसे सब्ज़ी तरकारी खरीदता है.

प्रारंभमें एक हाथलॉरीवाला, एक हाथलॉरीमे सब्ज़ी लगाके एक मार्गकी फुटपाथ पर पार्ट टाईम खडा रहेता है.

फिर वह अपना खडा रहनेकी समय मर्यादा बढाता रहेता है.

05 hand lorry with spreaded material

फिर वह एक लॉरीमें तीन लॉरीका सामान लाता है. वह सामान फुटपाथ पर फैला देता है. फिर वह और किसमका भी सामान लाता हैजैसे कि नारीयलवॉटरमेलनकेले … आदि.

ऐसा करनेके समयके अंतर्गत उसकी सुरक्षा दलो सें पुख्ता दोस्ती हो जाती है. शायद उपरी स्तरके कर्मचारी/अधिकारीगणके साथ भी परोक्ष प्रत्यक्ष संबंध प्रस्थापित हो जाते है.

तो एक दुसरा हाथ लॉरीवाला भी पैदा हो जाता है. उसका  भी ऐसे ही इतिहासका पुनरावर्तन होता है. 

05b one more larywala

फिर तो क्या कहेनाबलुन वाला आता हैखिलौना वाला आता हैगन्नेका रसवाला  जाता है. फुलवाला आता हैमोची आता हैपंक्चर रीपेरर आता है… ऐसे फुटपाथ पर अतिक्रमण बढता ही रहता है.

इसकालके अंतर्गत कई कर्मचारीगण/अधिकारीगणका तबादला होता रहेता है इस लिये किसीकी जीम्मेवारी फिक्स करना उच्चस्तरीय अधिकारीगण योग्य समज़ते नहीं है.

इस प्रकार समयांतर कालके अंतर्गत अराजकता फैल जाती है. गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीमें अराजकता के बीज बोये है. आज जो छूटपूट घटना है और जिसको निवारा जा सकता हैयदि गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीके अधिकारीयोंकी मानसिकता यही रही तो पांच सालमें अराजकता फैल सकती है.

अग्निशामक तकनिकी सुविधाएं और उसके नियमके अंतर्गत प्रावधान

अग्निप्रतिरोधक उपकरण, अग्निशामक व्यवस्थाएं और आपातकालिन व्यवस्था रखना आदिके बडे कठिन नियम है. उसमें एक नियम है बहु मंज़िला इमारतमें आपातकालमें निवासीयोंको निश्चित जगहसे उठानेका. इस जगहको फायर रेफ्युज खंड (फायर रेस्क्यु रुम) कहेते है. निश्चित मंज़िल पर दो ऐसे खंड आमने सामनेकी दिशामें छोर पर रक्खे जाते है. दो इस लिये कि यदि एक छोरका खंड आगके कारण उस आगकी दिशामें उपलब्ध नहीं होता है तो तो दुसरा छोरवाला खंड काममें  जाता है. निवासीयोंको वहां इकठ्ठा करके क्रॅनकी मददसे बचाया जा सकता है. फायर रेस्क्यु खंड एक स्वतंत्र खंड होता है. उसमें  तो कोई निवासी अपना सामान रख सकता है  तो उसका नीजी उपयोग कर सकता है. इस खंडको बंद करना निषेध है. इस खंडमें प्रवेश होता है पर द्वार नहीं रखा जा सकता. उसी प्रकार उसमें गेलेरी होती है उसमें उसको बंद करनेकी खीडाकीयां नहीं होती. ता कि आपात कालमें आसानीसे निवासीयोंको निकाले जा सके.

लेकिन यहां गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीके बहुमंज़िला इमारतोमें इसका अक्षरसः पालन नहीं किया गया. दोमेंसे एक फायर रेस्क्यु खंडको करीबी निवासीको ऐसे ही व्यक्तिगत उपयोगकी सुविधा दे दी गई है.

01 fire rescue room02 break open wall of Fire rescue room

04 fire rescue room exclisive use

नियम के अनुसार फायर रेस्क्यु खंड को कोई निवासी अपने अंगत स्वार्थ के लिये उपयोगमें ले नहीं सकता. किंतु गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीके अधिकारीयोंने फायर रेस्क्यु खंडमें विशेष वीज सुविधा भी उपलब्ध करवायी है. फायर रेस्क्यु खंडमें वीज सुविधा होती है. और उसमें एक लेंप होल्डरका प्रावधान होता है. सामान्य परिस्थितियोंमे इस लेंप होल्डरमें लेंप    लगाना होता है ताकि असामान्य परिस्थितिमें लेंपका अन्वेशण करना न पडे. रेस्क्यु खंड दो होते है. एक मुख्य और एक विकल्पके लिये अतिरिक्त (स्टेंड बाय). कौन मुख्य और कौन विकल्प केलिये अतिरिक्त यह कोई नामाभिधानका विषय नहीं है. दोनों ही एकदुसरेके परिपेक्ष्यमें विकल्पीय है. जैसे की दो स्टेर केस होते है  तो एक यदि आग की घटनामें उपलब्ध नहीं है तो दुसरा जो सामने के छोर पर है वह उपलब्ध होता ही है. तो यहां गोदरेज गार्डन सीटीमें क्या हुआ कि निवासीको फेसीलीटेट करने के लिये उसके पासवाले रेस्क्यु खंडमे तो दिवारको तोडके प्रवेश द्वार तो लगवाही दिया पर उसके लिये फायर रेस्क्यु खंडमें लेंप भी लगवा दिया और ट्युबलाईटभी लगवा दिया. अब फायर रेस्क्यु खंडकी बीजलीका कंट्रोल किसके पास है और उसका विद्युत का बील किसको आता है यह संशोधन का विषय है.

भारतमें और खास करके उत्तरभारतीयोंकी (खास करके राजस्थान, पंजाब, यु.पी, बिहार और गुजराती भी कम नहीं) आदत है कि गैरकानूनी तरीके से उपलब्ध जगहोंका उपयोग करना. और अधिकारीगण/कर्मचारीगण भी वैसे ही चरित्रवाले होनेसे अवैध तरीकेसे आंखे बंद कर देते है.

इसका समाधान क्या है?

कौटिल्यने कहा है कि, आमजनता तो “दंड” से ही सावधान रहेती है. 

“गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी”में और क्या करने कि आवश्यकता है?

गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी बडी आसानीसे स्मार्ट सीटी विस्तार बन सकता है. अभी तो यह विकसित हो ही रहा है तो इसमें अभीसे जनताको सुव्यवस्थित और सुसंस्कृत की जा सकती है.

(१) प्रत्येक मार्ग पर जैसे कि मुख्य मार्ग पर गति-सीमा ४० कि. आंतरिक मार्ग पर १५ कि. और क्लस्टरके अंदर ५/१० कि. की सीमा रक्खी जा सकती है. गतिसीमा के सूचना बॉर्ड रखना चाहिये.

(२) प्रत्येक प्रवेशद्वार के पास सीसीटीवी केमेराका प्रबंध किया जाना चहिये.

(३) प्रत्येक क्लस्टरमें सदस्यके लिये स्मार्टकार्डसे प्रवेश किया जा सकता है,

(४) प्रत्येक बिल्डींगमे प्रत्येक स्तर (फ्लोर) पर भी सीसीटीवी केमेरा का प्रबंध होना चाहिये. सुरक्षा कर्मचारी निवासीसे बात करके सुनिश्चित करेगा कि आगंतुक को प्रवेश देना है या नहीं, यदि निवासीने अनुमति दी, तो वह आगंतुक वहीं पर ही गया या कहीं और गया.

(५) प्रत्येक मार्ग पर भी सीसीटीवी केमेरा का प्रावधान किया जाना चाहिये ताकि सभी कोई सज्जनता पूर्वकका व्यवहार करें और यातायातके नियमोंका भंग करनेसे बचे.

(६) सीसीटीवी केमेरासे अतिक्रमण पर कडा निरीक्षण रखा जा सकता है.

कर्मचारीको नियमपालनके लिये प्रतिबद्ध होना चाहिये. यदि ऐसा नहीं हुआ तो समज़ लो 

अराजकताका आरंभ है.

 

शिरीष मोहनलाल दवे

किसी भी नगरको/ग्रामको बदसूरत और गंदा कैसे किया जाय ….

हमने समज़ लिया कि, शास्त्री नगर जो एक ठीक तरहके आयोजनसे बनाया हुआ टाउनशीप था उसको अहमदाबादकी म्युनीसीपल कमीश्नरकी गेंगने एक ही दशकमें कैसे बदसूरत कर दिया.

कौनसे परिबल है जो कोई भी नगरको या क्षेत्रको बदसूरत कर सकते है?

कमीश्नर और उसकी सेनामें निम्न लिखित गुण होते हैं

अभिनव विचारोंका अभाव (ईनोवेटीव आईडीया),

आर्षदृष्टिका अभाव,

कुछ नया करके दिखावेंवाली सोचका अभाव,

नगरके प्रति अपनापन रखनेका अभाव (बीलोंगींगनेसका अभाव),

भविष्यदृष्टिका अभाव,

कनिष्ठ और क्षतिपूर्ण आयोजन,

क्षतिपूर्ण विशेष विवरण और आकृति, (स्पेसीफीकेशन और डीज़ाईन), यानी कि डिज़ाईन ऐसी हो कि रखरखाव कमसे कम हो

काममें क्षतिपूर्ण गुणवत्ता,

मरम्मतमें विलंब, और मरम्मतकी गति, क्षतिग्रस्त बननेकी गति से कम होना,

स्वच्छताका निम्नस्तरवाली मानसिकता,

नीति नियमोंमे क्षतियां, और उनमे सुधार करनेकी मानसिकता अभाव,

संनिर्माणके और रखरखावके कर्मचारीमें प्रशिक्षणका अभाव,

संनिर्माण और रखरखावके अयोग्य उपकरण.

अब हमगोदरेज गार्डन सीटीकी चर्चा करेंगे.

यह एक ऐसा नगरक्षेत्र है जो गोदरेज प्रोपर्टीज़ नामकी कंपनीने आयोजन करके  संनिर्माण  किया है. बीएचके, बीएचके, . बीएचके, बीएचके, . बीएचके (२२ मंजिला) आदि के १२ मज़िला के भवनसमूह (ब्लोक क्लस्टर) है. ये सब मध्यम वर्गकी सुविधाओंके लिये उपयुक्त बनवाया है.

SAM_2385

इसमें सुव्यवस्थित आयोजन है. आंतरिक मार्ग, मुख्य मार्ग और राज मार्ग की रचना का आयोजन, अहमदाबादकी तुलनामें महानगर आयुक्त (म्युनीसीपल कमीश्नर)के आयोजनसे हजार गुना अधिक अच्छा है.

दो भवन समूहके बीच पर्याप्त अंतर है,

प्रत्येक खंडमेंसे आकाश दिखाई देता है,

प्रत्येक खंडमें सूर्यकी प्रकाश आती है,

विद्युतजलप्रबधन और आनुसंगी साधन और उपसाधनक़ी गुणवत्ता सही है और व्यवस्थित है,

हरेक भवनमें पेसेजकी चौडाई सही है,

SAM_2391

सुरक्षाका प्रबंध सुचारु रुपसे है.

सुचारु अग्निशामक व्यवस्था                                   

रखरखाव का कारोबार व्यवस्थित है,

वाहन पार्कींगकी व्यवस्था अव्यवस्थित नहीं है और अभी तो कोई क्षतियां दृष्टिगोचर नहीं होती है.

प्रत्येक प्रकारके भवनके जुथमें प्रर्यप्त वृक्ष और पुष्प पौधे है. उद्यानमें घांस भी है,

मार्गोंके दोनो दिशामें पर्याप्त वृक्ष और पौधे है.

SAM_2382

महामार्ग पर सायकिलके लिये अतिरिक्त लेन है. चलनेके लिये भी पर्याप्त चौडी फुटपाथ है, गेस, विद्युत और पानीके लिये सुनिश्चित मार्ग (रुट) है,

छोटे बच्चोंके लिये क्रीडांगण है, युवाओंके लिये भी अतिरिक्त क्रीडांगण है,

SAM_2411

टहेलने के लिये और जॉगींग़के लिये पर्याप्त मार्ग है,

व्यायाम गृह (जीम) और स्नानागार है,

वाचनालय है,

आराम गृह है,

क्लब है,

कोम्युनीटी ईतर प्रवृत्तियोंके लिये गृह है,

कोम्युनीटी भोज गृह है,

शोपींग सेंटर और डीपार्टमेंटल स्टोर्स है,

SAM_2387

रखरखाव के लिये कार्यालय है जो शिकायतें लेते है और उसका निर्मूलन करते है,

सुव्यवस्थित कर्मचारीगण जो शिष्ट तरिके से संवाद करता है और शिघ्रतासे कार्य करते है.

विद्यालय है,

सीटी बसकी सुविधा है.

ऑटोरीक्षा स्टेंड है.

रास्ते पर दिशा सूचन करने वाले बॉर्ड है,

क्या क्या नहीं है यह बात नगरके आयुक्त (कमिश्नर) के दिमागके उपरकी बात है. यदि नगर आयुक्त (सीटी कमीश्नर) चाहता तो, जो अहमदाबादके जो क्षेत्र १९५२के बाद विकसित हुए, उनको गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी के समकक्ष कर सकता था. लेकिन ऐसी मानसिकता म्युनीसीपल कमीश्नरमे कहां हो सकती है.

स्थित तो ऐसी है कि सर्व प्रथम जनताको अनुभूति होती है किहमें फलाँ फलाँ समस्या है”. तत्पश्चात समाचार पत्रोंको अवगत होता है. ये समाचर पत्र अपने सीयासती एजंडाके आधार पर उसको प्रसिद्धि देते हैं. जब प्रश्न नगरसेवककी सभामें उठता है, तब कहीं नगरके आयुक्तको पता चलता है. कभी कभी तो नगरके आयुक्तको न्यायालय आदेश देता है तब नगर आयुक्त अपनी सेना को आदेश देता है. फिर काम होता है या तो नहीं होता है या तो आंशिक होता है या तो दोषपूर्ण काम होता है जो थोडे ही समयमें पूर्ववत स्थिति उत्पन्न करता है. फिर वही चक्र फिरसे चालु होता है.

तो क्या गोदरेज गार्डन सीटी गंदा और बदसुरत बन सकने के काबिल है?

क्रमशः

शिरीष मोहनलाल दवे

A zero in philosophy talks philosophical. How funny?

RaGa is talking emotional and tried to twist the matter.

He is a liar, like her forefathers and Grandmother.

RaGa said when we take strict decisions we are prone to be murdered.

2018 03 13 RaGa looks funny

This was a lie.

STRICT AND NEHRUVIAN? WOW!!!

Nehruvians have never taken strict decisions, barring to protect their own Chair. To protect their own chair they have acted extra constitutionally.

(1) Indira was not killed for her strict action. She was killed because she lifted Bhindaranvale who was a separatist and terrorist. This stepping up of Bhindaranvale by way of aligning with his party and declaring him a Saint by Indira. In doing so, she founded terrorism in India including cross border terrorism because Bhindaranvale had cross border contacts. This she had done for her own political benefit. She had no wisdom, that, after cold war, the terrorists would be free from NW and would target India.

(2) Indira neglected free and easy movement of weapons in Golden Temple for several years as if the entry of police and military is not allowed to catch hold of antisocial activists. No law can prevent the police to enter to catch hold an antisocial element. Indira mislead the people of India for her inaction for a long period. This caused to strengthen the terrorists.

(3) The willful negligence of Indira Gandhi was an offence. For that reason she was punished by the nature. Nobody should repent.

2018 03 13 A SAINT DESIGNATED

(4) Rajiv Gandhi was stupid and fool. He was morally corrupted and non-democratic. This is for the reasons that he accepted the PM-ship, when Zail Singh invited him to sworn in. Rajiv Gandhi was well aware of the facts, that he was not a senior leader, he was not an experienced leader, and he had not made any contribution in any field including politics. His selection had not undergone democratic process, as there were many leaders in Nehruvian Congress party who were much more qualified for PM-Ship. Rajiv Gandhi knew all these aspects. He could have asked Zail Singh to wait for the decision of the party. But instead of that, he accepted the invitation to sworn in.

(5) The acceptance of PM-ship happily, by Rajiv Gandhi was a clear exhibition of his immorality. It was the clear indication that he was very much prone to do financial scams.

(6) It was not Rajiv Gandhi who brought revolution in telecommunication. Read this point carefully.

(6.1) In 1977 Janata Party defeated Nehruvian Congress. Morarji Desai’s Government took charge. George Fernandez was the Telecommunication Minister. He took the decision to go for electronic system of telephone exchange system. Previously Indira Gandhi was importing Cross Bar type system of Telephone Exchanges. The Cross Bar telephone exchanges system was OUT OF DATE ELSEWHERE. There were lots of disadvantages in this system. Abroad,  this type of systems were being scrapped. George Fernandez, had common sense. His Ministry took the decision to go for advanced digital telephone exchange system. The global tender was prepared for digital electronic  type telephone exchanges with transfer of technology. The tender was floated.

(6.2) By that time Janata Party government was toppled by Charan Singh and Indira.

(6.3) In 1980 there was no scope for Indira to go back in the decision. Indira Gandhi finalized the tender in favor of Alcatel France. Orders were placed in 1981 for 40000 lines. As per the technology transfer conditions, four teams of Indian Engineers were sent for training in France.

(6.4) First digital electronic telephone exchange of 10000 line installation was commenced in 1982 Worli Mumbai. 10000 line exchange was also under installation at Railwaypura in Ahmedabad.

(6.5) The first exchange installation of 10000 lines at worli was commissioned in 1983 and a satellite (Remote Line Unit of 3000 lines at Cuff parade Mumbai South by a French team.

(6.6) Indian Telephone Industries was set up at Manakapur (Gonada District. U.P.) by 1983.

(6.7) When Indira died, installation of nearly 100000 lines telephone exchanges were in progress. E.g. Cooperage, Andheri, Ghatkoper, Khar, Bandra etc… in Mumbai and at several places at Calcutta, Chennai.

(6.8) All these telephone exchanges work on micro-processor system in each Rack of the Telephone Exchange.

(6.9) At this period of time, there was No Pitroda and No Rajiv Gandhi were available on the screen even at the Horizon.

For details one can visit my blog site, at treenetram of wordpress.

To give credit to Rajiv Gandhi and Pitroda is a blatant lie. Pitroda had no contribution in designing or manufacturing large telephone exchanges. Sam Pitroda’s contribution is in only 256 lines under Rajiv Gandhi’s rule.     

(7) Rajiv Gandhi had never taken any strict decision. He was fool and stupid. He interfered into internal problems of Srilanka and acted against the interest of Tamilians of Shrilanka. Rajiv Gandhi paid the price of his immorality, stupidity and immaturity.

(8) Sonia is not eligible for PM-ship. Further she is absolutely immoral. RaGa is also not eligible for PM-ship for the same reason. But both want to have Number One post. Sitaram Kesari was physically lifted from the presidential office when he refused to resign. Narasinha Rao was never honored for his contribution.

(9) Sonia had kept Number One position with herself. Number Two position was kept for RaGa. MMS was a Robot. They have never taken a strict decision. Even they have practically disobeyed SC instructions.

(10) When RaGa was asked as to why the GDP was low in the period of Nehruvian Rule and higher under Non-Nehruvian Rule? RaGa failed to give reply. Instead of giving reply, he asked a question viz. “Whether from 2004 to 2014 I had a role in politics or not? Reply me Yes or No.”

(11) In fact RaGa and Sonia had big role behind the curtain. All the important files were being routed to Nehruvian. RaGa had torn out the resolution passed by the Ministry of MMS. This was their extra constitutional power.

(12) RaGa was expecting Basu to say yes or no. RaGa was supposed to answer.

(13) The video Nehruvian Congress floated was doctored.                

SHIRISH MOHANLAL DAVE

चमत्कृतिः “वचनेषु किं दरिद्रता” रा.गा. उवाच

UNDER WHOSE NOSE ARE/WERE THEY FLOURISHED AND SURVIVED?

CASE ANALYSIS 

EMPIROR OF FRAUD

Manmohan Singh must be prosecuted for not changing the system of recording and processing financial transactions. Not only this but it is on record that Sonia and RaGa used to instruct Man Mohan and the cabinet, how to act on every issue. Thereby Sonia and RaGa must also be, not only made answerable, but be arrested for exerting unconstitutional pressure on Man Mohan Singh, for prosecution. Man Mohan Singh should also be arrested for failing in his duties though he had taken oath that he would remain faithful to the constitution. It is a case of breach of public trust against him. How RaGa can be allowed to tear out a draft resolution prepared and passed by the ministerial cabinet?  

Why all, these?

(1) At the time of Harshad Mehta’s fraud, Man Mohan was the finance minister. He had stated before the parliament that the case of Harshad Mehta had taken place due to some system defect, and now he would modify all the systems which are prone to generate frauds.

(2) Thereafter this Finance Minister got promotion and he had been made Prime Minister by the Nehruvian Congress and its cultural allies. This was done because either Sonia wanted to enjoy only extra constitutional power only or she was not eligible for PM-ship because our Indian Constitution does not permit any person to become a minister if he/she/it has lean towards citizenship of other country. Though Sonia had gone to the president with a proof of majority support of the MPs to her, the Nehruvians and its cultural allies made a drama as if Sonia was not willing to become the PM. After playing this drama Manmohan Singh was made the PM. The possibility of a treaty between Sonia and Manmohan Singh cannot be ruled out that he would accept the unconstitutional authority of Sonia Gandhi while taking any decision.

(3) And the people of India had come across the Satyam Scam in his first term of PM. Man Mohan Singh should have at least resigned. But he did not resign and continued to act as the PM to obey the instructions of unconstitutional authorities like Sonia and RaGa. This is on records.

(4) It appears though Man Mohan Singh had stated before the parliament in 1994 that he would make the systems of financial transactions fool-proof, he did not do that. The reason may be either he was not capable to do that or he was prevented to do that. Who had prevented can be guessed by even a primary student of economics.

(5) In both the terms of Man Mohan Singh, a lot of financial scandals took place and the financial position and prestige of India had gone to dogs.

(6) The then RBI governor should also be taken to task for his all ill advises to the government and or for keeping mum.

(7) Man Mohan Singh even did not pay any regards and heed to the instructions of the Supreme Court to form a Special Investigation Team to unearth Black-Money. Nehruvian Congress willfully allowed to lapse three years and it lost the elections in 2014. Narendra Modi the new incumbent did form the SIT within three days.

(8) Now the Nehruvian congress leaders and its culturally allied parties leaders are spreading lies and rumors of the scam of some Modi, which has no relation with the PM Modi, though the birth of this scam had taken place in 2011. The Nehruvian Congress and its cultural allies are trying to allege PM Modi, to divert the attention of public to hide their own criminal inaction.

Could we taken to task “Sonu Nigam” for the faults of a Nagar Nigam?   

All these eight points, read together, and consider together, the intention related with actions/in-actions/mum/negligence/avoidance by Nehruvian Congress leaders becomes sky clear.

UNDER WHOSE NOSE THEY SURVIVED

A SIT must be formed to investigate into all evil acts of Nehruvian Congress. They must be arrested on un-bailable warrants. A caveat must be filed so the leaders of Nehruvian Congress cannot get stay orders from the SC without hearing the prima facie of presented by the BJP government.

Shirish Mohanlal Dave

CHAMATKRITI  (चमत्कृति);

A well known story of a Sardarji. (Sardarji-s would excuse us, as they are tolerant) 

A Sardarj went to a medical store near Regal Talkies, and asked for a castor oil as he could not go to toilet for the last two days. The shop keeper inquires whether he would purchase 100ml bottle or 200ml. Sardarji inquired the price. The shopkeeper said 100ml would cost Rs. 50/- and the 200ml would cost Rs. 75/- Sardarji purchased 200ml for the benefit of Rs 25/-.  He drank the whole bottle there and there only.

He might have hardly reached Flora fountain, an enormous pressure started. The stream of excreta commenced and started marking the road.  He inquired about toilet. A person told him to go to railway station. Sardarji started nearly running to the station. When he just reached the toilet of station, a man asked him where is Flora Fountain? Sardarji said “follow this line. The origin is the flora fountain”.

Compare: Randeep Surajewala stated under the nose of the PM Narendra Modi, Nirav Modi has escaped.

The question is under whose nose or line of excreta flushed from bowels, Anderson, Quattrocchi and Daud had escaped?

The whole world knows the origin is Italy so far the line of excreta had to be followed by Ottavio Quattrocchi.

%d bloggers like this: