By wisely seeking information after information one is bound to get 
conflicting and contradictory information in cases unlawful practices 
are followed by the public servants .  When one confromt the District 
Collector, Principal Secretary etc., with their own contradictions one 
get the reply that the earlier one was a clerical mistake. There canbe 
an odd clericalmistakes.  But it look so odd that all cases where the 
fowl-play is expossed with their own reply the officials start 
defending that it was a clericalmistake. Then what is the status of the 
false report framed by the public servant ? Just telling that it is 
mistake does not repair the injury caused by such reports dunless the 
injuries cause by the admitted false report is repaired.  In certin 
ases the Judiciary or quasi-judicial forums might have given a 
judgement based on the falsely frmed report. Of cource one can ask the 
status.  But all second appeals on such inconvenient cases are kept 
aside by the SIC un-actioned. Any solution ?  

Reply via email to