Total Pageviews

Thursday, July 28, 2011

POLICEMEN,POLITICIANS FUCKING DOCTORS


HERE I AM CONFINED WITHIN THE FOUR WALLS BECAUSE OF PERVERTED FREAKS GOVERNING THE WORLD. I AM DENIED THE RIGHT TO LIVELIHOOD AND THE RIGHT TO  FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION. I APPROACHED THE STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION ON 21ST JULY 2011 AND I WAS DENIED ACCEPTANCE. SUPPRESSION OF INHUMANITY OF AN INDIVIDUAL OR A GROUP AMOUNTS TO TYRANNY AND DEMONIC RULE. SO WHAT ARE THESE DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS DOING WITH ME WHILE FUCKING THE FEMALE DOCTORS ALONG WITH THE POLICE?
TALKING ABOUT THESE PERVERTED FREAKS CONDUCTING THE UNLAWFUL SURVEILENCE OUT OF A PRETEXT TO SCRATCH THEIR SICK ARSES. IN REALITY THESE CREEPS ARE ON TO PART TIME MONEY SPINNING BUSINESS OF FILMING THE REAL LIVES AND TRESPASSING TO FINGER MY ARSE OR THAT OF THE PETS. HOW? AND WHY?
SO HERE I AM CONFINED WITHIN THE FOUR WALLS. IT IS NOT JUST MY PHYSICAL STATE OF CONFINEMENT BUT ALSO THE BIOLOGICAL PARTS OF MY BODY UNDER TORTURE AND THREAT CAUSED BY THE PERVERTED FREAKS TRESPASSING OVERNIGHT. THESE PERVERTED FREAKS ARE SO FASTIDIOUS THAT THEY ARE NOT CONTENT FUCKING AMONG THEMSELVES. MAY BE THESE CREATURES ARE SIMPLY IMPOTENT CREATURES AND DO NOT KNOW HOW TO FUCK AMONG THEMSELVES SO WHAT THEY DO IS TO MONITOR MY MENSTRUAL CYCLE. EITHER TO INDUCE OR TO ABRUPTLY STOP WITH WRONG MEDICATIONS. THIS IS CLEAR CASE OF INHUMANITY. BUT THERE ARE THESE LUNATICS GOVERNING THE DEMOCRAT INDIA AND FUCKING THEIR PERVERTED COUNTERPARTS.
I WONDER WHAT IS ITCHING THESE PERVERTS TO KEEP FINGERING MY ARSE?

Thursday, July 21, 2011

DEMONIC RULE IN INDIA


ANDHRA PRADESH IN SOUTHERN INDIA A STATE COMPRISING OF TELUGU SPEAKING COMMUNITY AND LITTERED WITH HANDFULS OF MINORITIES FROM ALL OVER INDIA IN ITS CAPITAL CITY, THE HYDERABAD. THOUGH I AM THE THIRD GENERATION BORN AND BROUGHT UP AT SECUNDERABAD. I GREW UP WITH ALL THE DEVELOPMENTAL CLUSTERS AND THE ALL NEW TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES. IN SHORT, MY BIRTH PLACE HAS TURNED IN TO A MESS.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MESS? THIS IS ONE PLACE THAT IS EQUALLY SCATTERED WITH SEVERAL POLITICAL PARTYS. THE NAMES ARE SO VARIED AND ALL SO COLOURFUL WITH OUT ANY PURPOSE BUT JUST TO AMASS WEALTH AND PROMOTE THEIR CLAN. ONE SUCH IS THE REDDY'S HERE.

TODAY, I APPROACHED THE ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION TO SUBMIT MY REPRESENTATION. BUT THE STAFF WERE INSTRUCTED TO HARASS ME. THEY FAILED TO ACCEPT MY REPRESENTATION AND BEGAN THE SUPPRESSION ACT ON ME. THE CHAIRPERSON ANOTHER K PEDDI ....REDDY WAS MISSING FROM HIS ROOM AND EVEN IF PRESENT IT WOULD BE A DUMB ACT OF DIRTY POLITICS. THE PS TO CHAIRPERSON IS A CRANKY FELLOW WHO SNUBS AT ME EVERY TIME I APPROACH. LAST BUT WICKED IS THE PUBLIC RELATIONS OFFICER NAMED GOPAL SINGH WHO WAS SEATED IN HIS ROOM AND CHIT CHATTING WITH TWO FAIR WOMEN. HE SNARLED AT MY INTRUSION MOMENTARILY DISTRACTED FROM HIS SEXUAL AROUSAL DIALOGUES. HE VIRTUALLY THREATENED ME SAYING,"THE OFFICE WAS OPENED FIVE YEARS BACK....THE EMAILS DO NOT WORK...I DO NOT KNOW ABOUT WEBSITE...YOU SHOULD SUBMIT IN TRIPLICATE AND TAKE A COPY ON THE FOURTH ONE. WHILE THE CLERICAL STAFF OF THE INWARD SECTION TOLD THAT FOUR + ONE COPIES NEED TO BE SUBMITTED.

HUMANITY TOTALLY LOST UNDER THE DEMONIC RULE OF THE PRESENT REGIME. THE CONGRESS PARTY ARE TOTALLY OBLIVIOUS TO THE EXPRESSION "HUMANE" AND LAPPING UP THE LUXURY OF THE DEMONIC-CRACY. WHILE I OBSERVE THAT THE OPPOSITION POLITICAL PARTY'S LIKE THE TELUGU DESAM PARTY ARE BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE. ON THE OTHER HAND, SOME OTHER POLITICAL PAARTY'S HAVE BEGUN TO MEOW..MEOW.. LIKE THE PUSSYCATS IN THE NAME OF COALITION. ON THE MAIN FRONT IS THE ROARING TELANGANA AGITATION AWAY FROM THE JUNGLE. THE PRESENT JUNGLEE RULE IS NOT VERY DISTANCED BUT MOST OF THEM ARE IN TO EXTRA CURRICULAR ACTIVITIES NAMELY THE FEUDALISM DOMINATING AND EXPLOITATING INNOCENTS LIKE MY PET AND ME.

HERE IS THE OPEN LETTER ADDRESSED TO THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISION HERE AT HYDERABAD:

Dated: July, 2011.

The ANDHRA PRADESH STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION.

Sir/Madam,

SUB : VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS / FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS / CONSUMER RIGHTS / CRIMINAL OFFENCE MAINLY TRESPASS/ ANIMAL RIGHTS ACT

Please find enclosed the letters received from the NHRC, Delhi but in vain. The futility and wastage of stationary like paper, postage charges. The acknowledgment's received from the NHRC has not served any purpose.

I reiterate my genuine grievance as follows:

It is to complain that I am staying alone for over two decades out of circumstances and not out of choice. Since the on start of the millennium, there has been TRESPASS in to my residential apartments with criminal intention to cause grave harm and injury to my health and life. I have been practicing yoga since a teenager and I am not leading a marital life to suffer from any specific aggravated conditions.

Brief History:

I am knowledgeable that motivated and vested interested persons were involved to trespass in to my rented residential flat after gaining access and after sedating me in 1999. In 1999 I was a tenant of flat no 411, Poojitha Estates, Erragadda. There were diversionary strategies to disturb me by disrupting the power supply only to my flat. They used to switch off the Meter. After which I stayed at two houses in the BHEL Township in the city outskirts. Here my doberman pet was tortured to death in order to facilitate trespass.

In 2000, I shifted in to the Pratibha Apartments, Sebastian Road Secunderabad on the top floor. It was here that I became knowledgeable of the fact that sedatives and other forms of drugs were given in order to trespass. I suspect sexual exploitation during 2000 to 2003. That was when my only other doberman pet was tortured to death. The post mortem report (copy enclosed) reveals insecticide poisoning as one of the causes. Or any other form of experimental causes that has led to the pet's tortured death. Here too, there was diversionary tactics by one maintainence staff named Sri Ramana a dwarf stature person. Such dwarf structured persons can easily hide inside cupboards.

After which I shifted to Sai Ghar in Padmaraonagar in 2004 and later to Gharonda Veera Apts. In Padmaraonagar. Here again trespass began using the opportunity to trespass as soon as I shifted in the new accommodation.

At Gharonda Veera Apartments I was under attack by some of the housewives after my younger brother paid a very brief visit and fought with me. I was helpless here, though I had lodged several police complaints with the Chilkalguda Police Station. There was evidently police inaction and police bias. Eventually, the advocate couple named Sri Narsimha Rao and his wife Ms Anuradha exerted their influence to frame false charges of lunacy and mentally unsound against me out of political grudge. I was helpless again. Though a merit scholarship student from a reputed educational institution and a bank employee, I was turned in to a victim of racism. The police personnel were most corrupt lot and totally steeped in racism. As I was brown in complexion and the young housewives were all fair, I was victimized. They also presumed that my single divorcee status was cause enough for exploitation. Thus I am denied of justice till date, though my father working in Saudi Arabia came to my rescue . I am still deprived of justice in this matter and continue to be victimized and exploited. Racism is a social evil and also any form of inhumane discrimination because of my single divorcee status. Many consider single women widows or divorcees as bad omen and turn hostile.

I shifted to Tarnaka but again at Gummadi Nilayam, I faced torture and harassment by the flat occupants Sri Subba Rao in G-1 and his wife as per complaint letters duly enclosed. He was referring to his relative named Srinivas being an accused in the Satyam Fraud Case. Though I was not connected in any way, I was being harassed and threatened by Sri Subba Rao and others. I was virtually tortured on daily basis. The power supply to my rented flat was disrupted and disconnected by the G-1 occupant. tHere again all my written police complaints failed to initiate any action and I was thus denied justice. There was trespass yet again. So I shifted to Pallavi Residency where I am presently residing.

I had also lodged complaint with the National Commission for Women, the Human Rights Commission and other offices but in vain. The NCW had directed the related Osmania University Police Station to initiate action, but the related police personnel failed to do so.

Presently, I am residing at Pallavi Residency as a tenant paying Rs.11,000/= and the watchman named Sri Nagaiah is very much knowledgeable and aware about the “faceless trespassers”. I suspect that they are administering sedatives and other wrong / unsuitable medications or drugs. Please conduct investigation.

The diversionary strategy adopted is over the supply of drinking water. This way there can be wasteful disturbance at my door. Flat occupants in 104, 105, 305 & 201 disturb me by making the watchman Nagaiah ring my door bell. The Reddy family in 201 hold many flats and their relatives own others at Pallavi Residency. I am unnecessarily engaged and disturbed with wasteful conversations in the corridor so that there can be trespass from other sources to hide in side my bedroom. In my absence there is every possibility of trespass in to my residential apartment with the use of duplicate keys or other means. Cupboards and Cartoons are enough places to hide or else the access through windows. I am not sure about the sources of trespass and the hiding places. The reason I seek for intervention to conduct an enquiry in the matter in view of police inaction or incompetency or for whatever other reasons. The police personnel could themselves be involved in the trespass, thereby, I request the humanitarian agency to look in to my genuine grievance.

To summarise my genuine complaint as follows:

  1. The conspiracy is to morally undermine me and create grounds to frame false charges against me. To create an ambiance of unreality and chaos to commit a foolproof murder. Sec441 of IPC Act 1860, embarks on criminal trespass.

  2. Sec 120-A of IPC Act defines “criminal conspiracy” wherein, the parties collude to commit criminal offence against me by way of trespass or frame false/flimsy allegations to harass and torture.

CHAPTER XXII: OF CRIMINAL INTIMIDATION, INSULT AND ANNOYANCE

  1. 503. Criminal intimidation

Whoever threatens another with any injury to his person, reputation or property, or to the person or reputation of any one in whom that person is interested, with intent to cause alarm to that person, or to cause that person to do any act which he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do any act which that person is legally entitled to do, as the means of avoiding the execution of such threat, commits criminal intimidation.

I am threatened by the flat occupants namely 1) Sri Saroj Agarwal in 104, 2) Sri Singh and his wife in 105, 3) Sri Panduranga Reddy in 201 who incites the watchman to harass over the basic amenity i.e. drinking water supply and 4) Sri Sasi Bhusan in 305.

4) 504. Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of the peace

Whoever intentionally insults, and thereby gives provocation to any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace, or to commit any other. offence, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.

My two letters dated 09/06/2011 (copies enclosed) to the Police Station lodged against the flat 104 occupants.

5) 509. Word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman

Whoever, intending to insult the modesty of any woman, utters any word, makes any sound or gesture, or exhibits any object, intending that such word or sound shall be heard, or that such gesture or object shall be seen, by such woman, or intrudes upon the privacy of such woman, shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both.

My personal privacy is intruded by the trespassers in collusion with the aforesaid occupants.

6) Please view the enclosed copies of my complaint letters dated 03/2/2011 & 13/06/2011 lodged with the Osmania University Police Station.

Article 21 is the Magna Carta of the Constitution of India. It reads as follows- No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

It is noteworthy to mention that the fundamental right to life and personal liberty is inherent and is not conferred upon us by the Constitution. These are primary personal rights without which civil and political rights are rendered meaningless.
The Court has held that 'the right to life includes the right to live with human dignity and all that goes with it, namely the bare necessities of life such as adequate nutrition clothing and shelter1 inter alia.

7) There are eight key international consumer rights as defined by the United Nations Guideline for Consumer Protection 1985.

They can be simplified into the following:

The right to access to basic needs

To safety

To information

To choice

To representation

To consumer education

To redress

Healthy environment

In India to safeguard consumer interest, following rights were envisioned.

Right to Safety

Right to Information

Right to Choice

Right to be Heard

The Right to Redress

The right to consumer education

The Right to Basic Needs and

The right to a healthy and sustained environment.

The Right to Basic Amenity namely drinking water or the muncipal water supplied in equal manner. The Right to seek Essential Services like plumber, electrician etc.

Due to blockade and other forms of external harassment posed by the aforesaid persons, I was not able to access drinking water from 06/06/11. However, I could get the essential service and minor repair undertaken only on 09/07/11 after a gap of one month. The reason being the inhuman harassment of denial and restricting the essential services to me.

    1. Under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, against the aforesaid persons from interfering and trespassing in to my residence to confuse or cause cruelty to my tiny pet Kennel Club registered and duly vaccinated. Please note that the domesticated pet dogs are habituated to their master and owner. I can handle my pet with out the unnecessary intrusions and confusions caused by the trespassers and others.

    2. To quote the recent news, “Clinical trials:DCGI faults 9 more CROs” in Times Of India, dated 20-7-11, it is highly unethical practise and violation of Human Rights Act and Fundamental Right to give my consent to treatment for damages to my pet's and my health caused by trespassers. It is a criminal offence to TRESPASS for whatever reasons. http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Default/Scripting/ArticleWin.asp?From=Archive&Source=Page&Skin=TOINEW&BaseHref=TOIH/2011/07/20&PageLabel=7&EntityId=Ar00700&ViewMode=HTML

When I faced disruption of basic amenity on regular basis, I was compelled to inquire with the watchman and others. Instead of offering me a simple clarification or answer, I was being rebuked in a rude manner by the watchman. The watchman kept saying that he had to act as per the instructions of th occupants in flats 305 and 201. Even the watchman's wife named Smt Bhagya began to attack and abuse me, though I got equal rights as a consumer of the basic amenity mainly muncipal water. Mr Panduranga Reddy in 201 began to react in a boisterous manner and even attempted to assault me when I approached him and his wife to enquire about the basic amenity supplied to all. While Mr Sasi Bhushan of flat 305 began to directly accuse me for causing problems to them. His wife would simply shut the door on my face.

All the above stated boisterous and rude behavior are manifestations of social evil against single divorcees or widows in our conservative society. It is therefore, obligatory under the International Human Rights Law to defuse the perpetually growing social evil still rampant in our society. Racism is another form of social evil. Lawful action has to be initiated against persons responsible for the exploitation and harassment towards me. Just like dowry harassment cases, a similar law should be enacted to curb the exploitation and harassment of single women mainly divorcees or widows.

It is a show of degenerated values in a conservative society where women are treated alike second class or under privileged citizens. My single divorcee status is the main cause for antagonism and prejudice towards me other than racism. Police personnel are ineffective and incompetent in discharging their duties and express bias in my genuine complaint. The Police personnel are swayed by the status and assets owned by the aforesaid flat occupants or their political connections and they are mellow towards the housewives, There is evidently social evil in practice with the discrimination shown towards housewives unlike single stature women though working. Social Evil is a violation of human rights law, thereby, it is imperative and important that the Human Rights Commission intervenes in my individual case and set an example of social reform. Social Justice and Social Reform would just languish as an illusion with out the strict enforcement of law to erase the social evil.

It is, therefore, to submit my petition to seek intervention of the Human Rights Commission as prescribed under No:12 of Chapter III of the Humans Rights Act, 1993.

Sincerely,

MS KOTHAKOTA ASHALATA PRABHAKAR R/o Flat-101 Pallavi Residency, 12-13-662, St.No:14, Lane No:1, Nagarjunanagar, Tarnaka, Secunderabad-500017.

Mobile Nos:9246220209 / 7207691492.

Encl:( )

LIST OF DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED:

  1. NHRC Letters dated 07/09/10, 09/09/10, 14/12/2009, 27/01/11, 21/2/11 & 18/3/11.

  2. NCW Case no:93/2010 dt 01/3/2010.

  3. Complaint letters dated 02/3/2010, 01/09/10, 03/9/10, 21/07/2010.

  4. Notice dated 01/2/2011.

  5. Complaint letters dated 03/2/11, 09/6/11 (2 letters), 13/6/11.

  6. Post Mortem Report dated 23/09/2004.

Friday, July 8, 2011

MISUSE OF POSITION BY BANK OFFICIALS

Dated:02/07/2011
The Disciplinary Authority/Chief Manager, Office Administration Department,
State Bank Of Hyderabad, Head Office, Gunfoundry, Hyderabad-500001.
Sir/Madam,
RE : SP/OAD/2060 DATED 16/12/2010 & LR.NO:F/OAD/SP/153 DATED 11/05/11
In reply to the letter no:F/OAD/SP/153 dated 11/05/11 and thereafter the text message dated
28/06/11 to my cell phone no:9246220209, it is to submit the following submissions:
➢ The Disciplinary Enquiry was conducted in two days on 19-02-11 preliminary hearing and
on 26-02-11 regular hearing was conducted. Overall disciplinary enquiry was conducted
in one day.
➢ Please refer to my complaints dated 23/04/2010, 25/04/2010, 30/04/2010, 05/05/2010,
17/06/2010, 24/06/2010, 25/06/2010, 07/10/2010, 18/10/2010 & 25/10/2010 to the Higher
Authorities namely, Sri N.K. Padhi, The General Manager (Operations) and others for
intervention against harassment by the Bank Officials namely, 1)Sri Venkataraman, the
Deputy General Manager, Inspections Department, H.O., Gunfoundry and 2)Sri T.
Ayyanna, the Chief Manager, Office Administration Department, H.O. Gunfoundry. The
contents of the letters dated 23/04/2010, 30/04/2010 etc. states the sexual harassment,
probing queries of my maritial status and flirtatious advances made by Sri
Venkataraman, the DGM Inspection Department, H.O. The Sexual Harassment at
Workplace 2010 incorporates the clause to seek remedy against humiliating probings of
my personal marital life and also seek preventive measures from sexual harassment.
➢ The DGM Inspection Department, H.O. began to restrain the Accounts Manager/Chief
Manager from forwarding any or all of my applications claiming emoluments or benefits to
the Office Administration Department. Sri S. Venkataraman began to with hold my leave
fare concession / personal loan applications with him with malicious intention to harass
me. The idea was to make me enter his cabin to enquire about all the applications
submitted by me. This is one form of sexual harassment of a lady staff.
➢ The contents of letter 17/06/2010 is a complaint against the incoming and outgoing chief
managers of the office administration department for non payment of my arrears and
display of gender bias towards sanction of my car loan applied. The Office Administration
Department had also misplaced my car loan application forwarded through the Inspection
Department. There was considerable delay.
➢ It clears speaks of misuse of authority by the bank officials Sri Venkataraman and Sri T.
Ayyanna out of bias and prejudice because of my complaints as aforesaid. I am the original
grieved and victimized complainant. Thereby, the charges framed against me are
intimidated, conspiratorial and false. The very purpose of justice over disciplinary enquiry
is lost to me without the intervention of the Higher Authorities, your esteemed authority
and other Authorized Offices.
➢ Please find enclosed the copies of the aforesaid letters submitted to the Higher Authorities
duly acknowledged. prior to the Disciplinary Proceedings framed against me. I had
complained in April 2010 & June 2010 while the DP case framed in October 2010.
➢ Please view the worksheet dated 12/10/2010 (enclosed) wherein, salaries for the months of
January 2002 to April 2002 are shown as paid to me. But my savings bank account
statement (enclosed) does not show the credit of the amounts as shown in the worksheet.
The Office Administration Department has committed a serious irregularity and
discrepancy in the collection of the input materials for the calculation of the recovery on
loss of pay. Similarly, the salaries of August 2002, September 2002 and arrears show the
wrong amounts. My statement of account (enclosed) is admissible evidence in court of law
and thereby, the amounts shown as salaries paid to me in the worksheet is incorrect and
amounts to falsification of accounts IPC Section 477A, IPC Section 177 Furnishing false
information and IPC Section 24 Dishonestly (Whoever does anything with the intention of
causing wrongful gain to one person or wrongful loss to another person, is said to do that
thing “dishonestly” adopted in the calculation of the recovery on loss of pay. Despite my
letters dated 24/06/2010, 25/06/2010, 07/10/2010 & 18/10/2010, the Office Administration
Department under the authority of the Chief Manager, Sri T. Ayyanna had begun the
monthly recoveries of Rs.7367/= from my salaries of September 2010 and October 2010
respectively. The payslips for the aforesaid months are admissible evidence in the court of
law.
➢ The Office Administration Department has thus, committed a serious irregularity of a
fraudulent nature. In my letter dated 07/10/2010, I was compelled to use the word “Rogue”
in contest with the word “fraud” to prove that the statement of account of my savings bank
account of Zaheerabad Branch is admissible evidence to show that the amounts credited in
the said account differed from the amount shown under salaries paid column in the
worksheet given and signed by the then Chief Manager Sri T. Ayyanna and duly forwarded
by Sri Venkataraman the DGM Inspection Department, H.O. Therefore, it is to state that
as per charge no:2 allegation that I had used derogatory and abusive word is denied. I had
used the word to prove the fraudulent irregularity committed by the Office Administration
Department, H.O. and others involved. The word was not used as a show of disrespect or
as an abusive word. I was merely drawing attention to the wrongful and erroneous
recoveries started from my salaries of September 2010 and October 2010.
➢ In my letter dated 18/10/2010, I had requested to stop the wrongful recoveries and sought
re-calculation of the increment and recovery on loss of pay separately. However, on
26/10/2010, I was placed under suspension as per letter no:F/OAD/1854 dated 26/10/2010
duly signed by the then Chief Manager, Sri T. Ayyanna also the Disciplinary Authority for
the award staff. There has been misuse of position in the suspension order issued to me.
➢ To cover up the fraudulent irregularity, the Office Administration Department has cooked
up the charge no:1 against me to suit the convenience of the implementing machinery i.e.
the Office Administration Department, H.O. The charge no:1 does not specify the exact
abusive words used by me. The witness Mrs K Durga DECO of OAD or Sri S.
Ramamurthy DECO, OAD failed to depose the specific abusive words used and if so in
what language was the abusive word or words used as alleged. At times I come across
known staff from others Departments in the premises and any of my personal
conversations with known staff cannot be attributed as alleged. Therefore, it is to submit
that the charge no:1 is fake and falsely alleged in a vague manner. I can vouch that I am
not guilty of the charge no:1. On the contrary, the Office Administration Department has
committed an irregularity as evident from the worksheet and my statement of account
duly enclosed. The Office Administration Department is merely diverting the attention
from their own serious irregularity to the fake charges cooked up against me.
➢ The delay in the sanction of the annual increment and other emoluments pending since
2002 till 2007 is another inhumane harassment and discrimination shown towards me.
As per enclosed copy of the letter no:Insp/Gr.VII/1016 dated 09/06/2007 duly signed by the
then DGM Sri S. Sunder, the annual increment pending since 2002 was sanctioned.
Another letter no:F/INSP/GR.VII/4473A dated 26/12/2007 (copy enclosed) states that
“payment of the arrears of increment as advised vide our letter no:F/INSP/GR.VII/1129
dated 11/06/2007 after effecting appropriate recoveries for the leave on loss of pay. After
the aforesaid two letters, there has not been any further intimation to me in this regard.
➢ Non compliance of the aforesaid letters by the Office Administration Department, H.O., on
ignorance of such an order is inexcusable. The implementing machinery should be made
accountable for the non implementation of the same. The Office Administration
Department has been at fault yet again for non implementation in 2007. There has been
time lapse in the implementation of the aforesaid letter no:F/INSP/GR.VII/1129 dated
11/06/2007.
➢ In view of the incorrect amounts incorporated in the worksheet, it is to point out that there
is scope for discrepancy in the calculation of the total leave balance arrived. There has
been a breach of terms on the salaries paid to me against the services rendered. The same
cannot be applied to the earlier service period. I have been paid salaries against the
service offered as an employee of the State Bank Of Hyderabad. Similarly, there have been
deductions on account of loss of pay from my salaries as evident from the amounts credited
as salaries in my statement of accounts held with the branches. It would amount to breach
of service terms to recover any loss of pay more than once. Hence, the leave record for the
period 2002 to 2006 has to be reviewed with the related attendance registers.
➢ Please note that the nearest ladies toilet is on the second floor at the end of the corridor
and far away from the Inspection Department located on the first floor. At times, the single
toilet is used by lady staff of other Departments and there is a queue. By the time, I reach
the Department, the attendance register is taken inside the DGM's cabin. The charge nos:
3 & 4 stands denied and refuted.
➢ The witnesses Sri V. Bhushan DECO & Smt. Laxmi Sarada DECO have agreed that the
attendance register gets misplaced at times. In view of the same, I get to sign at a later
time. However, due to the biased nature exhibited by Sri Venkataraman DGM Inspection
Department, H.O. there has been remarks and comments posted only against my name.
The copies of the attendance register dated 21/07/2010, 01/09/2010 and 04/09/2010 show
that some of the other staff failed to sign against their names and have signed at a later
date. But they have been spared from similar allegations. It is a clear cut case of
inhumane discrimination and fabrication of charges against me after my complaints dated
23/4/2010, 25/04/2010, 30/04/2010 & 05/05/2010 against Sri Venkataraman DGM
Inspection Department, H.O. Of sexual harassment. Please note that my grievance of
sexual harassment was submitted in April 2010 itself while the said DGM Inspection
Department, H.O., began to pass remarks and comments in the attendance register from
July 2010. The predecessor Sri S. B. Roy, the former DGM, Inspection Department had not
passed any such adverse remarks against my name. The charges levied under 3 & 4
stands denied and refuted.
➢ In view of the biased bank official Sri Venkataraman DGM Inspection Department H.O.
still the Head of the Inspection Department and capable of misusing his position and
authority to intimidate or instil fear in the staff working under his supervision and
authority at the Inspection Department, it is difficult to call for witnesses from the same
Department to substantiate and support my claims. As long as Sri Venkataraman
exercises his authority as the Deputy General Manager of Inspection Department, and
capable of instilling fear and reprisal in the minds of the staff or intimidate accordingly, I
shall face stiff challenge to call for witnesses to support me. Thereby, it is only fair that the
above said Official ought to be posted elsewhere.
➢ Please note that none of the Bank Officials of the Inspection Department have complained
about any backlog in the work allotted to me. At the time I was attending to the Dispatch
Section and I ensured that there was no work kept pending, thereby, the charge nos:3 & 4
stands flimsy and refuted. How can I accomplish my job in time if I am not available in
Department as alleged?
➢ Due to sudden eruption of telangana agitations during 2010 and residing at Tarnaka, I
was delayed on certain days to the workplace because of unforeseen road diversions on the
roads. I would call the office and request for permission. At times the Accounts Manager
would not be available to permit. The genuine common difficulties faced by the public
stands to refute the charge nos:3 & 4 levied against me.
➢ There is evidently a conflict and contradiction of statements deposed by the various
witnesses presented by the Management on 26/02/2011. There clearly appears to be an
unclear vision and views expressed over the 'bringing of the pet dog” to the office. I do not
refute the charge that I brought my pet dog to the Office on 16/10/2010. However, I deny
the charge that I had violated the decorum of the Office and that my pet dog had created a
nuisance and disturbance. The witnesses Sri V. Bhushan and Smt. Laxmi Sarada have
deposed that the pet was quiet and did not create any nuisance. Also Sri Fernandez
deposed that he did not record on 16th that she brought the dog.
➢ On 16/10/2010, I came to the Inspection Department to inform that I would not be able to
attend Office and that I would be availing leave. However, Sri L G K Murthy pointed out
that the work would get accumulated and 16/10/2010 being a Saturday with four working
hours, I was made to understand that I could discharge my duties with the tiny pet on my
lap. But when the Security Officer suddenly approached me and informed me that pet was
not allowed, I left the premises with my tiny pet. In other words, my purpose of visit was
to inform about availing leave.
➢ On 26/02/2011, the day of regular hearing, I was shocked by the coercive treatment meted
out on me. When I was making the statement, I was being coerced to admit the charges. I
was truly upset and decided to remain silent.
➢ Please view my letter dated 14/03/2011, wherein, I had requested to question the witness
Mrs K Durga and extend the Disciplinary Proceedings Enquiry by one more day. However,
in reply vide email dated 17/03/2011 (copy enclosed), I was denied the opportunity.
SUMMARY:
I am not guilty of the charges alleged as stated in the charge sheet no:SP/OAD/2060 dated
16/12/2010. Please squash the flimsy charges levied out of bias and grudge by the related bank
officials as mentioned earlier.
Charge No:1 stands denied and refuted in view of serious irregularity committed by the Office
Administration Department, H.O. There is no clarity and specific abusive words mentioned in the
allegations. The witness Smt K. Durga merely said, “of course”. While Sri S. Ramamurthy
another witness failed to specify the abusive word or words as alleged. The charge no:1 is vague
in nature and definitely conspiratorial to cover up the serious offense committed by the Office
Administration Department H.O. in the calculation of increment/recovery on loss of pay/leave
balance arrived. Please squash the baseless conspiratorial charges without any punishment.
Charge No:2 stands misinterpreted and deserves to be squashed in view of my genuine grievance
of falsification of accounts and furnishing false information u/s 477A & 177 IPC. The word
“rogue” was not meant to disrespect or abuse the position but to express the fraudulent
authorization of incorrect information and wrongful recoveries from my salaries.
Charge Nos:3 & 4 are utterly groundless allegations with just the scribbled remarks in the
attendance register only against my name. It is clearly a case of bias and vendetta against me by
the DGM Inspection Department H.O. from July 2010 onwards after I lodged my grievance of
sexual harassment in April 2010. Right to Earn my Livelihood is a fundamental right enjoyed by
me as a citizen of India and as senior staff of the State Bank Of Hyderabad. The Sexual
Harassment at Workplace Act, 2010, offers the aggrieved victim to seek preventive measures
against sexual harassment at workplace.
Charge No:5 about “bringing pet dog” is flimsy and a wasteful topic. The witnesses have offered
unclear, conflicting and contradictory statements. The witness Sri V Bhushan has agreed that my
pet was quiet and did not create a nuisance, so where is the need to allege that my pet dog had
caused nuisance and disturbance. Hence, the charge no:5 is totally false and stands to be refuted
and deleted.
Conclusively, I reiterate my stand that all the five charges alleged deserve to be squashed with
out any kind of punishment whatsoever. There has not been a single complaint about my job
performance and nobody has alleged about any backlog of work or any pending work in the
Department. I have not caused any monetary loss to the bank by way of fraud or
misappropriation or any erroneous calculations to bear the disgraceful punishment of being
placed under suspension. My job performance has been par excellence and many bank officials in
the Department had praised my speedy and accurate work. In fact, the bank officials were
pleased that I could trace any mistakes committed by others before dispatching the same, so that
they could rectify the same. I can confidently assure of my sincere, best and honest service
imparted till date. In view of my excellent job performance, the authorities are obligated to
reinstate me with immediate effect and pay the back wages with all emoluments of the two third /
half balance unpaid since 26/10/2010.
The Disciplinary Proceedings is a futility of exercise in its entirety. I implore that the purported
flimsy allegations are only causing wastage of manpower in the State Bank Of Hyderabad. In
view of the futility of suspension in the purported flimsy allegations, it is to seek for dismissal of
the charges with out any reprisal whatsoever.
The submissions in response to the SP/OAD/153 dated 11/05/2011 generate genuine, strong and
valid explanations to seek justice as deemed fit and as applicable.
Sincerely,
MS KOTHAKOTA ASHALATA PRABHAKAR R/o F-101 PALLAVI RESIDENCY 12-1-3-662,
ST.NO:14 LANE NO:1 NAGARJUNANAGAR TARNAKA SECUNDERABAD-500017. A.P.
MOBILE NOS:7207691492 / 9246220209.
List of Enclosures:( ) No. Of Pages
1) Letters dated 23/04/2010, 25/4/10,30/4/10,5/5/10 & 17/6/10 …............... 6
2) Letter dated 12/10/10 enclosing worksheet.............................................. 5
3) Payslips of Sept'10 & Oct.'10..................................................................... 2
4) Statement of Accounts of Savings Bank A/c No:00007259...................... 1
5) Statement of Account of Savings Bank A/c No:01190095041.................. 2
6) Letter dated 18/10/10 & 08/2/2011 seeking recalculation.......................... 7
7) Lr no:F/Insp/Gr.VII/1016 dt09/6/2007, sanction of pending increment since 2002...1
8) Lr. no:F/INSP/GR.VII/4473A dt26/12/2007 duly signed by DGM, S.Sunder..............1
9) Lr dated 17/3/11 replied by Sri N. K. Padhi GM(O).....................................................1
10) Lr dated 24/6/2010 & 25/06/2010..............................................................................3
COPIES TO:
1) The General Manager, Operations, Head Office, SBH, Gunfoundry, for recommendation.
2) The Chief General Manager, SBH, H.O., Gunfoundry, for recommendation.
3) The Central Vigilance Officer, SBH, H.O., Gunfoundry, for recommendation.
4) The Managing Director, SBH, H.O., Gunfoundry, for recommendation.
5) The President, VP, Secretary, AIBEA, for recommendation.
6) The Deputy General Manager, Personnel Department, SBH, H.O., Gunfoundry, for
recommendation.