P R A
Y E R S:
In the above premise, it is, prayed that Honble Supreme Court may be pleased to
pass appropriate order constituting a Larger Constitutional Bench
to decide important substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Part III, as interpretation of the Constitution
of India, and to issue writ or writs of certiorari or Mandamus or any other appropriate decree, writ, declaration,
direction or order interalia holding that:
a) The Principle of finality of final order of the Supreme Court is inconsistent with the never
placed before it substantial question of Law concerning to concept of Two separate, independent, untrammeled Supreme Courts:
1) Supreme Authority of Judiciary under Chapter-IV Part V and 2) Supreme Authority over and above all other Constitutional
Authority to protect fundamental rights of every citizen under Part III, thus its impact caused perpetuated irremediable injustice
to the Petitioner, and as such shall be declared void to the extent of such inconsistency;
b) The conditions laid down by the Constitutional Bench for filing of Curative Writ Petitions caused perpetuated irremediable
injustice to the Petitioner inconsistent with the Rights to Remedy guaranteed under Part III of the Constitution, as Constitution
nowhere empowered to cause directly or indirectly miscarriage of justice or perpetuated irremediable injustice to the Petitioner
and to the extent of such inconsistency shall be declared void;
c)
The Rule 5 Under Order XVIII of the Supreme Court Rules 1966 (substituted by G.S.R. 407 (w.e.f. 20-12-1997) (Petitions generally)
is void as far as its applicability in respect of the Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is concerned.
d)
Item No. 65 under Part -V (Suit Relating to Immovable Property) under the Schedule for the Period of Limitations under section
2(j) and 3 of the Limitation Act, 1963 are completely inconsistent to Part III of the Constitution and under Article 13 of
the Constitution should be declared as void;
e)
For declaration that the Respondent Nos. 25 to 32 are not entitled to take any advantage from any Order or Judgment which
under the laws of the land are not due, but obtained under embracement of respective Judicial Officers, and / or causing interpolations
or forgery of the Order Sheets, and / or by adoption of any manipulations or any other criminal acts by criminal means, irrespective
of the law of Limitations;
f)
For declaration that the Petitioner is entitled to recover damages from the Respondent No. 1 and 9 caused by omissions, or
commissions or non-actions against or favours for Respondent Nos. 25 to 32 or their associates, men and agents with reference
to respective Memorandums, Representations, Applications, and Complaints filed, submitted, placed before them or any of their
respective Ministries or Departments or Officers or sub-ordinates by the Petitioner, including all those referred in the Writ
Petition;
g)
Direction upon Respondent No. 7 to conduct enquiry with reference to charges leveled in the Writ Petition about political
clout acquired by the Respondent No. 25 to 32 and their men and agents and associates, and to further enquire that how far
they seriously jeopardises the smooth functioning of the administration and the safety of life and property of Petitioner,
and how far acquired substantial financial and muscle powers and how far successfully corrupted the Government machinery at
all levels and yielded enough influence to make the task of investigating and prosecuting agencies extremely difficult; how
far even the members of the judicial system have not been escaped the embrace of the Mafiadom controlled by the Respondent
No. 25 to 32 and submit report before Honble Court for appropriate directions;
h)
Direction upon the Respondent No.1 to ensure safety and security of the Petitioner and his family members and property at
the cost of the State from the Respondent Nos. 25 to 32 and their men, agents and associates;
i)
Upon hearing on merit, if Writ Petition proved as vicious or based on frivolous or contains scandalous matters, Petitioner
shall be punished for misuse of rights to remedy;
j)
For further or other order or orders as may be necessary for the ends of justice and as may be supplementary to the other
orders; and
k) For temporary injunction order with reference to prayers: e); f); and g).
FOR WHICH
ACT OF KINDNESS, THE PETITIONER SHALL AS IN DUTY BOUND, EVER PRAY.
Filed by
New Delhi
(MILAP CHORARIA)
Filed 29th October, 2003
Petitioner-in-person
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION)
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO..of 2003
In the
matter of :-
Milap Choraria.......PETITIONER
Versus
Union of India and Others.......RESPONDENTS
A F F I D A V I T
I, Milap Choraria, previously known and called as Milap Chand Choraria, son of Late Shri Deep Chand
Choraria, aged about 60 years, permanent resident of Post Office at Tamkore, District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan, and presently
correspondence address at A-47, Pal Mohan Plaza, 11/56, Desh Bandhu Gupta Road, Karol Bagh, Delhi-110005, do solemnly affirm
and state as under:-
1.
That I am the Petitioner of the above Writ Petition, and I have filed the
above Writ Petition in person and competent to swear this affidavit to the same.
2.
I say that the entire contents of the above Writ Petition are true to my
knowledge as regards to the facts referred and are believed to be true and correct.
3.
That, present petitioner has not filed any other petition in any High Court
or Supreme Court on the subject matter of the present matter.
4.
I say that nothing has been stated in the petition against any Honble Justice
of the any Honble Court.
DEPONENT
VERIFICATION
Verified at New Delhi this the 29th day
of October 2003 that the contents of above affidavit are true to my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been concealed
therefrom.
DEPONENT
