Monday, March 10, 2008
EK BUDDA MAILA SA -A 60 YEARS OLD MAN WITH A LEG IN THE GRAVE STILL A PRINCE ;WILL DIE A PRINCE?
M.D.C. - Maschera di cera (1997)
29-10-2005
Buy Now
- Rating:
- Genre: Horror
- Movie Type: Crime Thriller, Gothic Film
- Themes: Serial Killers, Mind Games, Crime Sprees
- Director: Sergio Stivaletti
- Release Year: 1997
- Country: FR/IT
- Run Time: 95 minutes
Migrant Immovable Property Act. 1997
| (a) "ACT" means the Jammu and Kashmir Migrant Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997 |
http://kashmirdivision.nic.in/about/services/migrantb.htm
|
Alieanation of migrant Property
[Migrant Immovable Property Act & SRO 364]
CARLOS MARCELLO: BIG DADDY IN THE BIG EASY
| Enrollment No | D/406/2005 |
| Applicant Name | LATIKA RANA |
| S/O, D/O, W/O | S/O SH.Y.P.S.RANA |
| Date of Birth | |
| Permanent Address | 97, RAJAN KUNJ, OPP. 6th Bn P.A.C., |
| Telephone No | 0121-2611093 |
| Temporary Address | A-22, SEC-9, OVERSEAS APPTS, ROHINI |
| University | |
| | |
 | See full-size image. |
Paris, 1900: a couple are horribly murdered by a masked man with a metal claw who rips their hearts out. The sole survivor and witness to the massacre is a young girl. Twelve years later in Rome a new wax museum is opened, whose main attractions are lifelike recreations of gruesome murder scenes. A young man bets that he will spend the night in the museum but is found dead the morning after. Soon, people start disappearing from the streets of Rome and the wax museum halls begin filling with new figures.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madame_Tussauds
Madame Tussauds and the London Planetarium.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/gangsters_outlaws/family_epics/marcello/2.htmlPatanga (1949) -
| Actors : Ajit, Cuckoo, Gope, Nigar Sultana, Rajendranath, Shashi Kapoor, Shyam, Vimmi, Yaqub Director : Rawail H S Lyrics : Rajinder Kishan Music Director : Ramchandra C Producer : Varma Films Singer : Chitalkar, Shamshad Begum Theme : Love Year : 1949 |
Mere Piya Gaye Rangoon [ Lyrics ]
 | |
| Born | November 2, 1965 Gurgaon, Haryana, India |
|---|---|
| Other name(s) | Shah Rukh Khan |
| Occupation | Actor, Producer, Television presenter |
| Years active | 1988-present |
| Spouse(s) | |
The Queen's personal fortune has been the subject of speculation for many years. Sometimes estimated at US$10 billion, recently Forbes magazine conservatively estimated her fortune at around US$500 million (£280 million).[71] This figure seems to agree with official Palace statements that called reports of the Queen's supposed multibillion-dollar wealth "grossly over-exaggerated;" however, it conflicts with a total addition of the Queen's personal holdings. Her personal art collection is worth at least £10 billion, but is held in trust for the nation, and cannot be sold.
The Queen also privately owns large amounts of property that have never been valued, including Sandringham House and Balmoral Castle. Press reports, upon the death of the Queen Mother, speculated that the Queen inherited estate worth around £70 million.[72] Furthermore there is control and ownership of the Duchy of Lancaster, which is valued at £310 million and transferred a private income to the monarch of £9.811 million in 2006.
The Queen also technically owns the Crown Estate with holdings of £6 billion; however, the income of this is transferred to the Treasury in return for the civil list payments.
Canadian national unity
While not speaking directly against Quebec sovereignty in Canada, she has publicly praised Canada's unity and expressed her wish to see the continuation of a unified Canada, sometimes courting controversy over the matter. Like her mother, the Queen has shown an affection for Canada, stating in 1983, when departing California, "I am going home to Canada tomorrow," and at a dinner in Saskatchewan in 2005: "this country and Canadians everywhere have been a constant presence in my life and work."[42] She has also stated that Canada feels like "a home away from home".[43]
DADDY'S DARLING DAUGHTER MAMTA CLICKED BY HIS BLACK AND WHITE CAMERA IN 1972.
I AM ONLY MY FATHER'S DAUGHTER TODAY COMPLETING THE MISSION ASSIGNED TO ME BY MY FATHER AND MY ANCESTORS AND HAVE NO OTHER IDENTITY AS ON DATE 11-3-2008.
PASSPORTS WHITE COLLARS OF CANADA AND ENGLAND.
Aristotle Onasis twin short version of Paltu Charles of Jeddah.
www.aristotle-onassis.blogspot.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles,_Prince_of_Wales
The Prince Charles, Prince of Wales (Charles Philip Arthur George;[1] born 14 November 1948), is the eldest son of Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh.
Charles is Heir Apparent, equally and separately, to the thrones of sixteen sovereign states known as the Commonwealth realms; he will most likely reside in and be directly involved with the United Kingdom.
This activity is not confined to the United Kingdom. For example, as heir to the Canadian throne OF MAILOT OF JESSICA LAL MURDER CASE , he has aimed to use his tours of that country as a way to help draw attention to relevant issues, including youth, the disabled, the environment, the arts, medicine, the elderly, heritage conservation and education.[29]
- Further information: Royal visits to Canada
The Prince is regarded by some as an effective advocate for the United Kingdom. On a visit to the Republic of Ireland, for example, he delivered a personally researched and written speech on Anglo-Irish affairs that was warmly received by Irish politicians and the media.
Second marriage/Relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles
On 10 February 2005, it was announced by Clarence House[26] that the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles would marry on 8 April of that year, in a civil ceremony at Windsor Castle, with a subsequent religious blessing at the castle's St George's Chapel. Subsequently, the location was changed to the Guildhall, Windsor, possibly because of the discovery that Windsor Castle might have to become available for other people's weddings, should theirs be performed there. On Monday 4 April, it was announced that the wedding would be delayed for one day to 9 April to allow the Prince of Wales and some of the invited dignitaries to attend the funeral of Pope John Paul II.
The Orthodox Church
Prince Charles is also interested in Orthodox Christianity.[51][52] Each year he spends time in the Orthodox monasteries of Mount Athos in Greece[53] , and has also visited monasteries in Romania.[54][55] With his father, Prince Philip, who was born and raised Greek Orthodox, he is a patron of the "The Friends of Mount Athos" organisation. Prince Charles was also the patron of the "21st International Congress of Byzantine Studies,"[56] a forum dedicated to the study of the history and art of the former Orthodox Roman Empire, also known as the Eastern Roman or Byzantine Empire.
Philosophy
Another of the Prince's greatest areas of interest continues to be philosophy, especially the philosophy of Asian and Middle Eastern nations, as well as so-called New Age theology. He had a friendship with author Sir Laurens van der Post, whom outsiders called the "guru to Prince Charles", starting in 1977 until van der Post's death in 1996; such was his friendship with van der Post that the author was named godfather to Prince William. In 2006, the Prince praised "that wonderful Kabbalistic diagram of the Tree of Life", as expounded by Warren Kenton, a teacher at the Temenos Academy.[57]
Genesis: The Creation of the Saudi Crime Syndicate
November 8, 2007 · No Comments
Conspiracy Archive | Oct 6th, 2007
by Paul & Phillip D. Collins
When it was discovered that money from Saudi Princess Haifa bint Faisal had found its way, into the hands of Al Qaeda operative and advance man for the 9/11 hijackers Omar al-Bayoumi, the Saudi Princess put forward one of the worst alibis ever concocted. Princess Haifa claimed that she was giving the money to a woman named Majeda Ibrahin Dweikat so she could treat her thyroid condition (”The Saudi Money Trail,” no pagination). The good Princess claimed she had no idea that Majeda and her husband, Omar Basnan, were passing the money to Omar al-Bayoumi (no pagination).
The problem is that Majeda’s husband, Osama Basnan, was known to be a “vocal Al-Qaeda sympathizer” (no pagination). According to a law enforcement official, shortly after the 9/11 attacks, Basnan “celebrated the heroes of September 11″ and referred to September 11 as a “wonderful, glorious day” (no pagination). Basnan is also known to have “met with a high Saudi prince who has responsibilities for intelligence matters and is known to bring suitcases full of cash into the United States” (no pagination). Princess Haifa also connected to Omar al-Bayoumi through her husband, Prince Bandar bin Sultan. Omar al-Bayoumi had worked for Dallah Avco, the aviation services company owned by Prince Bandar’s father, Prince Sultan (no pagination). All of this seemed to suggest that more connected Princess Haifa to Omar al-Bayoumi than just unintended charity.
However, the 9/11 Commission accepted Princess Faisal’s alibi at face value. Why did the Commission give thumbs-up to such a flimsy explanation? The Commission never intended to find the truth behind 9/11. Its job was to cover up the fact that the United States government and the American aristocracy were intimately tied to the amalgam of terrorist financiers and criminals collectively referred to as the Saudi elite or Saudi Royals. This alliance goes back to the birth of the modern state of Saudi Arabia. This genesis story doesn’t begin with a charismatic Arab leader, but with a member of British intelligence: St. John Philby, known also as Jack Philby.
Jack Philby: Saudi Arabia’s Founding Father
Many people are more acquainted with Jack Philby’s son, the notorious Communist double agent, Harold Adrian Russell Philby, also known as Kim Philby. However, Jack’s story is no less important. Jack could be considered the founding father of Saudi Arabia. Jack Philby was a British Civil Servant who was dismissed for sexual misconduct (Loftus and Aarons 25). From there Jack was picked up by British secret service MI6 in 1915 (25). The British secret service was known for its anti-Jewish ranks that viewed all Jews as secret communists (31-2). The anti-Jewish sentiments found in the British secret service had trickled down from the British power elite.
The British saw the Balfour Declaration as merely a foreign propaganda tool meant to get American military support during World War 1 (29). The British actually favored more of an Arab presence in the Palestine territory with a small Jewish minority to placate America (29). This is why the Balfour Declaration of 1917 promised that Palestine would be “a national home” as opposed to “the national home” for the Jews (29). The Balfour Declaration’s language would allow for a situation where the Jews would be insignificant in the Middle East.
Jack’s involvement in British secret service probably helped shape his anti-Jewish mindset. John Loftus and Mark Aarons elaborates:
During the early 1920s, Philby and his secret service colleagues did everything they could to undercut Zionist immigration. Philby’s secret service station organized anti-Jewish propaganda in Palestine. To be fair, he was merely carrying out a policy organized by his predecessors to stir up the Arabs against the Jews. According to several of our sources, Great Britain was the first modern country to use its intelligence service to organize terrorist acts against the Jews. (33)
However, Jack was more than just a Jew-hater. Philby’s fanaticism went much further than the fanaticism of his colleagues in MI6 or the British power elite. While the British power elite and MI6 were anti-Jewish, they were still not supportive of Arab self-determination and political independence. From the perspective of the British oligarchs and MI6, the Arab world was to be divided into French and British spheres of influence.
The secret Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916 was concocted for just this purpose (28-9). Jack Philby was fanatically pro-Arab. In 1917, Jack met with the chieftain of the Wahhabi sect, Ibn Saud (30). This was supposed to be just a minor political mission, but what came out of it was an alliance between Jack and Ibn Saud as well as Philby’s adoption of Wahhabism (30-1). Philby passed intelligence information to Ibn Saud that allowed the House of Saud to defeat Sharif Hussein and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was born (35).
Did Jack Philby help found Saudi Arabia on behalf of the British power elite and MI6? In all likelihood, the answer is no. Philby’s support of Ibn Saud was motivated by his hatred for Britain. When Philby realized that British promises of Arab independence were not genuine, he broke politically with England (28). Still, Philby’s pro-Arab fanaticism buttressed the British power elite’s anti-Jewish agenda. While he may have been a renegade, Jack Philby’s work seemed to always help one or more faction of the power elite. This included the American elite. With the aid of Allen Dulles, Jack Philby would connect the Saudi elite to American elite.
Dulles, Big Oil, and ARAMCO
In the 1930s, Philby was able to convince Ibn Saud to allow foreign investment in the Kingdom in the name of discovering oil. Philby convinced Ibn Saud to allow Charles Crane to facilitate exploration of Saudi Arabia’s subsoil assets (42). In 1933, Standard Oil of California (SOCAL) negotiated with Philby for a 60-year contract that allowed SOCAL to have exclusive rights to explore and extract oil (42-3). This was the beginning of what would become the Arabian-American Oil Company (ARAMCO). The U.S. State Department classifies ARAMCO as the richest commercial prize in the history of the planet (”St. John Philby,” no pagination).
A key player in the creation of ARAMCO was Dulles ally James Forrestal. Forrestal brought SOCAL and Texaco together in an agreement that formed Caltex, the parent company of ARAMCO (Loftus and Aarons 63). James Forrestal’s ties to the Dulles brothers were extremely important. Not only was the Dulles brothers agents of the power elite, but Allen Dulles had also been in a criminal relationship with Jack Philby since 1921 (39). In that year, Philby, who was then the secret service head of intelligence for Transjordan, met Allen, who was then stationed in Istanbul (39). Allen helped Jack guarantee the economic and political survival of Ibn Saud through his connections to American oil companies (38). Together, Philby and Dulles helped build the modern state of Saudi Arabia and connect the American elite to the Saudi elite.
The 9/11 Cover-Up
A real inquiry into the September 11th attacks would have proven disastrous for the American power elite. A genuine investigation would have revealed that the Saudi elite had their hands all over the attacks. This would have led to a deeper examination of the Saudi elite, which would have revealed that the American power elite has been connected to the Saudi criminal and conspiratorial infrastructure since Philby and Dulles created it.
A bogus investigation had to be concocted. The first indication of a cover-up came when President Bush attempted to appoint Henry Kissinger to head the 9/11 Commission. Kissinger’s consulting firm, Kissinger Associates, has had dealings with Saudi Arabia in the past (Scheer, no pagination). When the public and activists raised the roof over this move, Henry was replaced with Thomas Kean. Kean is the director of oil giant Amerada Hess (Hicks 76). At the time of the 9/11 hearings Amerada Hess was conducting a joint venture with the Saudi Arabian oil company Delta Oil (76). The idea that Kean would follow the Saudi money trail of 9/11 was laughable.
Conclusion
The political landscape is filled with many discomforting truths that the common man must wrap his head around. One of those truths is that those who claim to be defending us are in bed with the very forces they claim to be defending us from. The connection between the American elite and the Saudi elite illustrates this point. It is time to take responsibility for our own protection, instead of leaving it in the hands of those who see us as cattle to be harvested.
Shouts of ‘murderers’ and ‘torturers’ greet King Abdullah on Palace tour
November 1, 2007 · No Comments
Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah (R), Britain’s Queen Elizabeth (L) and her husband Prince Philip, The Duke of Edinburgh (C), arrive for a group photograph ahead of a State Banquet at Buckingham Palace in London October 30, 2007. King Abdullah met the Queen on Tuesday at the start of a two-day state visit that has attracted widespread criticism of the Saudi human rights record.
By Colin Brown
One of the most controversial state visits to Britain of recent times began officially yesterday with a royal welcome, set against a backdrop of protest placards.
King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia was officially welcomed by a guard of honour with the Queen at Horseguards Parade. Gordon Brown, Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, and the Foreign Office minister Kim Howells joined dignitaries on the dais. The King then lunched with the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh in the Bow Room at the Palace before being shown a specially created exhibition of Saudi items from the Royal Collection.
Beyond the gates of the Palace, however, the growing outcry continued. Protesters calling for the reopening of a corruption inquiry into a multibillion-dollar arms deal for Typhoon fighters from the UK jeered the Saudi King as the Government rolled out the red carpet to greet him. Scores of protesters shouted “murderers”, “torturers”, and “shame on you” at King Abdullah as he passed by in a gilded horse-drawn coach.
King Abdullah greeted by Darth Vader theme music
As the Prime Minister welcomes the King to No 10 today, Labour MPs are planning a demonstration outside the Saudi embassy in London.
Vince Cable, the acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, who is boycotting events during the visit, said Mr Brown should answer a list of questions including whether he has sought an apology over the arrest and torture of the British expat engineer Sandy Mitchell by the Saudi authorities. Mr Mitchell is expected to be among the protesters.
Mr Cable said Mr Brown should raise with the Saudi King five causes of civil rights abuses in the country – gender discrimination, the death penalty, cruel punishments, the wholesale use of torture and the ill-treatment of homosexuals.
On corruption charges, including alleged “backhanders” for arms deals, Mr Cable asked: “Why is it that the UK has dropped the investigation into Al Yamamah deal in the same year that the US has opened an investigation into the issue? Will Mr Brown reopen the investigation by the SFO into BAE Systems and alleged corruption with regards to Saudi Arabia?” Would Mr Brown give his backing to the release of the National Audit Office report into the Al Yamamah case – which is the only report conducted by the NAO which has never been released?
He said Mr Brown also needed to say whether the Government was giving full co-operation to the US Justice Department, or whether he believed the US action compromised international security. Would he co-operate if the US charges were brought against British Government officials? Mr Cable asked.
More than 30 MPs and celebrities have also signed an open letter protesting at the visit. One of the signatories, the comedian Mark Thomas, 44, who helped the group Campaign Against Arms Trade organise the protest, said: “It’s really important to show opposition to this disgusting hypocritical state of affairs where governments, rules of law, human affairs and democracy are cast aside to worship a barrel of oil.”
Another signatory, Clare Short, the former secretary for international development who resigned from the Blair government, accused the Government of an “absolutely craven foreign policy” towards Saudi Arabia. “It is not just that the Saudis have a terrible record on human rights at home. They are exporting an extreme fundamentalist form of Islam. We should not be giving a state visit to this regime,” she said.
The human rights activist Peter Tatchell said it was “incredible hypocrisy” for ministers to condemn the Burma and Zimbabwe while saying nothing about human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia. He said: “It just shows oil and arms sales seem to have bought the Government’s silence.”
Peter Kilfoyle, a former defence minister, and a string of trade union leaders such as Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Britain’s biggest union, Unite, were also among the signatories. “We believe that there is a conspiracy of silence about the human rights abuses being perpetrated by the Saudi regime,” their letter said.
BUREAUCRACY/CIVIL JUDICIARY ACHIEVEMENTS
http://www.aiuweb.org/organisation/organisation.asp
http://www.tnfrs.tn.nic.in/Articles/Upahaar.htm
 | See full-size image. www.tnfrs.tn.nic.in/ 110 x 129 - 7k Image |
Mr. S. Ramani is an officer of the Indian Police Service from 1970 batch of Tamil Nadu Cadre. He is at present Additional Director General of Police (Head Quarters). Earlier, he had a long tenure as the Director of Fire and Rescue Services and did a lot to professionalise the working of the Department. In recognition of his deep interest in matters relating to fire and safety, the Government of Tamil Nadu made him a Member of the Fire and Rescue Commission constituted to study the working of the Department and suggest improvements.
THE UPHAAR CINEMA TRAGEDY CASE
DELHI HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT
A WAKE-UP CALL
 | See full-size image. www.thaindian.com/.../ 163 x 140 - 17k |
 | See full-size image. www.newstrackindia.com/ 140 x 100 - 6k |
 | See full-size image. indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/ 222 x 237 - 7k I |
Mr. S. Ramani is an officer of the Indian Police Service from 1970 batch of Tamil Nadu Cadre. He is at present Additional Director General of Police (Head Quarters). Earlier, he had a long tenure as the Director of Fire and Rescue Services and did a lot to professionalise the working of the Department. In recognition of his deep interest in matters relating to fire and safety, the Government of Tamil Nadu made him a Member of the Fire and Rescue Commission constituted to study the working of the Department and suggest improvements.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
THE UPHAAR CINEMA TRAGEDY CASE
A WAKE-UP CALL
S. Ramani, I.P.S.
Addl. Director General of Police,
Head Quarters.
The Delhi High Court delivered a land mark judgment recently in Civil Writ No. 4567/1999 on 24.04.2003, in what is commonly called the Uphaar Tragedy Case. This was widely reported in the media. It is important to have a close look at the judgment by the law enforcement agencies, because several critical issues have been raised and directions given. It has opened up a totally new dimension in the area of public safety. Many important legal issues such as payment of compensation and other statutory issues and administrative issues etc. have been dealt with in the judgment and it is necessary to understand them.
2. The facts in brief are that in the posh area of
3. A petition was filed in the Delhi High Court by the Association of victims of Uphaar Tragedy. By this writ, besides claiming compensation, the petitioners have also tried to highlight the shocking state of affairs in the cinema hall and the inadequate safety arrangements. The petitioners claimed that there was complete disregard to the statutory obligations prescribed under the law for the prevention of fire hazards in public places. They alleged that each and every public authority not only failed to discharge its statutory obligations but in fact acted in a manner which was hostile to the discharge of their public duties. Licence and permits were issued with utter disregard to the mandatory provisions of inspections and ensuring safety standards. They contended that scores of cinema halls were and are permitted to run without any inspection and without licence. Permits are issued mechanically and for a price. The petitioners prayed for adequate compensation for the victims and punitive damages against the respondents for showing disregard to the statutory obligations.
4. An initial objection was raised on behalf of the respondents, viz. the Government officials and it was argued that a writ petition was not an appropriate proceeding for deciding the cause and responsibility for the unfortunate incident. The Court ruled that the petition was maintainable. It held that enterprises which are engaged in hazardous activities and which pose a potential threat to the health and safety of the persons working in the factory and residing in the surrounding areas owe an absolute and non-delegable duty to the community to ensure that no harm results to any one. The enterprise has an obligation to conduct its activity with highest standards of safety and if any harm results, it is liable to compensate for such harm. The Court held that even if there was no negligence, but it was proved that there were statutory violations of safety standards by the authorities, these violations may be sufficient to hold the respondents liable to pay compensation for the victims and for the damages. It is very important to note this point.
5. Building Plan Violations:
Uphaar Cinema was started in 1973 and licence was given under the provision of the Delhi Cinematographic Act, 1953 by the District Magistrate. In 1975,the Delhi Administration reduced the cinema tickets rates by 10%. The cinema owners felt aggrieved and represented to Delhi Administration that their expenses had gone up and the reduced rates, were unbearable. This representation was considered by the Lt. Governor and Delhi Administration agreed to relax the rules and allowed the licencee to add more seats in their halls to make good the loss. Uphaar Cinema was permitted to add 43 seats in the balcony and 57 seats in the main hall as per a notification, dated 30.09.1976. The cinema owners accordingly added the extra seats. However the Chief Fire Officer reported that the additional seats were a fire hazard. So the Lt. Governor cancelled the notification permitting extra seats and issued a new notification to this effect. The cinema owners went to the High Court and filed a writ petition. The Delhi High Court held that action taken was legal. The Court also held that simply by withdrawing the notification, it did not mean that all the additional seats were contrary to rules. The Court directed the administration to apply its mind afresh to the additional seats with a view to determine which of them had contravened which rule and to what extent. As a result of the addition of these seats, though the number of vertical gangways remained the same, the exit from the right hand side balcony was closed. Even the vertical gangway to the extreme right of the balcony along the wall was closed. A new vertical gangway was introduced between seat 8 & 9 on the right side of the balcony and the width of the gangway was reduced from 120 cm to 90 cm. There was absence of foot lights near the floor. As a result of the closure of exits, a patron sitting on the extreme right of the balcony had to come out from the left exit door and there was only one stairway available for him to go to the ground floor, to get out of the building. As per rules there should have been two stairways. From the foyer in the balcony, if one wanted to go to the right side stairway, he would come across a glass door, which used to remain closed. These deviations contributed to a large extent in obstructing smooth egress of patrons at the time of the fire which resulted in deaths in the balcony.
6. After the incident, the Lt. Governor instituted an inquiry headed by Naresh Kumar, Deputy Commissioner (South), Government of NCT. The High Court also appointed Commissioners to visit the site and note down the violations. This was done and the violations were found as under:
A. Basement Floor:
Four partition walls were constructed in the basement meant for parking; Inflammable materials were stored; A number of rooms were made in the basement. A temporary wooden structure was put up; Air conditioning plant room did not conform to regulations; Staircase leading to basement was not enclosed type.
B. Ground Floor:
Space meant for restaurant was let out for offices, banks etc ; Ticket booth was constructed near car parking , Partition walls between LT & HT transformers were altered ; A dispensary was constructed behind the transformer room over the ramp, One toilet adjoining the A/C duct was constructed; Cars were parked in front of the Transformer room ; Cycles and scooters were parked in front of the stairs.
C. First Floor:
Two additional refreshment counters were constructed in the rear stall foyer ; One additional seat was added in the rear most row near the left side exit door.
D. Mezzanine Floor:
One additional refreshment counter was constructed ; An air conditioning unit was installed in the area sanctioned for a washroom.
E. Second Floor (balcony):
52 additional seats were provided over and above the 250 originally sanctioned. When granting licence, DCP (Licensing) did not take sufficient care to facilitate free egress of patrons sitting on the right side ; Two gangways and one exit on the right side were closed ; Inspection room was converted into a 18 seater box; A toilet block was converted into an office.
F. Third Floor:
The sanctioned administrative area was converted an office complex using wooden partitions and let out to various companies ; A few offices were also constructed around the lift well with wooden floors and let out. Part of a sanctioned toilet block was also converted into an office.
G. Terrace:
Existing machine room was bigger in size than sanctioned.
7. Thiru. Naresh Kumar in his report observed that there were major deviations from the building bye laws which converted the whole building into a death-trap.
8. Electricity Act & Rules and Delhi Municipal Corporation Act Violations:
When Uphaar Cinema was being constructed, a transformer had to be installed by Delhi Vidyut Board. What was needed for a Cinema Hall was a transformer of 100 KW and a HT connection and so the owners had to provide space of 10.5 x 15 feet for housing it. While it was being processed, the Delhi Vidyut Board asked the owner to additionally provide land measuring over 45’ x 75’ for installing a sub-station, required for a colony developed by the Delhi Development Authority. Initially the owners refused, but ultimately gave in, owing to arm-twisting methods of the Vidyut Board. The Delhi Vidyut Board not only put up the sub-station on the ground floor in the car parking area, but the transformer meant for the theatre was also installed along with the same. A 500 KVA sub-station was put up and later augmented to 750 KVA and then to 1000 KVA. There are rules governing the installation of transformers, under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act and the Indian Electricity Act. There are also detailed guidelines with regard to the installation of transformers under the Indian Electricity Act and Rules. One important rule in 50-A, which stipulates that in case of Multi-storey buildings of more than 15 meters height, the supplier/owner of the transformer shall provide at the point of commencement of supply, a suitable isolation device with cut-out or breaker to operate four wire circuit and fixed in a conspicuous position, 2.75 meters above ground level so as to completely isolate the power supply to the building in case of emergency. All conductors are required to be completely enclosed in a mechanically strong metal casting or metallic covering and adequately protected against mechanical damage. Before installation of a transformer, approval of the Electrical Inspector has to be obtained u/r 63. U/r 64 & 64-A. At the time of installation of the transformer, relays must be provided and cable trenches inside the sub station and switch station containing cables are to be filled with sand and pebbles and non-inflammable materials. All apparatus, cables and supply lines should be kept in a healthy condition and a record of all tests, checks and maintenance works are to be maintained. However in the case of Uphaar, the entire framework right from the installation to maintenance was defective and rules were breached. Neither circuit breakers, nor relays, nor earthing were provided. Approval was not taken before installation of 1000 KVA transformer and cable trenches were not provided. No maintenance schedule was maintained by the Vidyut Board nor were the mandatory and periodic tests carried out. There were no inspections between July 89 & 22.01.1997, when a foreman did an inspection. He noticed defects, which were brought to the notice of his superiors. The Delhi Vidyut Board was clearly negligent in the installation and maintenance of the transformer. Cable trenches were not of proper size and cables were over crowded without any cover. Electrical cables were found laid in a haphazard manner making it difficult to make out as to which cable was connected to which transformer. Arrangements were not made to prevent the flow of transformer oil from the sub station to the other parts of the building. The standards prescribed for such a power installation in the Indian Electricity Act & Rules & Bureau of Indian Standards, were not adhered to.
9. Sequence of Events:
Tracing the sequence of events on the fateful day, the Court held that on 13.06.1997, there was no electric supply to Uphaar between
10. Compensation:
The Court ruled that any enterprise which is engaged in a hazardous or inherently dangerous industry, which poses a potential threat to the safety of the persons working in the premises or vicinity owes an absolute and non delegable duty to ensure that no harm results to anyone on account of hazardous or inherent nature of the activity undertaken. It should be held strictly liable for causing harm as part of the social cost of carrying on the hazardous activity. The Court went on to held that if the hazardous activity resulted in profit, the law must presume that the permission given to the enterprise to carry on the activity was conditional on it absorbing the cost of any accident on account of such activity. It must indemnify all those who suffer regardless of whether it has carried on carefully or not. The observation of the Supreme Court in MC Metha Vs Union of India, 1987 (1) SCC 395 are relevant and it holds an enterprise liable to compensate all those who are affected by the accident and such liability is not subject to any condition.
11. While going into the negligence and responsibility of the public authorities in the non compliance of the rules, Court held that the Delhi Vidyut Board was very negligent in regard to installation and maintenance of the transformers. The provisions of the Indian Electricity Act & Rules were not followed. The raising of the 3 feet parapet wall at the back of the transformer room in 1972 or early 1973 to the ceiling level was without obtaining the permission from the Municipal Corporation of Delhi. The Court faulted the Delhi Vidyut Board (DVB), the licensing authority, owners of the cinema and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) for this wall and held them responsible and liable.
12. Regarding licensing authority, the Court held that, by his order dated 24.12.1979, 43 of the 56 additional seats added to the main hall in theatre were blocking the vertical gang ways. The 37 additional seats in the balcony were found to be in accordance with the rules, this despite the fact that they were blocking the exits and in contravention of the Cinematographic Rules, which prescribes clearly the number of exits for every hundred patrons. It is not only the number of exits, but also their location, which are important. The licensing authority did not care to move the Delhi High Court for obtaining appropriate directions, consequent on its earlier order. The Court held that most of the violations, which existed in the cinema hall due to which the licence was briefly suspended for four days in 1983 existed even on the date of the accident. Scant respect was shown to adherence to safety regulations. The authorities were not strict and vigilant in compliance of regulations meant for safety.
13.
The Delhi High Court then examined the role played by the Delhi Fire Service. An allegation was raised that they arrived late, did not do well and were more engaged in fire fighting than in rescue of the people and their equipments were out of order. The High Court noted that there might have been shortcoming in the kind of equipment provided to the Fire Service by the Government; however the staff of the Fire Brigade, with the available infrastructure, performed commendably. The court refused to give a ruling as to whether fire fighting or rescue should have been done first. It was not an expert on the matter and it is entirely for the fire fighting staff to decide in a situation as to how they have to meet it. The Court did not want to make any further comment.
14. The Court finally concluded that the licensee of Uphaar Cinema, the licensing branch of the Delhi Police, the Delhi Vidyut Board and the Municipal Corporation of Delhi were all responsible for having contributed to the spreading of fire and smoke and by their acts of omission and commission were are all jointly and severally liable to payment of compensation to the victims. There was no act of omission or commission on the part of the Delhi Fire Service. The Court held that the petitioner claming for damages in public law for wrongful acts done by the respondents is maintainable. Once the Court came to a conclusion that there was a breach of statutory duty on the part of some of the respondents and there was lack of proper care on the part of the others, it was sufficient to hold them liable for damages under the public law. Taking all this into account the High Court ordered the respondents to pay the one lakh to each of the persons injured in the accident by way of compensation for the mental pain, shock and agony. Regarding those who died, the Court arrived at a figure of Rs. 18 lakhs each to the relatives of the victims in case of adults and Rs.15 lakhs in case of children. The relatives will also be entitled to interest at 9% per annum from the date of filing petition, on the amount of compensation now allowed. Since the liability of each one of the respondents viz. Delhi Vidyut Board, Owners of cinema, Licensing Authority & Municipal Corporation of
15. Punitive Damages and other recommendations:
Besides the compensation amount, the Court also directed that the owners of the cinema would be liable to pay punitive damages to the extent of profit made by selling extra tickets to the seats illegally sanctioned by the authorities. It arrived at a figure of Rs. 2,50,00,000/- (Rupees Two crores fifty lakhs) being the income earned by selling 52 additional seats between 1979 and 1996, and held that the amount to the paid in this regard will be used for setting up a “Central Accident Trauma Service”. The Court also recommended the creation of a City Health Services on the lines of Delhi Fire Services consisting solely of medical, paramedical persons & Ambulances & equipment. It should be designed to provide medical assistance to the people in emergency situation. The Court suggested a legislation to provide for Public Liability Insurance for providing relief to victims of accident in public buildings. It also recommended the constitution of a Fire Safety Fund, which can be used to create safety awareness and in fire safety engineering. It further recommended upgradation and modernization of the Fire Service and fixed a time limit of 90 days to process the proposals of those Departments dealing in public safety. It observed that entertainment tax generated sufficient revenue, which can meet financial requirement of bodies, which are required to safe guard public health.
TAMIL NADU RESPONSE TO UPHAAR
16. In Tamil Nadu, fortunately there has been no accident of the type at Uphaar in the recent past. But a far more grave tragedy had struck on 29.07.1979 at
17. Inspection of Cinema Halls:
Government of Tamil Nadu have recently reviewed the system of periodic inspection of Cinema Halls. If inspections of such places are properly and periodically carried out, accidents can be prevented. In order to streamline the system of inspections and make them effective, Government of Tamil Nadu, vide GO Ms.No. 922, Home (Cinema.I) Department, dated 24.08.2000, constituted a multi-departmental committee headed by the Director of Fire Service, to undertake annual inspection of all Cinema Halls in the State. The committee would have representatives from Health, Chief Electricity Inspectorate, CMDA, Town & Country Planning Licensing Authority, PWD and Police. It would conduct joint inspection of Cinema Halls so that the defects are noticed then and there and the licensee is put on notice to rectify them. The licensing authority is also told about the state of affairs so that he too can step in appropriately. The Director of Fire & Rescue Services is also required to submit an annual report to Government in this regard.
18. Revision of the Cinemato-graphic Act and Rules:
Government of Tamil Nadu has also taken up an exercise of amending the Cinematographic Act & Rules, so that the specifications prescribed by the National Building Code, in so far as cinema halls are concerned, are incorporated in the Act itself. Cinematographic Act needs to be amended urgently so as to incorporate the latest technological development in the area of fire prevention, fire fighting and safety. The
19. Regarding the whole lot of other recommendations made by the Delhi High Court in the Uphaar judgement, including establishment of a Fire Safety Fund, Modernization of the Fire Service and Publicity and awareness campaigns, safety of buildings etc., Tamil Nadu Government has vide GO. 1102, Home (Pol.17) Department, dated 19.11.2002 established a high-powered commission with a retired High Court Judge (Justice -oOo-
Bhakthavatchalam) as its Chairman. I am a member of the Commission. The Commission has been given a 19 point term of reference which covers all issues that are important and relevant for fire prevention, fire fighting and fire safety. This Commission is perhaps the first of its kind in the country or even in the world and its findings will go a long way to address the issues involved. I understand that there is also a move to establish a similar Commission at the National Level.
20. Be as it may, the Delhi High Court judgment has sounded a wake-up call to all concerned. The judgment is indeed a landmark, having far reaching consequences. Hereafter the various agencies will have to pay hefty damages for lapses and failure to ensure safety. That is why the judgment has been examined in depth in this article. It is now time to wake up.
KILLERS OF 1997
http://www.tamilnadutourism.org/
Sri Ramanathaswamy Temple This temple is constructed at the spot where Lord Rama offered woship to the sand Lingam - Ramanathaswamy made by Sita Devi & the Siva Lingam brought by Hanuman from the Kailasam - Viswa Lingam. The construction of the temple as it stands today, a wonderful example of Dravidian architecture, was started in the 12th century and ended in 19th century. All the rulers in a span of 350 years contributed greatly to various aspects and sections of the temple. The most interesting feature in the temple is the 1,220m long corridor with the beautiful carvings on the pillars, walls and cieling.
Kothandaramaswamy Temple The southern most tip of the island where the Indian Ocean mingles with the Bay of Bengal is Dhanushkodi. A major portion was washed away during the 1964 cyclone, but the Kothandaramaswamy temple here is still intact. According to legend, Vibeeshana the brother of Ravana met and joined hands with him at this spot. There are paintings in this temple depicting this story. The idols of Rama, Sita, Lakshmana can be seen along with Vibeeshana & Hanuman. Vivekanadar is said to have landed here after his historic trip to spread Hinduism in the West.
VANAKKAM!
-HATRED FOR HINDUISM,HONESTY,NATIONALISM AND FAMILY VALUES -ALL THAT IS THE 7TH AVTAAR OF VISHNUJI -RAM AND PEACE
www.sacredsites.com/
R.K SHARMA IMPLICATED FOR HIS WORK UNDER ATALJI AND FOR THE RIGHTS OF THE LOOTED KASHMIRI PANDITS KESAR FIELDS,AND HEINOUS EXTORTION RACKET OF THE MUMBAI UNDERWORLD,UNDER THE COMMON WEALTH.
By Our Special Correspondent
The prime accused in the Shivani Bhatnagar murder case, R.K. Sharma, outside the court in Ambala on Friday, after he surrendered. — PTI
Saath mein baap kata hua kaun hai -carlos?
Gulshan Kumar murder case
mumbai: following is the chronology of events in the gulshan kumar murder case. august 12, 1997 : gulshan kumar is shot dead at jeet nagar in juhu. august 30, 1997 : mumbai police commissioner r h mendonca declares that music composer nadeem akhtar saifee is the prime conspirator. police allege that nadeem had hired the killers.
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/ie/daily/19970813/nl-body.jpg
A prominent Indian music director has won his appeal at the High Court in London to avoid extradition to India on a murder charge.
Nadeem Akhtar Saifi had been charged by Indian police with murdering the Indian music producer, Gulshan Kumar, in Bombay in 1997.
 Nadeem Saifi: Said he would not get fair trial |
Nadeem Akhtar Saifi's lawyer had previously told the High Court that Mr Saifi had been implicated in the murder of Gulshan Kumar two months after he and his wife came to Britain.
Mr Saifi had apparently intended to return to India, but changed his mind due to serious doubts about the genuineness of the proceedings against him
He also feared that as a Muslim he would not get a fair trial in India.
His defence team had asked the two High Court judges to block his extradition on the grounds that false evidence against him had been obtained through what was described as "inhuman treatment and coercion" of a key witness by the Indian police.
Retracted confession
Today, the judges ruled that the accusation of murder and conspiracy made against Nadeem Akhtar Saifi had not been made in good faith and in the interests of justice.
One of the sitting judges, Lord Justice Rose, told the court that it would not be fair and just to return the applicant to India because of the apparent misbehaviour by the police in pursuing their inquiries.
The case for the prosecution had rested on the evidence of Mohammed Ali Shaikh, who confessed to being part of the murder conspiracy and implicated Mr Saifi as co-conspirator before a magistrate in Bombay.
But according to Mr Saifi's lawyers, Mr Ali Shaikh later retracted his confession saying it had been obtained through police coercion.
No comments:
Post a Comment