Comedy of---------

When somebody makes an attempt to influence an honest judge, he has three options:

1. Refuse to hear the case

2. Consider the matter; and if on merits it deserves to be decided in favour of the person who tried to influence, transfer the case. But if on merit, matter has to be decided against the person, decide.

3. Expose the person; don't hear the matter but initiate contempt proceedings.

I know from my own experience and experience of my friends that usually the first option is exercised by most of the judges. It is because somehow, judges believe that power of contempt should be exercised sparingly. However, it is debatable.

This difficulty is suffered usually by new judges because after sometime at the bench, people know whether a judge is approachable or not.

In my view, justice Raghupati was wrong to publicly disclose only a part of information. Either he should have kept mum and decided the matter on merits, or he should have recused himself without disclosing reasons. When he disclosed that he was being approached, he should have initiated contempt proceedings. I do not understand why did he write a letter to chief justice of Madras. After all, it was not an administrative matter.
But once a letter had been received by chief justice why did he forward it to chief justice of India. Prima-facie a matter of contempt had been brought to his notice.

Chief justice of Madras high court had ample powers to initiate contempt proceedings.
In my view, the chief justice of india could have not proceeded in the matter. But why did he say that Raghupati had not mentioned the name of any minister, when actually he had mentioned rajas name.
Lot of explaining has to be done by many.

Tale of two cities

As a consequence to making children's education a fundamental right parliament enacted an Act and created a commission known as national commission of protection of child rights.
The commission recently convened a public hearing at Chennai to listen to grievances of people.I was invited to be a member of jury.Hundreds of complaints were heard and redressed.

Some time back tamil nadu govt had fixed fee for students of private schools.Against this decision teachers of thirty thousand schools had gone on strike for two days.the parents of students of these schools complained against teachers and management.they wanted compensation.I was surprised to see dozens of people arguing vehemently against teachers who went on two days strike against the interest of students. Besides seeking monetary compensation these people also wanted teachers to teach their children on holidays.

In Srinagar teachers did not teach their students for six months and nobody complained.