PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2009 ID-50052
.
"un.
JNl .
The lunatic behavior of SFI is now wide open! A new tenn has been coined by ifds"une/ected JNUSU''! Only communists can think of such a tenn and still claim or:.
JNUSU is actually related to election and elected members through proper channel..
,.
How is it possible that one (or many) be unelected and still remain as JNUSU!?.
wording ofunelected JNUSU? .
Do the SFI think that like them all the students of JNU stay in an intoxicated condi .
What is the meaning ofune/ected JNUSU??.
Who wtelected them and stHI made them JNUSU?.
.
.
What was the mandate of the fraud UGBM? When the last UGBM took place? For how.
UGBM was valid? How many people voted as JNU housed more than 5000 students? What.
bell ofthe UGBM? When (what time) the voting of UGBM took place? Who conducted the.
.
who conducted UGBM were impartial people?.
Ian'.
.
JN .
. Now student bodies like SFI have started eating crow! However powerful an emperor or king, he CIIIIIIOJ.
bat .
believe night as day! Lie will remain lie and white lie remains white lie! The Leftists or the Rightists.
JNUSU when they themselves have accepted their illegality not once but twice? Why they are worried about .
language or wording but illegality of the JNUSU remains illegal! Why SFI is now feeling suffocation about the.
lt\l batches of students now when the same gross violation of rules is going on since nine months?.
the .
.
Co .
ft is strange that the SFI does not know anything about the court proceedings and the so-called Joint Struggle '-'VII.
Mr .
It was during the third hearing at the Supreme Court that the judges fumed to the name of Joint Struggle Committee and.
las· the lawyer Sanjay Parikh 'what is tlzis Joint Struggle Committee?', 'Joint Struggle against whom? Against the Supra.
im1 Court? Against us?' To this Mr. Parikh replied-what is in a name Me Lord? It is just a name! Judges were not satisfied .
Mr. Parikh consented to change the name!So as ofnow, there is no Joint Struggle Committee! Out ofthe five hearings-the.
Su· .
.
last two hearings never find a mention of JNU election as the matter is not only pertaining tQJNU election but the broader .
implementation ofLyngdoh recommendations! The last two hearings were dominated by the Aman Kachroo's case! So for the .
rer, .
An .
remains the same irrespective ofits current or past position! Gopal Subramanium 's elevation never changes his status as .
cal .
Supreme Couf4 JNU election can only happen if the university adheres to the Lyngdoh recommendations! Amicus Curie.
Amicus Curie unless and until him, himselfdeclines to continue in the same position! He is a government lawyer; he neither .
qutm. can fight against the government nor can he go against the Lyngdoh recommendation; he will remain the same! But here the .
question arises -when SFI admits the fact that Gopal Subramanium is the Amicus Curie, whose job is to report non-.
.
Su .
implementation of Lyngdoh to the Supreme Court; why they all are accusing YFE for its role in bringing the matter to the .
tra.
co .
transferred to the subsequent judge as per the Supreme Court rotation rule. The case hearing Lyngdoh matter was not a Supreme Court? How many lies are acceptable? When a Judge retires, automatically the cases being heard under him are.
an.
un .
and stubborn stand of professional politicians of this campus, the final disposal of this case has been pushed into an .
sta constitution bench but a regular two judge bench so there is no need to constitute a two judge bench! Because of the stupid.
unending spiral of hearings! The same student bodies that are .now spending crocodile tears are responsible for the current state of affairs!.
be Stl AISA is now running for cover to cover its illegality status! The illegal JNU officer bearers are now sandwiched in .
between the student expectations, their own tall claims and the refusal of JNU administration to accept them as the.
Stl .
Asfaq, Rajguru and JP had fallen flaT as the shamelessness of AISA has been exposed by YFE! Their attempt to drag new .
co .
A~ student representatives! Their attempt to equate their greed for power and position with that of Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Azad,.
he .
students into their philosophy was also curtailed this year by the administration! They can not threat newcomers with dire.
re: .
consequences if they do not join their organization as there is no election in the near future! As there is easy access to .
hostel for the new comer, they cannot indoctrinate them by housing them temporarily! AISA's dictate about OB~ .
qu.
rath reservation is laughable as the HRD order is different and Supreme Court Order is different with the latter is binding! Al.SA IS.
raising the infrastructure? When Youth For Equality's struggle ensured huge expansio~ AlSA is only there to kill the seats of the General Category students. This is criminal act when the general category covers everybody including the OBCs! .
quoting SC judgment and still contradicting with the same. How AISA imagine the admission of OBC students wtthout.
w:.
u YFE congratulates the student community for passing of the Right To Education (RTE) Bill in the parl.
w was YFE, which is spearheading the struggle to improve basic primary education. In the landmark, Youth For Equahty vs.
bf iam~nt. Itc .
Union of India judgment on 10 April 2008 the Supreme Court ofIndia directed to the Central Government to enact the ~T.E.
A .
within six month. Finally on 4'hofAugust 2009, the act was passed. YFE supports the reservation provision in the RTE as It ts.
COMPULSORY PRIMARY EDUCATION! The argument is now showing colour! YFE salutes the endeavor of SeniOr based on economic criteria! It was YFE lawyer Senior Advocate P.P. Rao, who advocated strongly in favor of FREE A~D.
Advocate P.P. Rao for forcing the government to enact the Right To Education Bill..
Amit Ranjan.
YFE Representative Sonam GroverYFE Representative.
-.
.
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2009 ID-50052
.
"un.
JNl .
The lunatic behavior of SFI is now wide open! A new tenn has been coined by ifds"une/ected JNUSU''! Only communists can think of such a tenn and still claim or:.
JNUSU is actually related to election and elected members through proper channel..
,.
How is it possible that one (or many) be unelected and still remain as JNUSU!?.
wording ofunelected JNUSU? .
Do the SFI think that like them all the students of JNU stay in an intoxicated condi .
What is the meaning ofune/ected JNUSU??.
Who wtelected them and stHI made them JNUSU?.
.
.
What was the mandate of the fraud UGBM? When the last UGBM took place? For how.
UGBM was valid? How many people voted as JNU housed more than 5000 students? What.
bell ofthe UGBM? When (what time) the voting of UGBM took place? Who conducted the.
.
who conducted UGBM were impartial people?.
Ian'.
.
JN .
. Now student bodies like SFI have started eating crow! However powerful an emperor or king, he CIIIIIIOJ.
bat .
believe night as day! Lie will remain lie and white lie remains white lie! The Leftists or the Rightists.
JNUSU when they themselves have accepted their illegality not once but twice? Why they are worried about .
language or wording but illegality of the JNUSU remains illegal! Why SFI is now feeling suffocation about the.
lt\l batches of students now when the same gross violation of rules is going on since nine months?.
the .
.
Co .
ft is strange that the SFI does not know anything about the court proceedings and the so-called Joint Struggle '-'VII.
Mr .
It was during the third hearing at the Supreme Court that the judges fumed to the name of Joint Struggle Committee and.
las· the lawyer Sanjay Parikh 'what is tlzis Joint Struggle Committee?', 'Joint Struggle against whom? Against the Supra.
im1 Court? Against us?' To this Mr. Parikh replied-what is in a name Me Lord? It is just a name! Judges were not satisfied .
Mr. Parikh consented to change the name!So as ofnow, there is no Joint Struggle Committee! Out ofthe five hearings-the.
Su· .
.
last two hearings never find a mention of JNU election as the matter is not only pertaining tQJNU election but the broader .
implementation ofLyngdoh recommendations! The last two hearings were dominated by the Aman Kachroo's case! So for the .
rer, .
An .
remains the same irrespective ofits current or past position! Gopal Subramanium 's elevation never changes his status as .
cal .
Supreme Couf4 JNU election can only happen if the university adheres to the Lyngdoh recommendations! Amicus Curie.
Amicus Curie unless and until him, himselfdeclines to continue in the same position! He is a government lawyer; he neither .
qutm. can fight against the government nor can he go against the Lyngdoh recommendation; he will remain the same! But here the .
question arises -when SFI admits the fact that Gopal Subramanium is the Amicus Curie, whose job is to report non-.
.
Su .
implementation of Lyngdoh to the Supreme Court; why they all are accusing YFE for its role in bringing the matter to the .
tra.
co .
transferred to the subsequent judge as per the Supreme Court rotation rule. The case hearing Lyngdoh matter was not a Supreme Court? How many lies are acceptable? When a Judge retires, automatically the cases being heard under him are.
an.
un .
and stubborn stand of professional politicians of this campus, the final disposal of this case has been pushed into an .
sta constitution bench but a regular two judge bench so there is no need to constitute a two judge bench! Because of the stupid.
unending spiral of hearings! The same student bodies that are .now spending crocodile tears are responsible for the current state of affairs!.
be Stl AISA is now running for cover to cover its illegality status! The illegal JNU officer bearers are now sandwiched in .
between the student expectations, their own tall claims and the refusal of JNU administration to accept them as the.
Stl .
Asfaq, Rajguru and JP had fallen flaT as the shamelessness of AISA has been exposed by YFE! Their attempt to drag new .
co .
A~ student representatives! Their attempt to equate their greed for power and position with that of Shaheed Bhagat Singh, Azad,.
he .
students into their philosophy was also curtailed this year by the administration! They can not threat newcomers with dire.
re: .
consequences if they do not join their organization as there is no election in the near future! As there is easy access to .
hostel for the new comer, they cannot indoctrinate them by housing them temporarily! AISA's dictate about OB~ .
qu.
rath reservation is laughable as the HRD order is different and Supreme Court Order is different with the latter is binding! Al.SA IS.
raising the infrastructure? When Youth For Equality's struggle ensured huge expansio~ AlSA is only there to kill the seats of the General Category students. This is criminal act when the general category covers everybody including the OBCs! .
quoting SC judgment and still contradicting with the same. How AISA imagine the admission of OBC students wtthout.
w:.
u YFE congratulates the student community for passing of the Right To Education (RTE) Bill in the parl.
w was YFE, which is spearheading the struggle to improve basic primary education. In the landmark, Youth For Equahty vs.
bf iam~nt. Itc .
Union of India judgment on 10 April 2008 the Supreme Court ofIndia directed to the Central Government to enact the ~T.E.
A .
within six month. Finally on 4'hofAugust 2009, the act was passed. YFE supports the reservation provision in the RTE as It ts.
COMPULSORY PRIMARY EDUCATION! The argument is now showing colour! YFE salutes the endeavor of SeniOr based on economic criteria! It was YFE lawyer Senior Advocate P.P. Rao, who advocated strongly in favor of FREE A~D.
Advocate P.P. Rao for forcing the government to enact the Right To Education Bill..
Amit Ranjan.
YFE Representative Sonam GroverYFE Representative.
-.
.
.