An Award with a difference

KARPOOR CHANDRA KULISH AWARD 2007:

Year 1956, nine years after Independence of India, one journalist dared to dream of a newspaper free from influences and interests, totally credible, wedded to truth and public good and devoid of commercial concerns and set about making it a reality. Karpoor Chandra Kulish’s dream and ideals drove him to launch Rajasthan Patrika with a borrowed capital of Rs 500 (about 100 US dollars then). Today Rajasthan Patrika is the most authentic voice of India’s largest state, besides being the only Hindi daily with readership in most parts of India including such non-Hindi speaking states as West Bengal, Gujarat, Karnataka and Tamil Nadu. It is one of the largest circulated Hindi newspapers of the Indian sub-continent, and is among the top 50 newspapers of the world with over 13 million readers in India.

The phenomenal growth from virtual scratch was possible only due to Karpoor Chandra Kulish’s grit and determination and his faith in the people of Rajasthan, who responded generously to his brand of journalism based on truth, courage and independence. Karpoor Chandra Kulish never swerved from the path of fairness and honesty. Professional excellence went hand in hand with coverage of news and expression of views always focused on public interest and welfare. He set high standards and healthy traditions for his successors to imbibe and follow.

Even today, the ideals and traditions of Karpoor Chandra Kulish remain the driving force for Rajasthan Patrika. In a recent BBC-Reuters survey, Rajasthan Patrika was listed among the top five “most trusted” publications of the country. The interests and problems of citizens as readers remain the newspaper’s prime focus and concern.

About the Award:
The Rajasthan Patrika Group is glad to announce the Karpoor Chandra Kulish Award 2007 (KCK Award 2007). This annual award, in the hallowed memory of Karpoor Chand Kulish, is aimed at recognizing efforts of thought leaders in media, journalist’s outstanding contributions to upholding professional values as well as protecting and promoting ethics and morality, right and freedom of the people for better quality of life. The award theme for year 2007 shall be “Human Development.
There is no entry fee for the award.

“Human Development”:

The first KCK Award for excellence in print journalism will be open to those who have authored and published the most compelling write-ups in media contributing to changing the lives and meeting the aspirations of people. We seek to honor journalists who covered events of people’s struggle for a life of dignity, fulfillment and honor.

We expect the contributions to represent manifestation of man’s unique spirit and goodness of life. They shall also depict strong focus on showcasing self-governance leading to effective social change.

Prize category

One award of US$ 11,000 would be given to the winner of KCK Award. One medal and certificate shall be given to each team member, the trophy and prize money shall be awarded to the institution or team leader (in case of independent team) on behalf of the team.

The distribution of the prize money rests with the concerned institution or leader of the team in case of an independent team application. Awards are restricted to Print Media only. Two institutions shall share the amount if both of them receive the same rating by the Jury.

Apart from this, 10 entries shall also receive special mention and would be given certificate & medal.

Winner Announcement

KCK Award shall be given at an award ceremony at New Delhi in the first half of year 2008. The award shall be conferred annually, starting with the year 2007.

Criteria:

Entries for this award must represent significant news story, depth in research, resourcefulness and courage in gathering information, and relating the story to broaden its dimension. Nominees for the awards will be selected and proposed by recognized panel of jury. Thus:

1. Award is valid only for stories by a team of journalists.

2. An independent team of journalists is invited to send maximum of two entries. A publication may have two entries from every print center.

3. A team shall at least have three team members including the team leader. They could represent at least three different areas (example: edit desk, reporting, research, layout desk, cartoon, photo journalist etc.).

4. Stories should have been published on or after 1^st January 2007 till 31^st December 2007.

5. 31^st January 2008, 1800 hrs (IST) shall be the last date and time for sending the entries.

6. Non – Hindi and English entries must be accompanied by full and accurate English translations. Hindi entries should have a brief of the story in English attached to the entry.

7. Entries must consist of journalistic content inspired by then current news.

8. In case the entry is a yearlong campaign or has more than one printed news articles, please highlight the three articles on which the entry should be judged. We encourage submission of the complete campaign.

9. Entries must have been published in a daily.

10. Each participant accepts full responsibility of his/her work and discharges Rajasthan Patrika from any responsibility in respect of third parties. Each participant agrees not to hold Rajasthan Patrika Group responsible for any claims made against copyright of ideas, content, images or disputes whatsoever.

11. All material submitted in the competition will become the property of Rajasthan Patrika and will not be returned. Rajasthan Patrika reserves the right to use any of the entries for publicity purpose.

12. Applicants are encouraged to keep copies of all information submitted along with a copy of the application form.

13. The decision of the jury shall be final and binding for all.

14. Results will be declared on our website www.rajasthanpatrika.com/kckaward

15. Announcement of the awardees shall be at the ceremony, which shall be informed to all winning team leaders/publications by email as mentioned in the application form a few days in advance.

16. All participants must strictly observe the entry rules. Completion of entry form will imply full acceptance of the contest rules by each participant. Non-compliance with any of the entry rules will result in automatic disqualification of the entry.

17. Entries must be accompanied by filled in application format, available with this document. The same should be attested by the publication in which the entry has been featured. Incomplete application format may not be accepted.

18. A signed original letter from the Editor of the publication on official letterhead supporting the submission (in case of entries from publications).

19. A signed letter of support should be submitted on the official letterhead from the publication. (in case independent team entries)

20. A letter of support with all team members authorizing the institution/team leader on whose name the cheque shall be drafted on behalf of the team.

21. All entrants are expected to follow all rules. Completion of the form and application format shall imply acceptance of rules.

22. Rajasthan Patrika shall not be responsible for lost entries in transit or for any delivery charges.

23. Rajasthan Patrika reserves all rights of acceptance, rejection or reproduction of the entries submitted in contest without any prior reason/consent whatsoever.

24. In case of any legal disputes arising, the court of jurisdiction shall be Jaipur only.

25. All tax liabilities shall be borne by the awardees.

26. Tax will be deducted at source if applicable.

27. The above rules and regulations may be amended to allow fair judgment. Rajasthan Patrika group holds all rights for the same.

28.For queries and clarifications email kckaward@rajasthanpatrika.com.

29. Entries fulfilling all requirements should reach the following address: KCK Award, Rajasthan Patrika Private Limited, Kesargarh, JLN Marg,, Jaipur 302004, Rajasthan, India. Only International Entries can be submitted online with PDF copies of all required documents at kckaward@epatrika.com.

30. Employees of Rajasthan Patrika and Rajasthan Patrika group companies are not entitled for sending entries for the award.

Application form:

Name of the Publication:

Print Center:

Name of the Team Leader:

Name Team Members with designations/field of work:

Title/Concern of the entry:

Publication day and date:

Impact in brief:

Evidences attached to the story (if any):

Disclaimers:

If the entry wins the award, cheque should be made in the name of below mentioned publication or team leader. This is in consent with the team members / publication:

Name:

Bank:

Account number:

PAN Number:

Address and direct contact number/mobile:

Please attach a letter of consent from the publication (in case of publication) or team members (in case of an independent team) on whose favor the prize money cheque shall be drawn.

Team leader to be contacted in case of clarification/information:

Name:

Telephone number (with ISD/STD code): (O) (M)

Email Address:

Fax:

We assure the judges that this work is original in content and is conceived by us.

Signature of the Team Leader

Application Format:

· Theme of the Story

· Number of articles in the story

· Dates with copies of the story printed

· Research elements involved and inferences of the research conducted

· Impact of the story

· Copy of Evidences for the story (Copy of the newspaper in which the story is printed, photocopy of the stories, any other evidence of importance)

· What inspired your team to work on this story

· What did you want to achieve from the coverage of this story

· Translation in English (if applicable)

· Please attach photograph of all team members

(Attach extra sheets if needed for answers)

Checklist for the entries:

- Application form

- Filled application format

- Evidences

§ Original copy of the newspaper

§ Photocopy or cuttings of the articles printed

§ Any other evidence

- Authorization letter of cheque by other team members/organization

- Letter of support for the entry from the publication

- Photographs of team members


Letter of Support

This is to certify that the entry attached by Mr./Ms…………………….. with the team members…………………………………………..on the concern of ………………… is valid and was printed in our publication.

We extend our support and best wishes to his team as an independent team application.

Regards

Editor

Certification of Entry

This is to certify that the attached be treated as the official entry from our publication……………………… from the print center of ……………………………….

The team leader was Mr./Ms…………………………………..with team members…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Thank you for accepting our entry.

Regards

Editor

Vishy! Catch it if you can

Role of the Internal Auditor in The Press Club Mumbai

The role of the Internal Auditor of the Press Club, Mumbai, has come into sharp focus, in the light of the amended provisions of Article 30 of the Club's Constitution, better known as the "Bye-laws & Rules and Regulations", and the vast expenditure that has been incurred/being incurred on a major re-development work that is currently on at the Club.

Given below is the amended version of Article 30 of the Club's constitution (This and several other major Articles of the Club's Constitution were amended on June 30,2006):

Article 30: The General Body at its Annual General Meeting shall elect as Internal Auditor of the Club, a senior member who has been a member for more than 10 years. He shall act as vigilance officer and the functioning of the Managing Committee shall be subject to his objective scrutiny. The Internal Auditor shall directly report to the President every three months on the performance of the Club. Further, the Internal Auditor shall present, if the situation demands, to the President an on-the-spot report on his own or at the behest of the President, if there is a likely breakdown in the Club administration or malfunctioning of the Managing Committee or any other development which necessitates the President's effective intervention.

In the last AGM of the Club held on July 27, 2007 it was pointed out by the Secretary Gurbir Singh that there was no internal auditor for the last one year as the one elected for this post in his absence declined to accept the job. At this some members suggested that appointments for such posts should be made only from among those present in the AGM or his consent should be available in writing. Senior Member Mr G Vishwanath , who was present in the AGM and gave his consent to take up the job was unanimously elected for the post for the year 2007-08.
Here are some questions which are begging for an answer from the Internal Auditor, President and the Managing Committee of the Press Club:

1) Has the current Internal Auditor submitted reports to the President every three months ever since he(the internal auditor) was appointed to the post for the year 2007-08 at the Annual General body Meeting held on July 27,2007 as has been mandated by the amended Constitution of the Club?

2) In the event of internal auditor having not submitted reports to him every three months, has the President bothered to fulfill his responsibility of asking the Internal Auditor as to why he(internal auditor) has not reported to him every three months as has been mandated under the Constitution?

3) Has the Managing Committee of the Club bothered to keep the Internal Auditor in the loop as to the financial matters relating to the re-development work? In specific terms, has it kept him posted of the matters vis-à-vis the contract(s) on civil works at the club, spilled over civil works and contract on the furnishing work? Has it kept him posted on the various correspondences/agreements reached on financial matters relating to the club's re-development work? Has it informed the Internal Auditor whether it has followed parameters under which it (the Managing Committee) was given a "go ahead" to raise funds for the club re-development work in a manner in it wanted to in its proposals passed at the SGM held on July 27,2007?

4) Last but not the least, has the Internal Auditor kept track of financial matters relating to the 're-development' work at the club?

At least 171 journalists were killed in the year 2007

Violence against journalists in 2007 has reached extreme levels for the third year in succession with 171 confirmed deaths, just below the record set a year ago.

According to a communication received from the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) conflicts in Iraq, Pakistan and Somalia have proved the most dangerous for journalists in a year that has confirmed the high rates of killings in recent years and “tragedy unlimited” for thousands within the global media community.

In 2006 the IFJ confirmed 177 journalists and other media workers killed. At the year's end 2007 proved only slightly less deadly -- with 171 deaths. The figures have been compiled in co-operation with the International News Safety Institute.

“Violence against journalists remains at extremely high levels for the third year in a row,” said IFJ President Jim Boumelha. “The scale of attacks on journalists marks a continuing crisis filled with unlimited human tragedy and relentless attacks on press freedom.”

Boumelha called for more action from the international community to counter impunity and to eliminate fear and danger from the profession of journalism. “Our colleagues have been targeted because of their work, or killed covering dangerous stories often in the rush to cover breaking news,” he said.

There have been more accidental deaths this year and the IFJ says the threats of targeting particularly in combat zones like Iraq continue unabated. As well as the heavy toll in Iraq, there were multiple media killings in Somalia and Afghanistan. Unrest in Sri Lanka and Pakistan also led to journalists’ deaths.

In Africa violent attacks on journalists have continued and the brutal repression of free expression in Eritrea has led to two deaths there this year.

Coverage of drug traffickers led to another high death toll in Mexico. Throughout Latin America journalists were killed for reporting on criminal gangs, drug running and shady politics.

“As usual those most at risk are media staff operating in their home country,” said Boumelha. “Violence against media is particularly evident in countries where the political situation is unstable. It is no coincidence that countries like Somalia and Pakistan are two of the most dangerous this year.”

The IFJ includes all journalists killed because of their work, including targeted murders, and deaths while covering violent events. It also counts deaths where journalists are killed in accidents while on assignment or on their way to or from a story.

In Iraq, which has been the deadliest country for journalists since the US invasion in 2003, at least 65 journalists and media staff have been killed this year. Of those killed, it is believed that all but one was an Iraqi national.

The full IFJ report with details of each case is released in mid-January based upon conclusion of the cases under investigation.

The IFJ’s study makes it clear that local journalists are the most vulnerable to attack. In the vast majority of the cases this year, the media workers targeted were working for national or regional media and were killed in their own communities. It also highlights the problem of impunity that continues to plague the media sector. Many of this year’s crimes are unsolved and will remain so.

IFJ General Secretary Aidan White, who this week joined a fresh appeal for action over impunity arising out of the United Nations Security Council resolution issued a year ago calling on all governments to confront the crisis of violence against media, said, “Many killers of journalists are just getting away with murder. Governments must take these issues seriously. Every case must be investigated. Those responsible must be punished.”

White, accompanied by Canadian journalists’ leader Peter Murdoch, and IFJ Middle East Coordinator Monir Zaarour is visiting Baghdad this week to discuss security with IFJ affiliates the Iraqi Syndicate of Journalists and the Kurdistan Syndicate of Journalists.

Despite the increased attacks, the IFJ says, journalists are still covering news no matter how dangerous it is. “We salute all of our colleagues out there who face danger as they try to provide news for their communities,” said Boumelha. “We will continue our fight to make sure that safety conditions improve.”

The IFJ recorded the following information for deaths of media workers in 2007:

• Murders and violent deaths 134
• Deaths in accidents 37
• The deadliest region was the Middle East with 68 killed
• Deadliest Countries (for killings) were Iraq (65), Somalia (8) and Pakistan (7)
• Other hotspots were Mexico (6), Sri Lanka (6) and Philippines (5)

India must not be alowed to become police state

29.12.2007
An Open Appeal!!!


Dear friends and comrades ,

This is to inform you of the recent arrest of Prashant Rahi, a senior journalist of Uttarakhand, by the state police. Prashant was arrested on 15 th of this month in Dehradun and was allegedly charged of being a Maoist commander. The police secretly confined him for five days after which he was shown arrested from the forests of Hanspur Khatta on 21 st December. The police have charged him with various sections of IPC including 121, 121A, 124A, 153B, 120B. All the media carried the same version as stated by the police.

Just to give you a background, Prashant Rahi had been working in close association with the local people's struggles in Uttarakhand since last 17 years. He has been a journalist by profession. Started his career from Himachal Times, moved on to The Statesman and worked many years covering people's issues. He is a native of Maharashtra and pursued his education from Banaras Hindu University .

This incident is in continuance of the trend set by many innocent arrests in the last few months including that of Binayak Sen and some journalists in Kerala and Andhra Pradesh of targeting pro-people intellegentsia. The trend has become increasingly apparent in those parts of the country where people's movement is strong.

We firmly believe that this state action is a part of the efforts being carried out by the various state governments to secure hefty amount of funds from the central government in the name of combating naxalism. For this, it becomes imperative for them to prove that the state is inflicted with this insurgency.

We, the undersigned, strongly condemn the arrest of Prashant Rahi and call upon all the concerned individuals, civil society organisations, journalist unions, writers unions, people's movements and struggling groups to join hands in solidarity and support.


Rajendra Dhasmana (President, PUCL, Uttarakhand)
Manglesh Dabral (Poet and Journalist)
Pankaj Bisht (Editor, Samayantar)
Anand Swaroop Verma (Journalist and Human Rights Activist)
P.C. Tiwari (National Secretary, Indian Federation of Working Journalists)
Suresh Nautiyal (General Secretary, Uttarakhand Patrakar Parishad)
Anil Chaudhary (President, INSAF)
Jagdish Yadav (Photo Editor, Pioneer)
Harsh Dobhal (Managing Editor, Combat Law)
Shekhar Pathak, Senior Fellow, Nehru Memorial Museum and Library
Gautam Navlakha (Consulting Editor, Economic and Political Weekly)
Ashish Gupta (Asamiya Pratidin)
Anil Chamadia (Journalist)
A.K. Arun (Editor, Yuva Samwad)
Madan Kashyap (Poet)
Pankaj Singh (Poet and Journalist)
Karuna Madan (Journalist)
Piyush Pant (Editor, Lok Samwad)
Sarvesh (Photo Journalist)
Panini Anand (Journalist, BBC Hindi)
Avinash (Journalist, NDTV India)
Bhupen Singh (Journalist, STAR News)
Sukla Sen (CNDP India)
Aanchal Kapur (Kriti Team)
Vijayan MJ ( Delhi Forum)
Sanjay Mishra (Special Correspondent, Dainik Bhaskar)
Prem Piram (Director, Jagar Uttarakhand)
Ashok Pandey (Poet)
Arvind Gaur (Director, Asmita Theatre Group)
Pankaj Chaturvedi (Poet)
Satyam Verma (Rahul Foundation)
Ranjit Verma (Advocate)
Bishambhar (Secretary, Roji Roti Bachao Morcha)
Ajay Prakash (Journalist, The Public Agenda)
Swatantra Mishra (Journalist, IANS)
Vandana (Special Correspondent, Nai Dunia)
Shree Prakash (INSAF)
Abhishek Srivastava (Freelance Journalist)
Rajeshwar Ojha (Asha Pariwar)
Raju (Human Rights Law Network)
Rajesh Arya (Journalist)
Kamta Prasad (Linguist and Translator)
Abhishek Kashyap (Writer)
Thakur Prasad (Managing Editor, Samprati Path)
Rajiv Ranjan Jha (Writer)
Srikant Dube (Journalist)
Rishikant (Journalist)
Pankaj Narayan(Journalist)

Mr Vijaykar , why are you silent on 'dropping' of Mr Nandi from the probe panel

September 7, 2007

Mr Pradeep Vijayakar

President

The Press Club
Mumbai

Dear Mr President,
I am shocked to receive an e-letter written by Chairman Devenra Mohan dated August 30, 2007, addressed to Mr. Jatin Desai, Mr.G.C.Bainik and me, announcing in effect that the Managing Committee (MC) has not only relieved me of my assignment as the Convenor of a three-member committee, appointed to inquire the alleged violent incident of August 3,2006 involving Rennie Abraham and Gurbir Singh, but also as its member.

The letter among other things states: “In line with the Annual General Meeting’s decision on the above subject on July 27, 2007, it was noted by the Managing Committee that Suresh Nandi, conveyors (sic) of the Enquiry Committee, has failed to call any hearings of the committee. There does not seem to be any progress to complete and deliver the enquiry report either.

In the light of the AGM’s decision, it has now been decided to request Dr.G.C.Bainik and Mr Jatin Desai to proceed with the enquiry hearings without any further reference to Mr. Suresh Nandi”. I am enclosing/attaching the copy of the above letter for your ready reference.

In response to the above letter, I would like to submit the following:

1) In the first place, the letter is grossly misleading. It does not state as to what was the decision taken by the AGM held on July 27, 2007.

2) In the first place, no decision was taken by the AGM to either remove me from the post of convenor of the inquiry committee or as a member from the inquiry committee. (Mind you, I was appointed as the convenor by the AGM at its last year’s meeting).

3) Unfortunately, the issue relating to the functioning of the above inquiry committee was discussed at the AGM in my absence. (I had left the AGM minutes before the issue came to be discussed, to attend to my professional work). Had I been around, I would have explained my side of the story. My side was not brought to the attention of the AGM even when member C P Jha asked Treasurer Rajesh Mascarenhas to read out the last letter written by me to Chairman Devendra Mohan on May 14, 2007.

4) I am told that Mr Jatin Desai expressed certain views against me at the AGM. I do not subscribe to any of his expressed views. Because, they were partisan in nature and aimed at projecting me in poor light vis-à-vis the inquiry committee. In the first place, you as a President – who is presumed to be impartial – should not have allowed Mr Jatin Desai to speak in the first place in my absence. But that was not the case here.

5) In my above letter to Mr Devendra Mohan, a copy of which I had marked to you as well, and an earlier letter written to you way back on February 27, 2007, vide which I had explained in detail as to the problems/issues that were coming in the way of my going ahead with the inquiry. EVEN TODAY, I HAVE NOT RECEIVED ANY REPLIES TO THE ABOVE LETTERS EITHER FROM MR DEVENDRA MOHAN OR FROM YOU.

6) As I have been told by members present at the above AGM, you in your capacity of the President, chairing the meeting, chose not to do anything with regard to the on-going inquiry.

7) As I have explained in detail in my above letters as to what was impeding the inquiry and the efforts made by me to hold inquiries, I emphatically deny the assumption arrived at and stated in its above letter that I have failed to call any hearings of the committee. Let me refresh your memory of various initiatives taken by our committee to go ahead with its task: We had scheduled inquiry hearings beginning from November 3, 2006, and had formally intimated both the accused and witnesses vide our letter dated October 26, 2006. However, we had to defer the hearings a day before the scheduled start of hearings as the Club administration failed to provide secretarial help – a fact which we intimated to all the concerned vide our letter dated November 2, 2006.

8) Coming as it does after the non-cooperation from the Press Club administration all through for ensuring the smooth conduct of the inquiry, the decision to relieve me of my assignment as the convenor of the inquiry and remove me as the member of the committee smacks of a deliberate decision to ensuring against my conducting an impartial inquiry into the alleged violent incident between Rennie Abraham and Club Secretary Gurbir Singh.

9) In the event of your not taking cognizance of my serious grievances, as expressed above and also through other letters in the past, I will be forced to put the entire correspondence in the public domain, so that the club members can draw their own conclusions. I may also contest the MC’s decision in a proper forum.

Thanking you

Yours truly,

(Suresh Nandi)
cc: Chairman, the Press Club, Mumbai

August 30, 2007

Mr. Jatin Desai

Mr. G.C.Bainik

Mr. Suresh Nandi

Sub: Enquiry into alleged violent incident of August 3, 2006 involving Rennie Abraham & Gurbir Singh

In line with the Annual General Meeting’s decision on the above subject on July 27, 2007, it was noted by the Managing Committee that Suresh Nandi, conveyors of the Enquiry Committee, has failed to call any hearings of the committee. There does not seem to be any progress to complete and deliver the enquiry report either.

In the light of the AGM’s decision, it has now been decided to request Dr.G.C.Bainik and Mr Jatin Desai to proceed with the enquiry hearings without any further reference to Mr. Suresh Nandi.

The two members, Mr Bainik and Mr Desai, are requested to complete the Enquiry as far as possible within two months from the date of the AGM, ie. July 27, 2007.

Yours sincerely,

Devendra Mohan

Chairman

cc : President

Exposing Distortions in July 27 AGM official minutes relating to Gurbir-Rennie case

Mumbai. 5 December 2007

To
The President
The Press Club , Mumbai
Sub: Draft Minutes of the July 27 AGM

Dear Mr President,

This refers to the draft minutes of the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the
Press Club, Mumbai, held on July 27,2007 – which were circulated among
the Club members by the Secretary on October 25,2007 and put up simultaneously
on the club’s notice board.

Having actively participated in the deliberations of the said AGM, I hereby
lodge my strong protest with you against the distorted manner in which the
Secretary has chosen to present the deliberations, in the above draft minutes.
If anything, the draft minutes are an affront to the very general body of the club.

Here, I am confining myself to the distortions in the presentation of facts – as
transpired at the above AGM – relating to the inquiry pending against the
Club Secretary Mr Gurbir Singh and a member Rennie Abraham. The distortions
relate to the following paragraph in the draft minutes:

“C P Jha raised the issue of enquiry, which was set up to look into the August 3,
2006 incident involving cross-allegations of violence by Gurbir Singh and Rennie
Abraham. Treasurer Rajesh said that the Enquiry committee had failed to complete
its work despite several letters and offer of cooperation for providing extraordinary
demands like stenographer, tape recorder, etc. One of the enquiry committee
members, Jatin Desai, who was present in the AGM, blamed the convenor Suresh
Nandi for deliberately delaying the enquiry and displayed the correspondence with
the other two members on the issue. C P Jha suggested Suresh Nandi be dropped
from the enquiry committee and proposed the other two members complete the
enquiry. After discussion in the house, it was decided that the convenor would be
given time till July 31, 2007 to complete the enquiry process, failing which he
should be dropped from the Committee, and the other two members should complete
the process within two months thereafter”.

With regard to the above-referred mentioned portion of the draft minutes, I have to
make following submissions:
1) It is grossly incorrect to state that any decision was taken at the above AGM to
the effect that Mr Suresh Nandi be dropped from the three-member enquiry that
was set up to look into the August 3, 2006 incident in which the Club Secretary
Gurbir Singh is one of the accused and that the other members should complete
the inquiry process be within two months.

2) I vehemently deny that I proposed that Suresh Nandi be dropped from the
committee and the other two members complete the enquiry. Because, mine
was a qualified observation that I made based on some statements made at
the above AGM by Treasurer Rajesh Mascarenhas on behalf of the
Managing Committee vis-à-vis the status of inquiry into the alleged incident
of violence involving member Rennie Abraham and Club Secretary on the
night of August 3, 2006.

3) Last but not the least, I request you to exercise your powers as the
President to disallow the Managing Committee's reported decision to drop
Mr Suresh Nandi from of the Committee till the draft minutes are
confirmed by the general body as per the procedures laid down in the
Club’s Constitution.

In elaboration of my above submissions, let me state the following:
We all are aware that one of the accused being investigated in the
incident is club Secretary Gurbir Singh and the issues relating to the
incident have been raised and discussed in two AGMs of the Club.
It is, therefore, essential that utmost care is taken to ensure that
the enquiry is not influenced by the current Managing Committee
and it is conducted in a 'free and fair' manner. I hope, you, as the
custodian of the Club, would take all possible steps to do justice
in this regard.

Going by the distortions in the draft minutes of the above AGM, one can
safely infer that a blatant attempt is being made by the Managing Committee
to twist facts relating to the incident involving the Secretary. Or how else
can you describe an effort made by the Secretary to fire the gun from
shoulders of an ordinary member like me in an apparent effort to sabotage
the inquiry being held against (the Secretary) himself? It is rather surprising
as to how you – as the custodian of the club and its constitution -- have
the circulation of distorted portion of the draft minutes relating to the
said violent incident involving then and the current Secretary Gurbir
Singh and Rennie Abraham, among the members.

I reiterate my above contention that no decision was taken to drop
Mr Suresh Nandi both as the convenor and member of the three-member
committee inquiry committee – appointed to probe the above alleged
violent incident in which Mr Gurbir Singh is one of the accused
-- based on my purported `suggestion’ and subsequent `discussion” -- as
has been made out in the draft minutes of the above AGM.

It is but essential that I put the records straight with regard to the above
alleged violent incident involving then and current secretary Gurbir Singh
and member Rennie Abraham. You may recall, I was among several members
who had petitioned the then President Mr Madhu Shetye vide a joint letter
dated August 5, 2006 and sought his intervention to “get to the bottom of thi
unfortunate incident and come up with remedial measures to ensure against
recurrence of such incidents in the future”. The joint letter had also
emphasized that the incident warranted the President’s serious cognizance,
considering that the Secretary – entrusted with the responsibility of
maintaining peace and decorum in the club – had resorted to violence
against a member for whatever purported “provocation or justification”.
If necessary, I can make you available a copy of the said joint letter written
by me and 15 other members to then Club President Mr Shetye. Incidentally,
the letter is also a part of the inquiry committee records.

In the context of the above background, it was but natural of me to raise
the issue relating to the said inquiry at the July 27, 2006 AGM and seek
an update on the ongoing inquiry. Given that you yourself were presiding
over the said AGM, you will recall that the following transpired at the
above meeting:

To a query by me as to the status of the inquiry, Treasurer Rajesh
Mascarenhas –replying on behalf of the Managing Committee – made a
serious allegation against the entire three-member committee, saying that
the inquiry committee in general and Mr Nandi as the convenor of the
committee in particular had failed to complete its work despite several
letters and offer of cooperation for providing “extraordinary demands” like
stenographer, tape recorder, etc.

In retrospect, you will appreciate that Mr Mascarenhas (a joint secretary at
the time of incident) – considering that he was a willing witness to the
incident (read a man who wrote a letter to the then chairman and
President justifying the action of the Secretary and seeking action against
Rennie Abraham, even before an inquiry into the incident) – had no business
to cast aspersions on the inquiry committee in general and Mr Nandi in particular.

I again draw your attention to a part of the objected portion of the draft
minutes, which states: “… One of the enquiry committee members, Jatin
Desai, who was present in the AGM, blamed the convenor Suresh Nandi
for deliberately delaying the enquiry and displayed the correspondence
with the other two members on the issue”.

As you and all others present in the meeting may recall I had asked Mr
Mascarenhas to read out the latest letter by Mr Nandi to the President
and the Chairman of the club. Mr Mascarenhas, however, spoke about a
letter sent recently by the Managing Committee to Mr Nandi, who was not
present at the AGM at that time.

Unfortunately, with Mr Nandi not being present when the issue of inquiry
came to be discussed, the members were not briefed by him (Mr Nandi) of
the difficulties faced by him in completing the probe. Not surprisingly
though, the treasurer did not think it fit to read out letters written by
Mr Nandi to you as well as the chairman of the club, who heads the
Managing Committee of the Club, on several occasions in the past with
regard to the said inquiry.

After Mr Mascarenhas laid the blame of the delay in the completion of the
inquiry at the door of Mr Nandi in particular, I had the following to say if the
managing committee was objectively convinced that inquiry can not be
completed due to the hurdles posed by Mr Nandi, then he (Mr Nandi)
may be dropped”. This was my qualified observation; either pre-supposing
or taking at face value as to what Mr Mascarenhas claimed was true.

The draft minutes have, however, failed to either capture or reflect the
tone and tenor of what I said. They, instead, seek to give an impression that
I contributed to the AGM ‘s decision to drop Mr Nandi from the probe panel.
As I have already stated, no such decision was taken in the AGM and, I
believe, it was the Managing Committee which as an afterthought took
such a decision to sabotage the inquiry. This is my humble submission,
after considering that Mr Nandi had taken upon himself to conduct an
impartial inquiry into the incident – a thing that was not taken kindly by
one of the accused (the then and current secretary) and it was Mr Nandi,
who had in the SGM preceding the said AGM had taken serious exception
to the miserable failure of the Managing Committee (in which the Secretary
had the key role to play) to ensure “financial closure of the Club”
before undertaking demolition and reconstruction/refurbishment of a major
portion of the Club building that used to called earlier as the Glass House.

I understand to the best of the information I have at my disposal that Mr
Nandi had indeed taken several steps to conduct an impartial probe into
the above incident. Apart from others, he had also ‘summoned’ me to
appear for the hearing before the probe panel as per my own written
request. I am told that Mr Nandi had written numerous letters to the
various club functionaries, including you and the club chairman, over
the issue. There is nothing amiss or illegal, if he wanted the Managing
Committee to provide him a stenographer or audio-video instruments to
correctly record deliberations before the probe panel as anybody
entrusted with a task to conduct such a probe would definitely strive
ensure that the depositions are recorded correctly.

Under the circumstances, I would like you to consider seriously the
distortions in the draft minutes of the above AGM vis-à-vis the deliberations
regarding the inquiry into the incident involving Secretary Gurbir Singh
and member Rennie Abraham, various issues that I have raised in that
context and the fact that the current Managing Committee – of which
the accused Mr Gurbir Singh is a key functionary in his capacity as the
then and current Secretary of the Club – has gone ahead and removed
Mr Nandi not only as the convenor but also as a member of the inquiry
committee even before the draft AGM minutes – which I insist have
doctored – are adopted by the General Body of the Club. I would also
request you to act in a just and fair manner – as is expected of a person
holding the coveted President’s post of a leading Press Club in the country.

I reserve my right to send you letters over the matters I have already
discussed above and to propose amendments in the draft minutes of
the July 27, 2007 AGM. Similarly, I reserve the right to come back to
you on other distortions in the said draft minutes in near future.

Yours truly
CP Jha
Membership No 388
C/c Chairman, The Press Club, Mumbai
B/cc all those members who had attended the AGM of July 27, 2007