Search

Progress in converting the Brief History in Time into Print Format

Complaint (ref: 15904197)

Inbox

HM Courts and Tribunals Service

Thu, 13 May, 15:49 (18 hours ago)

Dear Shantanu Panigrahi Re: Case Number: E35YM660 Dr Shantanu Panigrahi v Mrs Theresa May - Prime Minister Of The United Kingdom Thank you for your complaint da

5

Balboa Press UK Dexter Lopez

09:39 (34 minutes ago)

Sir, I want to be able to help. Can we talk? Thanks. CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unl

from: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

to: Balboa Press UK Dexter Lopez <dlopez@balboapress.co.uk>

date: 14 May 2021, 09:55

subject: Re: Complaint (ref: 15904197)

mailed-by: gmail.com


Dear Mr Dexter Lopez


I am a very open person and wish to make progress towards the publication of the book, but is it not clear that the compromise should be mutually acceptable?


Kind regards


Shantanu Panigrahi


On Fri, 14 May 2021 at 09:39, Balboa Press UK Dexter Lopez <dlopez@balboapress.co.uk> wrote:

Sir,

I want to be able to help. Can we talk? Thanks.


From: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

Sent: Friday, May 14, 2021 8:48 AM

To: Enquires.centrallondon.countycourt@justice.gov.uk; centrallondondjskel@justice.gov.uk; cccladjournments <cccladjournments@justice.gov.uk>; mayt@parliament.uk; Adele Miller <Adele.Miller@governmentlegal.gov.uk>; Maria Cecilia <Mcecilia@balboapress.co.uk>; Balboa Press UK May Arado <marado@balboapress.co.uk>; Dexter Lopez <Dexter.Lopez@authorsolutions.com>; registry@supremecourt.uk; Paul Farthing <paulfarthing@southeastlibdems.org.uk>; partyreg@electoralcommission.org.uk; civilappeals.registry@justice.gov.uk

Subject: Re: Complaint (ref: 15904197)


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


To

Operations Manager: explaining why I remain dissatisfied.

County Court at Central London

& Mayors and City of London

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London

WC2A 2LL


Dear Sirs


1. I understand from the resolution of this complaint by HMCTS in relation to the attached concerns of mine: see VISHISTA-ADVAITA VEDANTA OF A MAHATMAN-PURNAVAR.docx, that I must contact you to discuss the grievances that I hold against the management of the Appeals that I have lodged with various components of Her Majesty's Court and Tribunal Service over the past 23 years of litigations summarised in this document, in order that progress can be made towards the resolution of those complaints.


2. In the first instance, my Claims at the Central London County Court were the culmination of those 23 years of litigations that involved hundreds of personnel and institutions all of whom have kept silent and send me criminal anonymous emails to scupper my quest for justice under the conglomeration name of Victims of Panigrahi Association. It is entirely wrong of the Judges involved in the due processing of the litigations at the criminal and civil and mental health courts of law and the examination of any forensic or seditious behaviour and conduct on my part to focus on Mrs Theresa May in person as it is the Prime Ministers in discharging their duties over the matter from Mr Tony Blair, Mr Gordon Brown, Mr David Cameron, Mrs Theresa May and now Mr Boris Johnson all combined together acting on the Royal Prerogative who have together to be held to account at the Court Hearing of 21 June 2021. As such your information that the Notice of Hearing has been served on all parties does not clarify to me that these Prime Ministers have been included as the parties in the Claim E35YM660.


3. Constitutionally, the petition of 2000 set out in this document was as follows:


''I then petitioned Her Majesty the Queen, dated 9 November 2000, as follows: Your Majesty, I have tried all the legal avenues open to ordinary subjects to access British Justiciary, having just spoken finally to the local Lord Chancellor’s Department to compel Medway County Court to issue me with a N150 Allocation Questionnaire now that I am able to complete it to maximum impact as the Claimant of my Case Statement, ‘A Conspiracy of Racial Discrimination and Harassment Perpetrated against Me By Means of Concerted Criminal Behaviour’; this after, somehow, concluding the detective work necessary to ascertain the full facts of the matter that I have been complaining about. Your Majesty, I read in my copy of the Reader’s Digest ‘You and Your Rights – An A to Z Guide to the Law’ that any British subject is entitled as a last resort to petition the Queen if he is dissatisfied with the actions or decisions of the government which acts in her name. It is with this in mind that I am hereby requesting you to intervene in this matter, as is constitutionally appropriate. Yours truly.


On 22 November 2000 I received a letter from Buckingham Palace from a Chief Correspondence Officer, Mrs Deborah Bean, stating, 'The Queen has asked me to thank you for your letter of 9th November expressing your wish to petition her on a 'rascism' matter. As a constitutional Sovereign, Her Majesty acts on the advice of her Ministers, and I have, therefore, been instructed to send your letter to the Lord Irvine of Lairg, the Lord Chancellor, so that he may know of your approach to Her Majesty on this matter, and may consider the points you raise'.''


4. In updating Her Majesty the Queen a fortnight ago thus, I was seeking the report on the Petition:


Shantanu Panigrahi

Shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com

SUBJECT: UPDATE ON MY PETITION TO HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF AROUND 2000


Your Majesty

I draw your attention to my Last Resort petition to you in the year of our Lord 2000 where I sought your intervention in the matter of gross injustices that I faced from the Judicial and Law Enforcement authorities in relation to my Claim against the University of Greenwich and the Mental Health authorities that castigated me to being a mentally disordered person so unfit for continuing with my scientific work on behalf of the Civil Service or elsewhere in the business community. You were kind enough to instruct your staff to refer the matter to the Lord Chancellor that I had never abused the process of court as was alleged and that remains the case.


When I was growing up I read that Christians do not believe in taking revenge and do not retaliate. I do not take revenge but as a Hindu I do seek the truth and this I do through the process of truth accommodation. Everything that I have done until this morning has been in quest of the inner compulsion to raise the truth to the surface of our lives.


I made no progress in my material quest for damages and compensation 21 years following the petition: https://www.theconservativelibertariansociety.com/post/fw-letter-from-the-registrar-supreme-court

But at the very least I have determined that we do live in an Absolute monarchy, judging by the fact that you did respond to my petition.

So, unless I hear from you I will just resign myself to my fate that your reign should continue indefinitely and withdraw my Petition to the Court that you be dethroned/impeached/made to abdicate for dereliction of duty.

Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi


Thank you for contacting Royal Collection Trust, your submission has been received.

A member of our team will contact you in due course.

10.56 am (UK-Time) 25April 2021


5. In lodging my complaint with HMCTS to which the Court as replied as shown below I had asked the Court whether Lord Irvine of Lairg or his successors had completed their assessment of the merits of the Petition lodged, for Constitutionally this is essential for any Hearing that is to take place on damages and compensation to be awarded to any party whether as Defendants or Claimant, and accordingly, I would like to receive a full assessment transcript of the decision before consulting a solicitor to discuss what the agenda for the Hearing of 21 June 2021 11.40 am should be and if necessary seek an adjournment of this Hearing. I am therefore not satisfied with the manner with which HMCTS has dealt with my complaint and wish to revisit the full set of circumstances immediately, especially since Balbao Press UK has not refunded my £1493 paid to the firm very recently for the full and explicit unadulterated publication of the book that is attached; and I am still not permitted to progress the political activities of my Party, The Conservative Libertarian Party of the United Kingdom (https://theconservativelibertarianpartyoftheunitedkingdom.com) as far as the Election Commission has decided as an Independent candidate with no one to nominate me being a one-man band - this is grossly unfair and undemocratic.


6. I should be grateful for your response as soon as possible because there are only 5 weeks left to the Hearing which is needed in order to bring this matter to a closure finally.


Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL


On Thu, 13 May 2021 at 15:49, HM Courts and Tribunals Service <replies@optic.justice.gov.uk> wrote:


Dear Shantanu Panigrahi

Re: Case Number: E35YM660 Dr Shantanu Panigrahi v Mrs Theresa May - Prime Minister Of The United Kingdom


Thank you for your complaint dated 02 May 2021. I am sorry to hear that you are dissatisfied with the service you have received from the court in relation to this case. I have treated your letter as a formal complaint and have given the following reference: 15904197. I should explain that this letter is the first stage of the complaints process.


I see that the issues you have raised in your complaint are about the proceedings in the case. I am sorry that you feel that your case has not been processed correctly but any decision on a case are made by the Judicial and not the administration.


I should explain that the judiciary are constitutionally independent of Government and the administration of the courts. It is not open to me, or any official of Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service to comment on any judicial decision made, nor the way a member of the judiciary conducted a hearing.


If you feel that decision was incorrect, the proper course of action is to consider whether to appeal the decision. We cannot help you to decide this or resolve it through the administrative complaints process, so we suggest you seek legal advice. If you have not already done so, you may wish to consider seeking independent advice on your situation. Any Citizens Advice Bureau provides free, confidential, and impartial advice on a range of matters. Their contact details can be found in the telephone directory or on their website at www.citizensadvice.org.uk


I apologise that I cannot be of more help in this matter, however, the independence of the judiciary must be safeguarded, and it is not for court staff to comment on judicial decisions or conduct.


In relation to your request for documents on your case, you will need to send a letter or an email stating which documents you want from your case file or call to book an appointment to view your file, but you will be required to pay a copying fee. If you wish to book an appointment please call 0207 947 7502.


Your case has been listed for hearing on 21 June 2021 and the hearing notice was sent out on 08 April 2021 to all parties.


If you have any questions in the meantime, please call 0300 123 55 77.


If you are not satisfied with my reply, you can write to the Operations Manager below explaining why you remain dissatisfied.


County Court at Central London

& Mayors and City of London

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London

WC2A 2LL

Yours sincerely,

Mrs O.O. Augustus

TEAM LEADER

COUNTY COURT AT CENTRAL LONDON , THOMAS MORE BUILDING , ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE , STRAND, LONDON , WC2A 2LL

Phone: 0300 123 5577

1 view0 comments

Recent Posts

See All