CBCNC vows to protect properties
Speaking to the media during his visit to Vijayawada to attend the High Court-related matters, he expressed concern over illegal activities involving CBCNC assets.
He stated that some people, who are not connected to CBCNC, are secretly trying to sell its valuable properties. He confirmed that certain illegal transactions have already taken place, and legal action has been initiated.
'No individual has personal rights over CBCNC properties. These assets are meant to serve the public,' Augustine said. He added that the Kakinada district registrar has already confirmed that the registrations happening in these cases are not legally valid. 'We have also informed the High Court. While we respect the law, we will not tolerate fraud,' he emphasised.
Augustine warned the public not to fall for false promises made by fraudsters. 'Some people make ridiculous claims, even saying they would sell the Charminar if given a chance. Don't believe such people,' he said.
He reminded everyone of the important work CBCNC has done in education and healthcare, and said that public service remains the organisation's core goal. 'We will continue our mission and serve society,' he assured.
Finally, he appealed to the public: 'If anyone spreads false information or tries to sell CBCNC property, please report it to local authorities immediately. These properties are meant for human service. It is everyone's responsibility to protect them.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
3 hours ago
- Time of India
Setback to lenders: NCLT replaces RP in Anil Ambani's loan guarantee case
NEW DELHI: In a setback to lenders, the National Company Law Tribunal has removed Jitender Kothari as the resolution professional (RP) in an insolvency case related to Anil Ambani 's personal guarantee to SBI for a loan to Reliance Communications . NCLT appointed Prashant Jain as the new RP. In Sept 2016, Ambani had given a personal guarantee for a Rs 1,385-crore loan, which was retrospectively classified as an NPA effective late Aug 2016. Kothari was appointed RP in Aug 2020. A few days after his appointment, the RP sought multiple details from Ambani, including details of a case in a British court. The insolvency action had been challenged in Delhi HC and the SC. In May 2021, the RP filed his report in NCLT, recommending admission of company petition for insolvency resolution despite Ambani's lawyer seeking more time, citing restricted mobility due to Covid. A few days later, Ambani's lawyer wrote that the RP can only seek information from SBI. Meanwhile, the businessman's writ petition in SC was tagged along with one Surendra Jiwarajka, which was finally decided in Nov 2023. Ambani has accused the RP of "acting in undue haste and denying him fair and proper opportunity" to provide information. Besides, the RP is accused of exceeding the mandate under IBC in seeking "unrelated information". The RP denied the charges and SBI supported it, while arguing that the matter had been pending with NCLT for a long time and the case was being delayed. In its order on July 15, the benchsaid that in light of Covid-related disruptions, Ambani should have been given "a fair opportunity" to provide information to the resolution professional. "Instead, we note that the RP didn't even wait for adjudication of his application pending before this Tribunal seeking relaxation of 10 days' timeline and a cross application of the applicant before this Tribunal requiring more time in view of Covid restrictions. " "Though, we do not find any negligence or explicit bias on part of the RP in this case, however, we are of considered view since the insolvency resolution process after commencement has to be run in close coordination of debtor and RP," it said. Stay informed with the latest business news, updates on bank holidays and public holidays . AI Masterclass for Students. Upskill Young Ones Today!– Join Now
Time of India
8 hours ago
- Time of India
Non-compliance in compassionate appt: HC issues contempt to police officials
Raipur: The Chhattisgarh High Court issued contempt notices to DIG Parul Mathur and Janjgir-Champa SP Vijay Pandey for failing to comply with its order to provide a compassionate appointment to the son of late ASI Boond Ram Bharti within 90 days. Bharti was compulsorily retired in 2017, but after his death, his service was reinstated following a High Court directive. The delay in implementing the court's order prompted a contempt petition, highlighting the broader issue of over 1,100 such petitions filed this year due to non-compliance by authorities. The case involves the late Boond Ram Bharti, who was compulsorily retired from service as an Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) by DIG (Administration), Raipur, on 18 Aug 2017. Following his death, the Home secretary cancelled the compulsory retirement order, making his dependents eligible for compassionate appointment, as per a High Court order. However, despite the High Court's directive to provide a compassionate appointment within 90 days, Vikki Bharti, son of Boond Ram Bharti, has not yet received the appointment in the police department. Counsels Abhishek Pandey and Priya Agrawal filed a contempt petition in the High Court. They informed the court that senior police officers are failing to comply with court orders within the stipulated timeframe. This non-compliance resulted in 1,149 contempt petitions being filed between Jan and July this year, consuming valuable court time. The counsels cited provisions for six months imprisonment and Rs 2,000 fine in contempt cases. The counsels sought action against the DIG and SP under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Taking serious note of the matter, the High Court issued notices to the senior police officers, seeking their replies. Clarifying the restoration of Boond Ram Bharti's service after his death, counsel Pandey said that many govt employees over the age of 50 were compulsorily retired under a govt scheme following an assessment of their performance and alleged poor service records. Boond Ram, along with several other affected employees, challenged the compulsory retirement orders in the High Court. In response, a committee was constituted to review the cases in accordance with the court's directive. The committee subsequently recommended the reinstatement of several employees, including Boond Ram Bharti. However, in the interim, Boond Ram passed away, and his service was reinstated 21 days after his death, the counsel informed the court.
The Hindu
11 hours ago
- The Hindu
Prison official suspended for public remarks on Govindachamy's jailbreak
Amid mounting criticism over systemic failures in the prison system following the sensational escape of rape and murder convict Govindachamy from the Kannur Central Prison, the Kerala government on Sunday suspended a prison official for publicly commenting on the case. The disciplinary action comes even as multi-pronged investigations are under way into the high-profile security breach that caught the law enforcement and prisons administration off-guard. Deputy Inspector General of Prisons (South Zone) Dinesh B. has ordered the immediate suspension of Abdul Sattar A., Deputy Prison Officer of Kottarakara Special Sub-Jail, pending inquiry, over his recent conduct and remarks made on a news channel. The statements in question relate to the escape by Govindachamy on Friday. According to the suspension order, Mr. Sattar allegedly made alarming claims, including that the convict had threatened to jump the jail and vowed to harm the officer's family if he escaped. He further claimed that stolen gold linked to the inmate had been hidden in graveyards in Coimbatore, and that these were being handled by certain people who purportedly backed Govindachamy in his case. Claiming that Govindachamy had harassed numerous women prior to his arrest, Mr. Sattar went on to express a desire that the convict should be executed, even claiming that he would be willing to serve as the executioner if needed. The order, which also stated that Mr. Sattar has previously been involved in several instances of misconduct, held that the condemnable statements have tarnished the department's image and violated Rule 62 of the Kerala Government Servants' Conduct Rules as well as a circular issued by the Kerala Prisons and Correctional Services. The department also emphasised that such conduct undermines public trust and professionalism expected of the prison staff. Probe instituted Three prison officers of the Kannur Central Prison had been suspended in the immediate aftermath of the jailbreak, with the government also instituting a special inquiry led by former Kerala High Court judge C.N. Ramachandran Nair and former State Police Chief Jacob Punnoose. The Opposition has raised allegations of security lapses and systemic negligence.
