 |
| REPLY TO SP SOOD |
For once, I want to do some plain-speak, to put things in perspective.
So far we have come across instances of mutual maligning among Associations and their leaders. There was therefore some sort of an awakening of the silent pensioners (belonging to those very Associations) who started 'crying' for unity - among Associations/Leaders/Pensioners, as a whole. As there is a groundswell in the number of Unity mongers, I now see a veiled maligning of the Unity moves, without even understanding what is being sought by the ordinary silent Pensioners. if I understood Mr S P Sood's tirade correctly, he (and others who may be equally uncomfortable with the unity movement) may kindly appreciate that these new enthusiasts and unity-seekers are NOT 'outsiders'. They are all part of you, your own members and supporters. Don't try to put yourselves on one side and all of 'them' on 'another' side.
Mr. Sood now, and just one or two others earlier, have been asking a question: 'where were you all, all these years and before 12/01/2010 etc.,?' My answer, on my behalf and on behalf of hundreds of others, is that 'we were where we should be, supporting Mr KML Asthana, Mr GN Sridharan, the Panchkula Team and all leaders like you, in OUR OWN way'. Silently but substantially, without intruding, waiting and hoping for the best outcome of your efforts'. In fact, it continues to be so even now. Except that some are asking openly for Unity - Inter-Association Unity, Intra-Association Unity, Unity in the 'approach' towards the common cause and finally uniformity and Unity in the strategies adopted to pursue to win cases in courts. The appeals for Unity were spontaneous because the required Unity in any of the areas listed has been lacking and it is seen to be hurting the cause. I really don't understand what is bothering Mr Sood. Does he claim, 'everything is fine, we are in control', and tell us 'you keep watching'?
Let it be clearly understood that the protagonists of Unity never doubted or discounted the value of the past achievements of any or all the people named in your mail, Mr Sood. The unity mongers are also aware of but not unduly worried about the adverse fallout of the setbacks, some of which were certainly 'avoidable'. The Appeals for a 'united approach' is to ALL ASSOCIATIONS & INDIVIDUAL LEADERS. To sit together, exchange views and adopt a combined strategy and not to tread on the toes of one another.
There was a question. 'to whom will the committee be accountable?' What committee are we talking of? It will be the Committee comprising the nominees/office bearers of all the Associations and the individuals who are actually spearheading the court cases; it shall be accountable to their respective Associations/members, besides the entire community of Pensioners. What is objectionable here?
The appeal for Unity is very relevant and the need for Unity is imperative because there have been fundamental differences in the perceptions on the interpretation of the Pensioners' case, among Associations and leaders. This situation does not augur well for the common cause. We should bring about a change.
Can Hyderabad host a Round Table Session? Or can it be Delhi, in which case, the Sr.Advocates representing all Associations can possibly participate and enlighten the stakeholders?
This phase of the action plan should conclude before the Supreme Court goes on vacation from 12/05/2014.
I am purposely not responding to the concluding part of Mr Sood's mail. It is too sensitive for public debate.