Running Commentary on Claim E35YM660: 16.07 pm (UK-Time) 5 July 2022
- Shantanu Panigrahi
- Jul 5, 2022
- 2 min read
Claim E35YM6602
Yahoo
/
Sent
Shantanu Panigrahi <shantanupanigrahi@yahoo.com>
To:
Central London DJSKEL
Tue, 5 Jul at 08:34
To
The Central London County Court
For the attention of His Honour Judge Partitt and District Judge Lightman
Your Honours
I take you back the proceedings of E35YM660 this morning as the revival of HQ17XO1773 at the Medway County Court under J00ME572 turned out to be a damp squib in my attempts to ascertain the Constitution of the United Kingdom in so far as it affects the Law Enforcement and Judicial processes as you will note from the email that I copied you into.
The Defendant, the Cabinet Office was awarded Costs of £4170 against the Claimant by His Honour District Judge Lightman and a year has passed by still there is no resolution of the matter. I had paid £100 Court Fees to have the District Judge Lightman's Order as attached General Form of Judgment or OrderCentralLondonCountyCourtDistrictJudgeLightman(Extract)21June2021 set aside and for an Order issued for the £4170 to be refunded to me as no one was certain at the point when I initiated my litigation against the Prime Minister that only the Royal Constabulary, most likely the Metropolitan Police have the constitutional authority to issue civil or criminal proceedings against the Executive of the Nation in the Prime Minister. It has taken me a whole year to now ascertain that. I had approached over 50 Law Firms and both the Legal Ombudsman and the Solicitors Regulation Authority to have this issue clarified. Further, as the Fines issued on Partygate matter shows only the Police can fine the Prime Minister of the Country, not an ordinary citizen.
In short, kindly look into this matter under the Court Fee that I have paid and issue your judgment to clarifiy the conundrum in the Constitution of the United Kingdom. The Claim Form served on the Kent Police is attached in this respect that n1-engKentPolice UpdateJune2022.pdf.
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
(Claimant)#
3 Hoath Lane
Wigmore
Gillingham
Kent ME8 0SL
Tel: 07967789619
On Monday, 4 July 2022 at 20:00:34 BST, Central London DJSKEL <centrallondondjskel@justice.gov.uk> wrote: Re: ALDI Auto Response - Case ID: 01634279
Thank You for your email message which is now in the judicial email inbox. This inbox is only viewed by judiciary and court staffs do not have access to this account. This auto response confirms that the message has arrived and will be dealt with in due course.
Thank You
This e-mail and any attachments is intended only for the attention of the addressee(s). Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return e-mail. Internet e-mail is not a secure medium. Any reply to this message could be intercepted and read by someone else. Please bear that in mind when deciding whether to send material in response to this message by e-mail. This e-mail (whether you are the sender or the recipient) may be monitored, recorded and retained by the Ministry of Justice. Monitoring / blocking software may be used, and e-mail content may be read at any time. You have a responsibility to ensure laws are not broken when composing or forwarding e-mails and their contents.
Download all attachments as a zip file
General Form of Judgment or OrderCentralLondonCountyCourtDistrictJudgeLightman(Extract)21Jun2021.docx 15.1kB
n1-eng KentPolice UpdateJune2022.pdf 208.7kB:
Comentários