No greater sedition possible in any nation of the world and treason against humanity:-
Under Complaint No. 36807/2016/Vigilance
3, Updated Tryanny claim of the Bank of Baroda Branch Manager Cantt
Road, Lucknow Fraudulent move. No rulings could be furnished by his as none
exists.
Evidence below:-
----------
Forwarded message ----------
From: Shahid
Hussain <shahidspokes@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 3:34 PM
Subject: URGENT- Fwd: Ref. DOIPP Letter No.
6/2/2016-PR & C (P+) PR & C Section Fw: Representation to Bank of
Baroda Against Rejection of PM-MUDRA Advance Petition-- Bionity PM-MUDRA
Project, Reply To BoB BM Queries
To: annaroy <annaroy@nic.in>,******************
To
Ms Anna Roy
The Joint Secretary
Ministry of Finance
Govt Of India
URGENT, for Departmental co-ordination for our National
Progress, kindly refer the Trail Mail as Post Script:-
Post Script:-
To
Ms Anna Roy
The Joint Secretary
Ministry of Finance
Govt Of India
Ma'am
We introduce ourselves as an aspiring ultra-high poitential IT
firm based in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, INDIA. We malied our grievances to you as
well as DIOPP about our predicament to initiate business properly attributable
to the flouting of laws by PSU Banks' staffers, in their greed.
Please go through the conduct of the BLF and the RM of Bank of
Baroda and it has caused us huge damages.
This laos has the reference of the DOIPP, Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, Letter No. 6/2/2016-PR & C (P+) PR & C
Section
sent to you by the Director Ms Preeti J. Kindly see that
the environment is not conductive of Industrilization and hence only alien
bondage for funding and hence all Indian economy i8n alien hands and in their
bondage. No policies of DIOPP can materialize here.
Kindly do justice and take stringent action as the corrupt like
Mr KA Srivastava(Kumar Abhishek Srivastava) and RC Bahera (RM Office) are bound
to do what not to keep their posiition intact and gain more competitive edge.
This also endangers potential Economy makers of our Nation. Now who will
enterprise like this?
Such corrupt elements are also using spies and henchmen hence
prompt action is pleaded under PRAGATI Scheme of our Union Prime Minister i.e. PRo-Active Governance And Timely Implementation.
PFA All evidences in attachment and Trail mail
systematically placed for your kind analusis and action.
Jaya Vijaya aka Jay
For M/s Bionity Inc
1st Floor, 119/154
2-Kandhari Lane
Lalbagh
Lucknow
INDIA-226001
*********************
To
Mr Kumar A Srivastava,
Now you have gone mum. Yiou have been defrauding The People that
you have discretionary powers to turn down MSME's applications and you may do
anything including clubbing Individual finances to the MSME institutions even
in the NON-Wilful defaulters cases. You have caused extraordinarily highh
damages to our nation and its Nationls in your own greed, and claimed Tyranny
in a Democratic state telling that you have discretionary powers and now
you are helpless and fool and rule is not working here, you contained by
Industriliazation revolutionaries poised to write growth story of India and
making this Nation Rule the world, rather than "Begging
Bowl of the
World".
Your joint manager Mr Mohammad Sami is badly rebuked by his
Branch subordinates, kindly keep the CCTV footage between 25 April to 25May
2016 between the times 11:00AM to 3:00 PM so that there is no criminal offenc e
on you and your superiors of Destruction
and Concealment of Evidence.
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 4:40 PM
From: "Bio nity" <bionity@dr.com>
To: "Cantt Road Branch, Lucknow" <LCANBS@bankofbaroda.com>, rm.lucknow@bankofbaroda.com, cmd@bankofbaroda.com, cvo.bcc@bankofbaroda.com, dgm.cs@bankofbaroda.com
Cc: governor@rbi.org.in, shahidspokes@gmail.com, cepclucknow@rbi.org.in, dikanpur@gmail.com, annahazareoffice1@gmail.com
Subject: EXTRAORDINARILY URGENT Re: Complaint of
Bionity Inc
To
Mr Kumar Abhishek Srivastava,
Sr Branch Manager,
Bank of Baroda,
Cantt Road,
Lucknow-226001
This response of yours proves fraudulent act. CIBIL is anti-law being against the provisions of
RBI guidelines for MSMEs as
well as clearly against MSMED Act
2006. Nww as you defrauded about your Head Office and RM
involved in this matter, they are being asked to clarify their stance.
Further, there is no such discretionary power to kill MSME units, its only to
Sanction such advance petitions for Development. Discretion is to Sanction even where law is silent
and go extra mile. Kindly provide
us the reference of such ruling that confers you such discretion. Your Joint
Manager as you said in you Return of application, if he is Mr Shami, he was
already rebuked in branch by other subordinates in all Public at
Branch for corruption when Photocopier was not working for clearing undue
bills for commission, and the said employee was telling him to complain about
this further and more than that as well. CCTV
footage will clear all.
Greedy and corrupt people like you and your joint manager are
causing privatization to Govt. Banks hence you are good for no one, neither
your employer, nor your subordinates, nor superiors and neither the Indian People
or Nationals to who thgis Nationalized Bank serves.
Hence we also need Joint Manager's report as referred by
you in return letter. Now as
you now say that application was rejected, then why originals returned and why it was written non-considering and asking to take away
papers from the
branch. How could this be lodged in the Bank's books per the procedure? Originals also have been returned. Any
lies will call for narco-test.
I am also ready for that. You are contradicting yourself. Your such delayed response
and implicating your higher authorities in fabricated criminal case is
extraordinarily grave misconduct and subject to prosecution.
You are against National Economy. This also raises doubt
that you abused the financials and I hired consultant merely to make the
financials complying to your/Bank's understanding, as also mentioned in all
documents.
You also defrauded Chief Minister's Banking Help Cell by telling
the Officer on phone that it was not returned but just some more papers were
needed as Head wanted it. Right? You defrauding
State Govt. as
well.
Higher Officials of BoB are requested to take disciplinary
action and make the losses good.
You determined your own destiny in ultra-greed.
Proprietor
For M/s
Bionity Inc
Lucknow-226001
Disclaimer:
****************************************************************************************
This email (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use of the
intended recipient/s and may contain material that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVATE
COMPANY INFORMATION. Any review or reliance by others or copying or
distribution or forwarding of any or all of the contents in this message is
STRICTLY PROHIBITED. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender by email and delete all copies; your cooperation in this regard is
appreciated.
********************************************************************************
Sent: Friday,
June 17, 2016 at 4:08 PM
From: "Bio nity" <bionity@dr.com>
To: governor@rbi.org.in
Cc: rm.lucknow@bankofbaroda.com, governor@rbi.org.in, assocham@assocham.com, ficci@ficci.com, dgssm@rbi.org.in, ravinder.73@nic.in, "Kalraj Mishra" <kalraj@kalrajmishra.com>, fmo <fmo@nic.in>, "Amit Shah" <amitshah.bjp@gmail.com>, centraloffice@bjp.org, ajaitley@sansad.nic.in, annahazareoffice1@gmail.com, cenvigil@nic.in, strongbharat2016@gmail.com, humanrights@aihra.org, cmd@bankofbaroda.com, dikanpur@gmail.com, mdkapre@rbi.org.in, mem_dept@assocham.com, hgovup@gov.in, smn.dash@nic.in, creditmon@dcmsme.gov.in, shahidspokes@gmail.com, cepdco@rbi.org.in, bomumbai@rbi.org.in
Subject: Representation to Bank of Baroda Against Rejection of
PM-MUDRA Advance Petition-- Fw: Bionity PM-MUDRA Project, Reply To BoB BM
Queries
Sir
Now it has been 2 weeks since representation to the Bank, but
its staffers sitting on the petition against the blunder.
Banking anarchy and no rules of land observed at all but the
tyranny of the BoB staffers.
Now with anti-law approach with CIBIL and any excuse of Private
3rd party for ploy against National Economy, as they themselves know that in
THEIR MODE, as so many private portals like Consumer Grievances ones post Banks
as cheat and on that basis the Cheating Bankers licenses MUST be annuled.
The Bannk laws are there and priority needing it, and
hence the relationship between Bank and its priority destroyed by Bank babus by encroaching the Rights of their own employer i.e.
The Bank and also Their Employer's Priority i.e. the MSME,
hence there is no point to sustain them, as no em,ployer needs traitors.
Now ball is in your court. Issue recomendations about thier
servicesd to the Government, else penalize the Banker severely so that the
Government automatically takes on them.
Thanks,
PS Trail mail in continbuation since inception of Representation
to the BoB.
Sir
It has been 5 days since representation and yet no remorse by
your HO and RM officers. They just know to eat up MSMEs and founf anti-law ways
for it. They call it commercialization and rope in private and irrelevant self
disclaimed CIBIL to MSMED priority covered under MSMED & RBI Guidelines.
For Car loan, personal loan, credit cards and all private things
we never said though commercialization there does not mean unilateral
unjustice, but then they also flout GoI Act and RBI mandates in the Namwe of
commercialization. They know its Govt Priority MSME and hence also Refinances
or Gurantee Covers by MMMY, CGFT,etc. They get 100% cover under these for Govt
own priority, then why anti-law commercialization called? Can they claim it in
the Court of law?
These Govt Funds/corpus are not meant for commercialization
for Bank officers. Banks are Banks as Govt Laws
and Guidelines per
the Regulator under Banking Regulation Act Revised 2012, but with reckless
disregard Bank
Staffers keep flouting and keep commercializing abusing
mediocre profile people like Mallya as scapegoats. Ask them to leave some space
for their Progeny as well as even if these fly out, they may want to come
back.
Shameless Creatures in BoB!
Apart from all below kindly consider as follows:-
1. In your Return Letter you say "unable to consider your request",
and you returned the originals per your RM directions as you told. Here, what
confers on your HO and RM officers to ask you or empower you with the Right to
ignore Govt Priority MSME request, that too under PM's Scheme? MSME is Govt
priority and hence Banks have been formed to serve them hence they are meant to serve the MSME and not ignore them.
The Bank is a Nationalized Public/Govt. Bank and they are Govt servants and MSME is Govt Priority. Flouting
the Laws it has been Returned which should be per your stance rejected, hence
this is Full
Fledged Fraud ab initio.
Now as they ignore and Return request, under what Law they are empowered to perform such a
practice, please cite the relevant Act and u/s or any
ruling, any sort of law at all,?
2. As you say, "unable to consider your request", but
after withholding the application, processing it, making site visits, asking
questions, making investigations, making us hire financial consultant to make
financials in conformity of your needs, sending it to HO and RM as you said,
receiving response from them and conveying us undersigned by you. Now after so
much procedure, by processing
and holding is over 5 days more than the MAXIMUM Time per the Banker's
pledge in BSI, it
is evident that
it was fully processed, and if processed is has to be either
accepted or declines, and if declined it MUST be
lodged into Banker's boks
for such action. Now when proceesed then how come unable to consider? THIS IS THE BIGGEST QUESTION
AND INDICATION OF PLOT AGAINST US, AND ALSO AS YOUR PREDECESSOR'S AND RM STANCE
ON M/S PEASANTS PRODUCE, where RBI has found them
guilty for killing MSME and PMO and BO Kanpur were defrauded. In your
Point 5 in the Return Leter you asked of it, this is the answer. We were
generous to not to invoke it back but as we now received orders from His
Excellence and the Hon'ble Chief Minister of UP and DI Kanpur in action, and
observing your forever incorrigible stance, you advise us how you have decided
your own destiny?
3. Your RM and HO per your stance, have considered the
unconsiderable for MSME Institutuion where clubbing of finances is forbidden, the unilateral Individual CIBIL records, but have uttered nothing on
the duly considerable Project wherein under "Funding The Unfunded"
PMMY only project merits are to be comnsidered. The excuse of Proprietorship
has been made. We wonder how come people assuming such offices be so
uneducated. An MSME unit is MSME unit and covered under MSMED Act 2006 and the
relevant RBI Guidelines, which madate refrainment from clubbing of finances of
even a sub-unit under a unit, then how come they g et into Private details,
that too unilateral, and overlook
the Projects merits in interest of your Home Branch city
Lucknow, its
Tourism, and its Life
Sciences related Institutions, professionals, and entire Public Health as
Health is inseperable from each and every Individual and is of Paramount
Significance than anything else at all. How about the damages
caused to these in your very place Lucknow, and globally, by and large, killed solely attributable to the greed of your HO and RM
officers per your
statements? Further in th is view, even in ignorance of MSMED act where
unilateral and Private CIBIL is relevant at all? Greed of BoB Officials over
Public Life, Liberty, Livelihood and Health.
4. As you told BoB HO or RM officials devise ansd send matter
for you to communicate to us, their stance evidently is malicious towards
Nationals and the National Economy, then how come they be fit for Nationalized
Banker? They say one Bank says Individual default was for 2 years, but do they
know who was responsible for delay in collection for that long? CIBIL is
unilateral and that too it is against MSMED Act and RBI guidelines as they as
well as CIBIL do not claim that the data uploaded by the members is correct,
and concurs to remove the wrong data. CIBIL also disclaims each and every
conduct or matter uploaded by any FI or any sort of institution, as evident at
the end of each very CIBIL report. This question was already answered in response to the Questionnare out of the 9 malicious questions
framed by your HO and forwarded by you as you advised. Kindly refer it again. Now as CIBIL is unilateral and
no reasons assigned of whose fault in the total length of delay, and despite
Individual CIBIL being irrelevant in MSME case, when they themselves are not
aware of the reason, they shopuld also see that they encroach self employment provided by this Act
of MSME, of the owner as well as Employees, potential employees and other relevant parties alongwith National Economy and India's
GDP.
5. Now as wed see that the MSMED Act and the corresponding RBI
guidelines provide for but you are yet claiming livelihood hence lives
violating the MSMED Act as well and RBI mandates, and say that 2 years default
was there as a Banker says, you MUST know, MSMEs are for livelihood and if
livelihood is encroached then such 2 years are bound to turn 20 years and for
eternity, thereby getting NPAs for FIs and Bankers. Hence this proves BoB officers begetting all NPAs by encroachment of
livelihood and Work units.
The Govt./RBI make Laws/Judiciary issues orders but BoB officers seen here flouting all Laws and
Mandates for the Bank recklessly. MSME MUST be operated in order to generate livelihood
and diminish the NPAs created by some corrupt by pro quo lendings, and for this their
"Financial Inclusion" is Mandated by Law which they have flouted and made you a
scapegoat as you stated.
6. Further, they have resorted to Individual/personal and
unilateral CIBIL, this is not the rest 60% part but MSME lendings are to
witness 20% YoY growth. Malice
for greed has hampered National Growth. Again as
yoou mentioned within parenthesis (as its
proprietorship), it is evident in the Act and MSME unit is an MSME unit, now
where comes the question of proprietorship, partnership, corporate Trust,
society or otherwise? It is not other sort of Proprietorships
like merely under Shops and Establishments act, unregistered and all otherwise.
The knew its an MSME unit
covered under MSMED Act 2006 and MSME relevant RBI guidelines. They also
know that for MSME proprietorships only PAN is issued by the Income Tax
Department, MoF, and for others like Shops and Establishment Act and all
others individual PAN of the Proprietor is used. This is
probably to stop clubbing of finances, as if no seperate PAN, the finances are
bound to get clubbed by so many transactions under same PAN and no
distinction between them, and the MSME unit's PAN was well furnished, yet they
ignored it and snooped into the Individual/Private PAN, which was not even
furnished by me and neither mandatorily asked. This Bank BoB is also under MoF, yet this blunder?
Individual PAN was asked only if an assesse as evident in the form submitted,
and as not an assee it was duly
mentioned there, and now THE BIGEST QUESTION,
form where they secured my individual PAN? Who they are annexed with?
Thus it is proved that all those 5 points as observed their approach towards MSMEs, and
at the very first instance Return of MSME application after full fledged
processing has killed the National Economy and the Globe's by and large.
Now kindly advise what should be our course of action for them
or you?
Waiting for reply.
Thank you,
Jaya Vijaya
For M/s Bionity Inc
Lucknow
INDIA-226001
In addition to the last mail yesterday kindly also
consider as follows:-
Sir, it is also to be observed that first you gave a
questionnare consisting of 9 questions which you advised that you received from
the Head Office to be asked, as copy attached viz. BoB 9 Point in
Questionnare.jpeg file herewith to which I replied fully as in Bionity Response
document and at that time you self were satisfied but told that the answers
have been sent to the Head Office for their consideration as only they can take
call on a few like IT related, Brick kilns, etc. Projects and not Branch
Managers, and the Head Office seeks information, assesses, and then conveys the
decision to the Branch, and then only on their approval loans are sanctioned.
But in your 9 point questionnare, under point 9, it was said that
it is a very technical and complicated project and you are not satisfied from
it, which you told is a questionnare for the HO, now as HO
decides on Technical aspects which have experts as you say, how come then HO be
so dumb with experts?
Are Experts = Dumb and find it too technical and
complicated? Their own Point No. 9 is self contradictory as on
one hand they are experts and same hand they are dumb finding it too technical
and complicated. There is something much fishy in HO and clarification needed on
this one from them.
Further, there is also a dilemma whether it is HO or the
RM that prepared the matter of that questionnare and the Return Letter (not
rejection), that Mr Mohammad Shami furnished me around 5:00 p.m.,
after a call from 0522-2231746 yesterday on my BSNL number furnished to you
94735442411, with an envelope that bears RM address as owner
on flap and addressed to the Cantt Road Lucknow Branch with Maruti courier
Aliganj stuck on it bearing barcode No. 3091200029908, as during last few days
of processing you were talking of RM and not HO as earlier, and was also
advised on phone that response received from "there", which during
last days you and Mr Shami were telling to be received from the RM office.
Kindly name the culprit precisely.
Further, as per Mr Shami and you RM responded so late and
delayed the entire process beyond 21 days even against the Bankers' own
BSI pledge, and came up with unlawful procedure of asking return of the
MSME application ab initio as if it were no made
and at all with a note at the end "we further request you to kindly
collect your papers from the branch". Are they aware it is against the RBI
guidelines, as if application is made it has to be sanctioned, else rejected,
and if rejected reasons are assigned and also lodged the MSME declination in
bank's book. Besides per the procedure the reasons are assigned on rejection so
that the defficiencies pertaining to those valid reasons are overcome and
re-application could be done. But no such conduct here but flouted the RBI
mandates along with all laws of land. Last time as yo have cited in Return
Letter under Point 5 about M/s P5, the Branch manager did not return the
Original application but rejected duly and only furnished the rejection letter,
which however turned out to be under corruption as gauged by RBI and for penal
action forwarded to the BO Kanpur. But here the practice has deteriorated and
nor rejection but brazen Return of Application was ordered by the errant
RM or HO officers whosoever, as you mentioned both during the
processing.
If RM or HO officers of BoB are so dumb as revealed by you and
Mr Shami who forward their words to applicants, we must eject them and their
likes and also filter such rest under BBB-Banks Board Bureau in around 130
Crores members large Indian National Public and National Economic interest. We
do not want the same filth as then BBB of no worth and difference.
Further, a minor little point i.e. the blunder as you committed
last time as well that you cited a date further like, day of Return Letter
cited as 05-06-2016 while it was 04-06-2016 Saturday, and 05 June is Sunday
today. Please rectify it and deem it to be 04-June-2016 to be precise.
Further, it has been observed that the Head Office or the
Regional Office officers who so ever sent the Questionnare and the Return
Letter cited matter, as scanned copy attached herewith, to be undersigned by
you as you claimed a couple of days before receiving the Return Letter, kindly
advise them not to abuse the BLFs- Branch Level Functionaries and
send their names or at least on the Return/Rejection letter mentioned the
latter number they sent to the BLF or the Name and designation of such matter
composer.
Further the BoB HO and RM has used these 5 points i the Return
Latter which is against the dignity of their positions and they are apparently
unfit to assume those offices as all these 5 points are anti-law one by one to
which I have replied yesterday, and even in the response to their 9 Point
questionnare as evident in the document attached as sent to you yesterday as
well via email. Despite all Rules and Laws quoted, they ignored as if there are
no laws and again came up with the same stupid stances like the very 1st one of
CIBIL, while CIBIL itself disclaims the validity of the content or
information uploaded by the members, Kindly go through their disclaimer at
the end of the Credit report of anyone. CIBIL is a private and unilateral CRA
and does not override Indian laws. People are not objecting it in the rest 60%
commercial lendings but Govt priority covered under laws like MSMED Act 2006
have to be honoured to avoid prosecution at least.
Kindly go through my response regarding CIBIL question in the
questionnare and the evidences. It was evident that HDFC wrote off the bill close
to merely INR 13,000/- remainder as its hired 3rd party was a criminal. HDFC advocate who served notice also agreed and did
away from the matter as it was going to be under syndication and under gangster
Act. Want evidence? please
tell me. Yet my generous approach to forget the matter with that Banker for
harmonious human relations. But BoB HO or RM took it adversely on the contrary.
While on genuine basis, what more is expected by a lender form a borrower?
Now as the HDFC conduct of posting it on my Personal/Individual
CIBIL records, and it did not hurt me Individually nor the
MSME Institution, but on contrary after all it did not pay me full
compensation but at least revoked remainder trifle INR13,000/-, but owing to
its CIBIL posting usage damages have been caused to me by BoB, hence
BoB is liable to compensation and prosecution of the offending officers.
Under MSMED Act as well as RBI guidelines pertaining to MSME finance, even
other units held by the same owner and even a sub-unit of a unit owned by the
same owner is considered as "owned by other owner/unit", thus
Individual CIBIL which any private CRA may unilaterally allow anyone to
post anything individualistic like negotiating on one's alimony and settling it
for less than sought, negotiating and settling on Machinery and Raw material
and settling for less than the first sought price, but how it is allowed to
flout the laws and Govt Acts, along with RBI Guidelines?
With such approach the CIBIL records of kith and kin can
also be taken into account as it is famous and pragmatic felt proverb "a
man is known by his company". Then your RM and HO officers may
also take our Hon'ble PM, CM, Minister of Commerce and Industry, Minister of
MSME and President's CIBIL records into account for MSME units' credibility
assessment as after all their actions effect MSMEs, besides Nation is under
their control and if their CIBIL, which is of course Unilateral and vulnerable,
is good then only ordinary people under them can be, and if their is bad how
come ordinary people have good credibility? It is not risible but as revealed
by you, BoB Ho and RM approach type. How come private and unilateral CIBIL be
abused to take away one's employment via MSME unit? Have they never been
educated or have they ever gone to any school that they do not know what are
the relevant laws yet assuming office, despite all laws referred for them?
Besides, under PM-MUDRA its clearly cited Project's merits
countale and nothing could be found like CIBIL as its for "funding
the unfunded". The DPR-Detailed Project Report (as copy
attached herewith) was not taken into consideration while devising
the Return Letter by them.
Do they observe any laws? Do they know under MSME
business only wilful defaulters are defaulters and above all when MSME itself
possesses its PAN and even other unit's finance is taken as others' finance,
how come they snoop into personal finance? The PAN number was also not
asked mandatorily, but only Individual assesses were to furnish it and hence not
furnished by me, then from where they got it to perform criminal offence
flouting Constitutional Fundamental Right to Life and Liberty from which arises
Right to Privacy? What is their modus operandi to snoop
into individual privacy without any warrant? This makes dealing with
such Bank officers risky as data might be revealed to rivals and enemies hence
again their ejection is called forth as Priority is priority and MSME is
Govt and National priority, and provides for fooding, clothing, shelter
and health.
Further the project as presented as IT projects are to the
potential investors in the format (Attached in EXCEL format herewith for your
ready reference), and on your advisory despite no performa provided by you, on
your very directions, BoB officers' compliant financials were prepared in
conformity with their needs, which was more than pain staking even for the CA
as advised and then asking him to convert it in MS WORD format which was
directly emailed by him to you. No imagine, how will Digil India succeed?
Now, the BIGGEST GRIEVANCE which is
beyond extremely grave is that 5 such anti-law points abused despite legal
reference response on most of them already, yet NPAs galore means righteous not
funded yet funding is going on which is under corruption rulings pro
quo. these lendings fill coffers of Top Credit decision makers
to feed their dynastic generations for eternity but the sub-ordinates' lives go
hell as then as is also evident by most probable privatization of BoB, which
would lead to destruction of generations of the sub-ordinates in BoB. The dream
of Govt Job shattered of all kins of subordinate and non-credit deciders as
they do not amass such huge wealth. Now how about the agony of them and their
generations and progeny? Refer NCRB reports for Public Banking Sector
and truth is out despite rarest of rare is unearthed, and then further reported,
yet we see horrible condition. IDBI Bank employees pain after its privatization
is evident of such misconduct of pro quo. Now the mass is blaming
the top credit decision makers small chunk for privatization and spoiling their
careers and families for generations, as media reports. How about justice with
common BoB employees, under such approach?
Please advise o this ASAP.
Thank you!
PFA All relevant documents
NB Further matter on yestrday's email as
below:-
Kind attn: The Sr. Branch Manager
33, Cantt Road
Lucknow-226001
Ph.: 0522-2231746, 4017576
Dear Sir
Our MSME Advance plea under PM-MUDRA "Funding The
Unfunded" Scheme was rejected vide letter dated
05.06.2016, undersigned by you, containing 5 reasons for declination, for
which we are making due representation.
The 5 points are being responded to you to kindly consider these
in the given chronological order:
1. As CIBIL has been taken as the basis of declination, first of
all it is irrelevany under MSMED Act 2006, which was as I guess not considered
and was taken as other types of Entereprises. Hope all educated people
understand this difference in compliance of the MSMED Act and corresponding RBI
guidelines. The response regarding that was cited in the attached file herewith
again viz. Bionity response to BoB.docx. It is extremely significant to take
them into account which we hope were inadvertently overlooked. Besides as you
have mentioned there was one write off in CIBIL, you were reponsed
clearly in this response file, and as you observe the nature of act third party
created, yet the lender was spared while it was subject to prosecution as well
as compensation. He was not incorrigible hence spared. Kindly go through the
Bionity Response document so that the veracity is established. Now also as
CIBIL is unilateral and I have no say on it and as the lender did not cause
that much damage as your declination has on his settled report, hence this also
makes BoB liable to compensate for the damages caused by unilateral and
irrelevant CIBIL in this MSME case. Further, when unit itself possess its PAN
and is and Institution covered MSMED Act, taing individual CIBIL which is
merely unilateral is irrelevant, and calls forth penalties for its violation
along with the corresponding RBI guidelines.
Now in this MSME unit's case as well as several individuals are
to be connected hence on my Individual unilateral CIBIL economic destructrion
of all, and I become more unfunded as my livelihood killed along with other
potential individuals. Unemployment galore under this sort of approach only, as
MSME units are considered as Self employment entities, even in case of genuine
defaulters (not willful ones), their livelihood is not killed as they will
always remain defaulter and become more defaulter, and social evils arise
out of unemployment primarily. When Govt is exerting to extreme for inflating
National Economy, against the MSMED Act 2006, this aproach is violation
thereof.
Further, it is to be noted as I also cited in Bionity Response
that I am not a wilful defaulter and ot in RBI's such list. But BoB officers
treated me as a wilful defaulter.
In the cases pertaining to MSME units Individual CIBIL usage is
neither held by MSMED Act nor compliant to RBI guidelines, unless its a case of
wilful defaulter of business. RBI also issues such list. Now as I never
availed Business advance how to judge my any type of business credibility even
if were not MSME, however we stick to law as it is MSME case, and the Act and
RBI mandates have been flouted with reckless disregard.
2. The matter of convincing as you mentioned in 5 th point of
the rejection letter about the firm M/s Peasants' Produce Protective
Propagation Pool-P5, which was also forwarded by Deputy Commissioner of
Industries who was convinced being pertaining to the same Industrial field, and
when asked that I only need to talk to you so that they may forward it to you
as they were very much excited and interested as also mentioned in the Bionity
Response document as attached, you told directly also you can understand and
evaded the Dy Commissioner's stance. Thus hypothesis, if it exists at all, it
is only as I guess in the mind of the producer of the rejection letter.
It is also that much effort was made to cxonform to the Bank's
understanding and for that reason even genric Angel funding pitch document was
transforemd for the worst scenario possible as clearly mentioned in the Bionity
Response letter. It is hence extremely urgent to analyse this oint in the light
of this Bionity Response letter, the copy of which attached herewith.
3. The pre-sanction report of your joint Manager is obscure
hence no comment can be made on it and market report is as you like can
make it. And even if Creditworthiness you may find, this MSME Advance petition
was under Funding the Unfunded PM-MUDRA Scheme who specially caters the less
creditworthy to make them creditworthy, hence this is apparently a deliberate
move. Again, referring to the MSMED Act which strictly lays down the rules to
kee the approach Progressive, rather than regressive, here it seems deliberate
violation of the same Act.
4. You were presented with the information that I already
possess a portal viz. www.vov.media under my absolute ownership with MV
above 10.5 Lacs. Here you use the word "misguided"
regarding the associate concerns. Such usage is prima facie apparently malicious, and seems
trecherous device to implicate in fanricated case. You were clearly told,
see the Bionity Response and prior documents along with aplication forms what
was hidden? If yet any doubt, kindly call for probe. Now further, as you say
revenues and accounts maintained of it, first the revenues and accounts even
what ever they were, clubbing of finances of units under same ownership is
forbidden, yet in a holy manner going an extra mile as you yourself cite that
it has not been updated since 2014, then how come revenue get generated? After
all it is a fixed asset and needs oiperatinal cost and as its a very large
portal covering all domains being Media Portal needs more operational cost. If
I earn from any one portal then can operate that as well. But since 2015 Your
Bank declined my Loan application which was also upheld by RBI as wrong, how
could I generate funds for it. Now becoming unfunded I was the biggest
deserving "unfunded" under PM-MUDRA Scheme, and this unfunded was
created by your Bank only. It is so much so that the Capital in hand too kept
on eroding, now how to be more creditworthgy as you cite per your own
analysis in the point 3? Now regarding my competence to complete project, as
you say, does competence without funds generate enterprising. Here we see MSME
rights encroached. This approach can n ever make any MSME unit get funds under
any scheme, PM-MUDRA apart. I wonder if BoB evr funds MSME units, if yes, under
what consideration?
5. In this point as you talk of M/s P5 advance petition as
forwarded to your Branch via Dy. Commissioner of Industries finding it worthy
of it, but there too the rejection letter said "unrealistic" which is
a divine judgement. Bank Managers can only understand per thier oen with viable
or non-viable. Besides, BoB was already found guilty by RBI hence this question
now. There too in response to BO Kanpur's Notice BoB officers made it get
closed under non-appelable clause 9 (a) citing no representation made to the
Bank. The BO Kanpur too did not allow me to present my response to your
Officer's incorrect information, hence there arises clear possibility of
BoB officials contaminating the RBI Ombudsman, which is absolutely against
Natural Law of Justice. Again as you say that I did not inform what happened to
P5, it hardly matters as your Bank rejected it and clubbing its finances hold
no value, if consider it and as your officials advised the BO Kanpur that no
representation made to the Bank while they were closing grievances presented to
Our Hon'ble Prime Minister via PGPORTAL, which was representation, did the
concerned BoB officials showed any remorse despite receiving Banking
Ombudsman's Notice, and call for funding the MSME unit M/s Peasant's Produce
Protective Propagation Pool-P5? In that case as well the concerned BoB
officials stance was "why us?". Now, as you tell me you not aware of
my previous project, that I am fickle minded and changed or dropped the
idea, the same is known to the Commissioner of Industries as well but they have
faith in me and you dont, this clearly proves that this declination of petition
is malicious and in fear that previous case where BoB officials were found
guilty do not surface up. Further, they never wanted application to be made
with BoB which is a PSB and that too a Nationalized one. What sort of approach
of Indian Nationalized bank towards Indian Nationals? further in the Bionity
Response document, as attached and as well as others it was already advised
that once one comes up more will automatically follow. BoB killed one, now
next, then how come others follow? Directorate of Industries has also been
advised and is well awar of my IT & Web units cluster plan and hence for
progress supporting me per the MSMED Act as their duty which is really
commendable, but unholy approach of a few in BoB is kilin Industries.
Now having replied to your rejection reasons, further is is
observed that the response time in disposing the aplication was above 21 days,
per your BCI voluntary acceptance, which creates a dicey situation, this is
after dedecting the time period the application was with me to respond
to your queries. Further, with rejection, the original copy of
application has been returned which as genuine practice should be retained with
the Bank for original reference. This is also strongly under suspicion.
Hence plea is being made to reconsider the stance of
declination of this Advance under PM-MUDRA application.
Waiting for response.
Thank you!
Jaya Vijaya aka Jay
Proprietor
M/s Bionity Inc
1st Floor, 119/154
2- Kandhari Lane
Lalbagh
Lucknow-226001
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The unending trail:-
 |
in response to Display Name:
The
Government of India has authorized the Central Vigilance Commission
(CVC) as the Designated Agency to receive written complaints for
disclosure on any allegation of corruption or misuse of office and
recommend appropriate action under the Public Interest Disclosure &
Protection of Informers (PIDPI) Resolution, 2004. Accordingly,
Commission had also vide circular No.33/5/2004 dated 17/05/2004 issued
guidelines and public notice on the procedure to be followed for filing
whistle blower complaints under PIDPI Resolution for protecting identity
of complainants/informers
Hi Sir,
I m residence of Dwarka and today I had gone to Bank of Baroda, Plot No.
277, Pocket – A2, Sector-17 and i saw Building owner Sudhir Kumar
Mobile Number is 9810099511. exchanging old notes with new notes in bulk
quantity with the convenience of bank branch manager & Staff
Members.
Bank Owner Sudhir Kumar Plot No. 277, Pocket – A2, Sector-17 M/o 9810099511 and take commission for Exchange.
please use the photage of cameras installed in the premises to verify the truth. please check full day coverage on CCTV camera.
Old currency to new currency for Commission based to Building owner & Bank Manager/Staff Members.
But in bank are getting a very big amount exchange without any interpretation
please look into this matter & Action immediately.
Building Tender will be cancel immediately.
|
There are several complaints
like this live and no response to them. The responses can be like
making absurd excuses or behaving foolish as if the addressed
authorities do not understand what the complaint is all about, or
transferring it hither thither as if a beast has to dance absurdly. To a
person from any other place in the world it maybe beyond miracle, but
it is veracity in wonderland. Turning blind eye is nothing but very
existence of complaint addressing authorities.
The world needs to know as the world needs to grow, and for real human development this is inevitable.
