Appeal on Claim E35YM660: Order of the Court dated 21 June 2021

Appeal on Claim E35YM660: Order of the Court dated 21 June 2021

Inbox

from: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

to: centrallondondjskel@justice.gov.uk

date: 2 Jan 2022, 10:34

subject: Appeal on Claim E35YM660: Order of the Court dated 21 June 2021

mailed-by: gmail.com

The Circuit Judge

Central London County Court

Dear Sir

1. Kindly note that the Administrative Court of the Queen's Bench Division has decided that it does not have the jurisdiction to conduct a Judicial Review based on the documentation of pertinent relevance that is solely what I wished to rely upon for my skeleton argument to that Court.

2. Please refund me my £100 Court Fee that I paid for this Appeal if a judgement will not be issued by the Central London County Court given that 6 months has gone by since the appeal against the Costs Order in favour of the Defendant of £4170 was lodged by me at the Court. The attached emails are further evidence that need to be taken into consideration for the full written reasons for lack of judgement on the Appeal to be issued to me: ToCircuitJudge(CentLondCtyCourt(E35YM660)28Dec2021.docs; CentralLondonCountyCourtOrder21June2021(DistrictJudgeLightman).pdf refers.

Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL

Tel: 07967789619

Forwarded:

RE: Update on Police Harassment through unlawful processes of interview and arrest

Inbox

from: Administrative Court Office, General Office <generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk>

to: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

date: 30 Dec 2021, 14:12

subject: RE: Update on Police Harassment through unlawful processes of interview and arrest

mailed-by: administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

Signed by: administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

security: Standard encryption (TLS) Learn more

: Important mainly because you often read messages with this label.

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your email.

If you wish to lodge an application for Judicial Review at this Court, as previously advised, please do so by following the attached guidance (please follow the instructions for a litigant in person). Please also refer to the following link on the Government UK website: The Administrative Court Judicial Review Guide 2021 (publishing.service.gov.uk)

The documentation that you have enclosed in your email below cannot be used to issue an application for Judicial Review.

Kind regards,

Lucia Meloni | Administrative Court Office | Issues and Enquiries C324

Queen's Bench Division | HMCTS | Royal Courts of Justice| Strand, London | WC2A 2LL

Phone: 020 7947 6655 (Option 6)

Web: www.gov.uk/hmcts *Official*

cid:image001.gif@01D2516A.D6B22CB0

Daily Cause List: http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/court-lists/list-rcj

Listing Enquiries: listoffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

General Enquiries: generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

Criminal & Extradition Enquiries: crimex@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

Skeleton Arguments: london.skeletonarguments@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

PLEASE DO NOT SEND EMAILS TO PERSONAL INBOXES AS NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. PERSONAL INBOXES ARE NOT MONITORED. PLEASE SEND ALL EMAILS TO :

generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

In accordance with Practice Direction 5B - Electronic communication and filing we ask you to do the following when sending an e-mail message to the court:

· Clearly state the Court's action number, parties’ names and any dates relating to an up-coming hearing in the subject header.

· In accordance with Practice Direction 3.3a, please do not submit documents which carry a payable fee; such e-mails will be deleted.

We do not accept documents over 50 pages by electronic means.

From: Shantanu Panigrahi [mailto:shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com]

Sent: 30 December 2021 13:01

To: Administrative Court Office, General Office <generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk>

Subject: Re: Update on Police Harassment through unlawful processes of interview and arrest

Dear Sir/Madam

I tried to telephone you on the Phone Number (Option 6) that you gave because of uncertainty on whether there is a missing word in your final sentence (if used instead of until) so I decided that since you have accepted that this matter is appropriate for the judicial review, I should send you the up-to-date arguments and evidence for where Kent Police have erred in law.

I was first interviewed on invitation on 16 September 2021 at the Medway Police Station in the presence of a Duty Solicitor who advised me of my options, and I followed her advice not to answer anything more since I had submitted the attached DEFENCE STATEMENT ON HARASSMENT OFFENCE in a handwritten form the day before. I invited Kent Police to charge me there and then so that I could submit my evidence to the Magistrates at North Kent Magistrates Court or Medway Magistrates Court with the Duty Solicitor representing me to the Magistrate. I wanted the matter to be sorted out there and then. Instead, Kent Police delayed taking a decision on whether I would be charged, until the 24 of November when I was marched off under arrest at my place of work and taken to North Kent Police Station for the rest of the day. The day's events are narrated in the attached: Events of 24 November 2021.docx.

Since then both my wife and I have repeatedly asked for updates on what the Police is planning to do to me as no arrest warrants were issued and nor were any search warrants issued for the confiscation of our Computer, my USB Memory Stick and my Mobile Phone taken from our house before my arrest on the 24 of November 2021 at 0.8.30 am, my arrest having taken place at 10.30 am.Formal complaints were submitted: Enquiry lodged in Kent Police Website 16Dec2021.docx.

The latest evidence of inability to dispose of the matter is evident in the attached correspondence: ToKentPolice(IncapcitatedMedCertMawanche)29Dec2021.docx.

Furthermore, I was stopped from interrogating the perpetrator of the victimisation and harassment on me Katrina Sale of the Conservatives and Unionist Party when I tried to investigate the role of the Prime Minister Mr Boris Johnson in reference to Claim E35YM660 of the Central London County Court: ToKatrinaSale (Conservatives)2Dec2021.docx; which was totally unlawful as it prevented me from engaging in the due process of legal proceedings for the judicial review of this matter.

Finally, the document attached was not signed by anyone in North Kent Police Station at the end of 5 hours of incarceration on 24 November 2021 in a police cell and no clarification has been provided on whether Kent Police has completed its investigations on the 27 criminal anonymous emails nor on when we can expect the return of our property from Kent Police: NorthKentPoliceReleasewithoutBail.pdf.

I hope these documents are all that you need to undertake the judicial review and please let me know now (today) whether I should send you the additional £54 Court Fee in the Post or telephone me for Card Payment on 07967789619.

Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL

Tel: 07967789619

On Thu, 30 Dec 2021 at 12:06, Administrative Court Office, General Office <generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk> wrote:

Good afternoon,

Thank you for your email.

Please follow the guidance which was sent to you by my colleague yesterday and make sure that you file an application for Judicial Review which is compliant with said guidance before paying any additional fees. This Court will not be able to process any documentation if all the required documentation is received.

Kind regards,

Lucia Meloni | Administrative Court Office | Issues and Enquiries C324

Queen's Bench Division | HMCTS | Royal Courts of Justice| Strand, London | WC2A 2LL

Phone: 020 7947 6655 (Option 6)

Web: www.gov.uk/hmcts *Official*

cid:image001.gif@01D2516A.D6B22CB0

Daily Cause List: http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/court-lists/list-rcj

Listing Enquiries: listoffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

General Enquiries: generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

Criminal & Extradition Enquiries: crimex@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

Skeleton Arguments: london.skeletonarguments@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

For information on how HMCTS uses personal data about you please see: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-courts-and-tribunals-service/about/personal-information-charter

PLEASE DO NOT SEND EMAILS TO PERSONAL INBOXES AS NO ACTION WILL BE TAKEN. PERSONAL INBOXES ARE NOT MONITORED. PLEASE SEND ALL EMAILS TO :

generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk

In accordance with Practice Direction 5B - Electronic communication and filing we ask you to do the following when sending an e-mail message to the court:

· Clearly state the Court's action number, parties’ names and any dates relating to an up-coming hearing in the subject header.

· In accordance with Practice Direction 3.3a, please do not submit documents which carry a payable fee; such e-mails will be deleted.

We do not accept documents over 50 pages by electronic means.

From: Shantanu Panigrahi [mailto:shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com]

Sent: 22 December 2021 16:58

To: Administrative Court Office, General Office <generaloffice@administrativecourtoffice.justice.gov.uk>

Subject: Update on Police Harassment through unlawful processes of interview and arrest

Administrative Court

Dear Sir/Madam

Thank you for your email as attached: FrAdministrativeCourtOffice()FFAL)JudicialReveiwGuide22Dec2022.

The content of the email was discussed with Kent Police as shown in the attached (Enquiry lodged in Kent Police Website 16Dec2021.docs) to place the manner in which it conducted the investigation and interview and arrest on the 27 criminal anonymous emails that I was a victim of.

I shall send you the £54 for the Judicial Review as £100 has already been deposited in HMCTS for the Appeal which did not take place in preference to the Judicial Review being the more appropriate route for assessment of Police brutality and torture of ordinary innocent citizens.

Yours sincerely

Dr Shantanu Panigrahi

3 Hoath Lane

Wigmore

Gillingham

Kent ME8 0SL

Tel: 07967789619

______________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

===========

The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and are intended for the use of the correct recipient(s) only. If you have received this email in error, please contact the author immediately. It is an offence to disclose or distribute the contents of this email and/or any attachments without consent of the author.

If your email has not been acknowledged or answered within 5 working days, or if you have difficulty reading this email or any attachment included, please contact the author on the number quoted above.

The author is not authorised to bind the Department contractually, or to make representations or other statements which may bind the Department in any way via electronic means.

===========

______________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

===========

The author is not authorised to bind the Department contractually, or to make representations or other statements which may bind the Department in any way via electronic means.

===========

______________________________________________________________________

This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.

For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com

______________________________________________________________________

Attachments area

ACO Notice 19.7.2021.pdf

2 Attachments

ToCircuitJudge(CentLondCtyCourt(E35YM660)28Dec2021.docs;

CentralLondonCountyCourtOrder21June2021(DistrictJudgeLightman).pdf

__________________________________________________________________________________

from: Central London DJSKEL <centrallondondjskel@justice.gov.uk>

to: Shantanu Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi3000@gmail.com>

date: 2 Jan 2022, 10:34

subject: RE: Appeal on Claim E35YM660: Order of the Court dated 21 June 2021

mailed-by: justice.gov.uk

Signed by: justice.gov.uk

security: Standard encryption (TLS) Learn more

: Important according to Google magic.

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.

Appeal on Claim E35YM660: Order of the Court dated 21 June 2021

Recent Posts

Comments