Expert report "North Сaucasus: Quo Vadis?"Igor Chepkasov
Report of the Head of the Scientific direction 'Political Economy and Regional Development' Gaidar Institute Irina Starodubrovskaya and senior researcher at the Institute Gaidar Kazenin Constantine, on the situation in the North Caucasus. Report of January 14, 2014 submitted to the Committee of Civil Initiatives.
Expert report "North Сaucasus: Quo Vadis?"Igor Chepkasov
Report of the Head of the Scientific direction 'Political Economy and Regional Development' Gaidar Institute Irina Starodubrovskaya and senior researcher at the Institute Gaidar Kazenin Constantine, on the situation in the North Caucasus. Report of January 14, 2014 submitted to the Committee of Civil Initiatives.
In the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the officials of three different RTI public authorities were oofficially confirmed through their RTI Statutory document on date 15/06/2012, 22/06/2012, 16/11/2012 & 07/12/2012 about the concerned judicial authorities and the concerned judicial members in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission were fraud , cheated the public, Legal councils, Central Government of India and Union Government of India by did not follow the mandatory clause 19(1) of the Consumer Protection Regulations 2005 more than three years from 1st,Jan 2010 up to 31st May 2012 wantonly not allowed to post the matter for final disposal, and not disposed the matters 4500 to 6000 matter per single calendar year likewise more than three(3)years by 5 benches. Factually each bench in the NCDRC must dispose minimum 75 to 100 matters, likewise 5 benches must dispose 900 to 1200 matter per 12 months. But the concerned judicial authorities and concerned judicial members were involved in corruption / bribery not discharge their judicial executive services by not allowed to post the selected matters for final disposal and not dispose the matters 4500 to 6000. During the period 1st January 2010 to 31st May 2012 dispose less than 50% matters per single calendar year. The concerned judicial authorities were evidently favor to the corporate, banks, foreign banks etc., by wantonly dragging selected matters of CC original complaints, and Firs Appeals and Revision petitions, and they were indirectly getting monitory benefit from corporate, banks, foreign, banks etc., According to mandatory section 13(3A) of the consumer protection Act 1986 and according to Mandatory clause 11 of the consumer protection regulations 2005 all the consumer forums must dispose all matters within 90 days and should not exceed Five(5) months. But within our country India the consumer courts not follow the mandatory sections of the C.P.Act 1986 and not follow the mandatory clauses of consumer protection regulations 2005 and not follow the mandatory rules 1987. When the consumer court did not follow the statutory act how can we were the public expect justice in consumer grievance? Is question of Law? All of our Indian citizens aware of that every consumer court judicial authorities and judicial members must follow the statutory act 1986. But why in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission the concerned judicial authorities and the concerned judicial members did not follow the mandatory clause 19(1) of the consumer protection regulations 2005 not dispose the matter 4500 to 6000 matters just because of corruption / bribery. If the fit matter not come to the final disposal and not disposing matters 75 to 100 per month we were the appellants and complainants not able to get justice and by just dragging consumer complaints by the concerned judicial authorities the corporate, foreign banks and banks etc.,evidence attch NCDRC
Technoblade The Legacy of a Minecraft Legend.Techno Merch
Technoblade, born Alex on June 1, 1999, was a legendary Minecraft YouTuber known for his sharp wit and exceptional PvP skills. Starting his channel in 2013, he gained nearly 11 million subscribers. His private battle with metastatic sarcoma ended in June 2022, but his enduring legacy continues to inspire millions.
In the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, the officials of three different RTI public authorities were oofficially confirmed through their RTI Statutory document on date 15/06/2012, 22/06/2012, 16/11/2012 & 07/12/2012 about the concerned judicial authorities and the concerned judicial members in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission were fraud , cheated the public, Legal councils, Central Government of India and Union Government of India by did not follow the mandatory clause 19(1) of the Consumer Protection Regulations 2005 more than three years from 1st,Jan 2010 up to 31st May 2012 wantonly not allowed to post the matter for final disposal, and not disposed the matters 4500 to 6000 matter per single calendar year likewise more than three(3)years by 5 benches. Factually each bench in the NCDRC must dispose minimum 75 to 100 matters, likewise 5 benches must dispose 900 to 1200 matter per 12 months. But the concerned judicial authorities and concerned judicial members were involved in corruption / bribery not discharge their judicial executive services by not allowed to post the selected matters for final disposal and not dispose the matters 4500 to 6000. During the period 1st January 2010 to 31st May 2012 dispose less than 50% matters per single calendar year. The concerned judicial authorities were evidently favor to the corporate, banks, foreign banks etc., by wantonly dragging selected matters of CC original complaints, and Firs Appeals and Revision petitions, and they were indirectly getting monitory benefit from corporate, banks, foreign, banks etc., According to mandatory section 13(3A) of the consumer protection Act 1986 and according to Mandatory clause 11 of the consumer protection regulations 2005 all the consumer forums must dispose all matters within 90 days and should not exceed Five(5) months. But within our country India the consumer courts not follow the mandatory sections of the C.P.Act 1986 and not follow the mandatory clauses of consumer protection regulations 2005 and not follow the mandatory rules 1987. When the consumer court did not follow the statutory act how can we were the public expect justice in consumer grievance? Is question of Law? All of our Indian citizens aware of that every consumer court judicial authorities and judicial members must follow the statutory act 1986. But why in the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission the concerned judicial authorities and the concerned judicial members did not follow the mandatory clause 19(1) of the consumer protection regulations 2005 not dispose the matter 4500 to 6000 matters just because of corruption / bribery. If the fit matter not come to the final disposal and not disposing matters 75 to 100 per month we were the appellants and complainants not able to get justice and by just dragging consumer complaints by the concerned judicial authorities the corporate, foreign banks and banks etc.,evidence attch NCDRC
Technoblade The Legacy of a Minecraft Legend.Techno Merch
Technoblade, born Alex on June 1, 1999, was a legendary Minecraft YouTuber known for his sharp wit and exceptional PvP skills. Starting his channel in 2013, he gained nearly 11 million subscribers. His private battle with metastatic sarcoma ended in June 2022, but his enduring legacy continues to inspire millions.
Storytelling For The Web: Integrate Storytelling in your Design ProcessChiara Aliotta
In this slides I explain how I have used storytelling techniques to elevate websites and brands and create memorable user experiences. You can discover practical tips as I showcase the elements of good storytelling and its applied to some examples of diverse brands/projects..
Hello everyone! I am thrilled to present my latest portfolio on LinkedIn, marking the culmination of my architectural journey thus far. Over the span of five years, I've been fortunate to acquire a wealth of knowledge under the guidance of esteemed professors and industry mentors. From rigorous academic pursuits to practical engagements, each experience has contributed to my growth and refinement as an architecture student. This portfolio not only showcases my projects but also underscores my attention to detail and to innovative architecture as a profession.
3. Part 1:
Request for change.
?
Question from MD Petra Granqvist
Can you help us out with handling our stock/warehouse
Investigation
Space needed, current stock analyses, only moving current stock
(not old depreciated) Contact supplier to return old stock that not will
be moved.
4. Part 1: Physically move
Physically move
On 1 June we started to physically
move all goods to the EDC in Holland
who took over all warehouse
activities including some mounting
work . (animatie van verhuizen met
foto’s van oude pand in SE naar
nieuwe pand bij AxFlow DC BV)
5.
6. Part 2: improving
order-process by
good analyses
EDC provided also full analysis of our purchase and sales activities
by making weekly standard analysis reports of the situation. With
this knowledge there is a much better control on our deliveries to
the customers
7. Part 3: Purchase
suggestion / forecasting
EDC we started implement the purchase suggestion tool in Sweden
ASW system, in order to get better control of our stock in the
future – we do want to carry the right parts and keep track of stock
agreements for our customers
Result :
The continuity is better because more people at the EDC can
handle these shipments and at lower cost. We see more possible
benefits in the future when Systems and Service will move in under
the same roof.
8. Conclusion
actually a win-win situation.
In Sweden we can concentrate on the
sales activities and not worry about
logistics!