THE MSc DISSERTATION
- Shantanu Panigrahi
- Mar 13, 2021
- 17 min read
Title: Livestock development with urbanisation: A case study of the Eastern India region
Author: S. Panigrahi
Full dissertation added ........
I received an auto-acknowledgement from Dr Westby’s email box that stated that he would be back in the office on 4 January 2016; however, by midday on this first full working day of the New Year I received nothing from anywhere so that it was clear that the material sent by me to him was not being acknowledged by him or by Linda and therefore not by the University of Greenwich. I then decided to macerate Linda Nicolaides to examine her deceit with the following reply on her email:
Document written in old Word5 document (9)
Shan Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk>
To
Linda Nicolaides
4 January 2015 at 12:45 PM
Dear Linda
1. That is a good idea, I mean talking to Andrew. Are there any Livestock Specialists remaining at the Institute after all the changes?
2. I am sure my doctor will be able to provide whatever medical evidence is required by Wye to support my extenuation.
3. Incidentally, I already have a PhD; but had decided that my studies should not end with that so registered for an MSc afterwards.
Hope to hear from you at the earliest.
Shan
Hide original message
On Sunday, 3 January 2016, 10:25, Linda Nicolaides <L.Nicolaides@greenwich.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Shan,
This is good news. I had thought talking to Andrew might be a better approach, however, I have forwarded your mail to him and copied you in so that you are now in contact.
I believe that Wye would also require medical evidence to support your extenuation. Good Luck with your submission and I look forward to celebrate you being awarded a PhD.
Best wishes
Linda
Linda Nicolaides, MPh, FRSPH Principal Scientist Programme Leader, MSc Food Safety and Quality Management (e-learning/Control systems and trade) Co-programme Leader, MSc Food Innovation
From: Shan Panigrahi [shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 02 January 2016 16:33 To: Linda Nicolaides Subject: Re: Document written in old Word5 document
Dear Linda
Do not worry about reading the document as I managed to salvage the full document by copy pasting from the Preview in the email attachment. I have recreated the entire dissertation.
Give me Andrew's email address now please.
Shan
On Saturday, 2 January 2016, 16:07, Linda Nicolaides <L.Nicolaides@greenwich.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Shan,
I will take the file wit me when I go back to work on Tuesday and see if the IT specialists can open it. I cannot open it on my pc which is running windows 10!!
I will also send you mail to Andrew.
More news next week.
Best wishes
Linda
Linda Nicolaides, MPh, FRSPH Principal Scientist Programme Leader, MSc Food Safety and Quality Management (e-learning/Control systems and trade) Co-programme Leader, MSc Food Innovation
From: Shan Panigrahi [shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 01 January 2016 15:53 To: Linda Nicolaides Subject: Document written in old Word5 document
Dear Linda
As discussed, please see if you can read the attachment document (URBANIS1A.doc) and if possible save it in the 97 or later version of Word and send it back to me
Thanks
Shan
University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by guarantee, registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office: Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by guarantee, registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office: Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
Soon after sending this email, the Office for Independent Adjudication (OIA) sent me another one of its stupid emails asking me in effect whether there was unfinished business in my dealings with the OIA and seeking clarification on whether I am pursuing the matter through this adjudicator of complaints against universities. Why did it wait from 18 December for this reply that did not address the complaint? I had to reply to this email immediately in order to restore the complaint at OIA there:
Service complaint (5)
Shan Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk>
To
servicecomplaints
4 January 2016 at 1:14 PM
Dear Sir
1. As soon as I have received a Completion of Procedures letter from Mrs Linda Nicolaides of the University of Greenwich, I will contact you with to let you know the outcome of the internal complaints processes.
2. Do you wish to see my correspondence with her now because she is not replying to my last email?
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
On Monday, 4 January 2016, 12:58, servicecomplaints <servicecomplaints@oiahe.org.uk> wrote:
Dear Dr Panigrahi,
As the OIA is an independent review body, we are unable to give advice about the specific internal complaints procedures of your University. Your Students’ Union may be able to advise you on this.
We would normally expect a complainant to have a Completion of Procedures Letter, which is issued by a university to a student when the internal complaints or appeals procedure has been completed, before bringing a complaint to the OIA. The eligibility of the complaint for review by the OIA is normally then assessed at that stage.
Kind regards,
Sarah Liddell
Head of Leadership Office
Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education
Second Floor
Abbey Gate
57-75 Kings Road
Reading
RG1 3AB
Tel: 0118 959 9813
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oiahe
This message is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not copy or disclose this message to anyone but should kindly notify the sender and delete the message. Neither the OIA nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan this email and any attachments. Calls to this Office may be monitored or recorded for quality control and training purposes.
The OIA is a charity, registered in England & Wales under number 1141289, and a company limited by guarantee, registered in England & Wales under number 4823842. Registered Office: Second Floor, Abbey Gate, 57-75 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 3AB, United Kingdom
From: Shan Panigrahi [mailto:shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: Friday, December 18, 2015 4:18 PM To: servicecomplaints Subject: Re: Service complaint
Dear Ms Sarah Liddell
It is only the OIA that can determine whether a complainant has gone through all of the internal University's complaints processes applicable to ensure that a submission to OIA meets with the necessary criteria to enable judgement to be made on whether the complaint can be reviewed and if so whether it is technically justified, and finally, what kind of compensation needs to be provided to the complainant. I can only provide you with the details of the correspondence that I have entered into to try and have the matter resolved to my satisfaction. This is why I asked your official to look into these and make a decision on whether I need to go through an extra stage on top of the letter to Ms Stiasny that I sent you a copy of. Your official clearly did not reply to that query.
I therefore consider my complaint to be fully justified.
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
On Friday, 18 December 2015, 15:59, servicecomplaints <servicecomplaints@oiahe.org.uk> wrote:
Dear Dr Panigrahi,
Thank you for your emails of 14, 15 and 16 December.
The automatic reply generated when an electronic enquiry form is submitted to us is intended only to confirm receipt of the form, so that the person submitting it knows immediately that it has submitted successfully. We then respond to the enquiry itself, and I note that Ms Brown wrote to you very promptly, the day after receipt of your enquiry form.
I am sorry that the link to the Complaint Form provided in Ms Brown’s email did not work. The correct link is: http://oiahe.org.uk/making-a-complaint-to-the-oia/oia-complaint-form.aspx and I attach a pdf copy of the form.
The OIA can only review complaints that fall within its remit and the Rules of the OIA Scheme. It is therefore appropriate that Ms Brown provided you with information to help you to determine whether your complaint is likely to be eligible for review by the OIA. We would normally expect a student to complete the internal complaints procedures of the University before submitting a complaint to the OIA.
Kind regards,
Sarah Liddell
Head of Leadership Office
Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education
Second Floor
Abbey Gate
57-75 Kings Road
Reading
RG1 3AB
Tel: 0118 959 9813
Show original message
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oiahe
This message is confidential and may be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not copy or disclose this message to anyone but should kindly notify the sender and delete the message. Neither the OIA nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses and it is your responsibility to scan this email and any attachments. Calls to this Office may be monitored or recorded for quality control and training purposes.
The OIA is a charity, registered in England & Wales under number 1141289, and a company limited by guarantee, registered in England & Wales under number 4823842. Registered Office: Second Floor, Abbey Gate, 57-75 Kings Road, Reading, RG1 3AB, United Kingdom
No replies came from Linda, Dr Westby or from OIA, and neither were there any other emails from any of my other correspondents such as AuthorhouseUK, Egregious_C, Medway County Court Hodge, Jones and Allen Solicitors, the Legal Ombudsman, or Mr Malcolm Dodds (Clerk at Maidstone Magistrates Court) in this struggle for justice. The OIA has to investigate my complaint on my terms or not investigate the matter at all for it was clear that it would cover up the persecution geared as it was for the purpose as an Institution of the State that exists to assuage the workings of the State with its false pretences that it gives complainants a chance to obtain redress for the injustices they have suffered in the same way that the Legal Ombudsman had done with my complaints. That is why it did not give me the opportunity to elaborate on the complaint immediately. Now that this document is ready it will most likely never surface again to harass me as it did this morning.
These developments show that the whole lot of them have operated through evil-deceit as agents of persecution for the State protecting each other by covering up for each other. I do not know whether the State had physically warned Linda Nicoloaides and the OIA of the documents that I had prepared on my computer (for it always had access to my computer files through the internet surveillance processing of its security services) or whether their behaviour were entirely the play of guna consciousness forces but the effect on me was the same: state persecution which I had to resist to simply survive in the United Kingdom with my dignity in tact for I cannot show my face to anyone in India which was once an option for me to disappear to but prevented by the State not implementing the private prosecution that I initiated at Maidstone Magistrates Court and by the non-publication of my book by the three publishers that I had contacted and which the Medway County Court took no action to enforce.
That dignity comes from following the path of truth or satya-advaita. The reason these proceedings are important to the State is because it would have liked to find some way of being released from my Blog contents that implies heavy criticism of British Justice. In the future people would be able to question Mr Cameron or another future Prime Minister on what these proceedings were all about. Why did not the government take action against this person for writing such things. For this reason I am not allowing any cover up of the mechanisms by which the State has persecuted me no matter how long I have to struggle on in my menial job at the Newsagents and whether or not I write anything further in my Blog ever.
I was not surprised when I received an email on 5 January morning from Linda Nicolaides having finalised this document before going to bed. I replied immediately, as follows:
Recovery of MSc (2)
Shan Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk>
To
Linda Nicolaides
5 January 2016 at 8:52 AM
Dear Linda
1. The reason for the late submission of my MSc Dissertation to the University of London was the University of Greenwich's decision to suspend me from work and then terminate my employment. These unjust acts (which were designed to cover up the workplace harassment and stop me from seeking evidence to defend myself on the charge of misconduct) also terminated all my official duties - which included the work that I was doing for the Livestock Production Programme of Overseas Development Administration under Ms Christine Okali on gender issues, livestock development and urbanisation upon which the MSc dissertation work is based.
2. The medical certificate that I submitted to the University in the summer of 1998 that Dr Rao of BUPA (Walderslade) provided me with was clear: Severe Depression with Psychotic Features. That was caused by workplace harassment at Natural Resources Institute from which I recovered quickly when at home and this is evident from the fact that I took up various employment over the years to good effect. I am still working today in a job. However, it may be relevant that in 2004 I was captured at Dover by the British State when on asylum travel to France to escape from a court order in my Medway County Court Case ME010463 that even the Queen would not assist me with and subjected to state-persecution in a mental hospital. I was released from that incarceration after 3 months detention because the psychiatrist could not find anything wrong with me. However, I was forcibly put on Respiridone medication of 3 mg per day to this day so that when I employed my right to be informed of the diagnosis and prognosis on me by the National Health Service, Dr Irala wrote that I suffered from 'persistent delusional disorder'. When I reissued asylum proceedings in 2008 as a result of injustices relating to Shell Tribunal proceedings to be considered by the Supreme Court of India I was forcibly taken from home by the Police handcuffed, thrown at the back of the Police van and put into a mental hospital again for another month: again I was released because the doctors could not again find anything wrong with me. I therefore dispute the diagnosis of persistent delusional disorder as being a condition that requires medical treatment. This is because what I do is truth-seeking through truth accommodation. I call it satya-advaita. The official diagnosis and pointless medication represents the utter failure of western science as the condition has had no impairing effect on my ability to work on technical issues in science and development and therefore has no bearing on the late submission of the MSc dissertation that I am proposing.
3. Thus the University of Greenwich decision to harass me and suspend my official duties was solely responsible for the non-submission of the MSc dissertation.
4. My Course Tutor at Wye was Mr Allinson or Mr Atkinson (sorry, my memory fails me on this).
5. Accordingly, I would be grateful if you would now issue your final letter now.
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
On Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 7:09, Linda Nicolaides <L.Nicolaides@greenwich.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Shan,
I presume that you are preparing a case for extenuating circumstances to be submitted to Wye? Certainly evidence of your medical issues will be key to this case.
With regards to the letter from NRI would you provide me with the name and contact details of your supervisor at Wye and the name and contact details of your contact at Wye with regards to your case.
From your e-mail we understand that you need NRI to agree the late award as funders of this programme of work? The information on the medical issues needs to come from your Doctors.
Once we have the details a letter will be prepared for you.
Best regards
Linda
Linda Nicolaides, MPh, FRSPH Principal Scientist Programme Leader, MSc Food Safety and Quality Management (e-learning/Control systems and trade) Co-programme Leader, MSc Food Innovation
From: Shan Panigrahi [shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 04 January 2016 12:45 To: Linda Nicolaides Subject: Re: Document written in old Word5 document
Dear Linda
1. That is a good idea, I mean talking to Andrew. Are there any Livestock Specialists remaining at the Institute after all the changes?
2. I am sure my doctor will be able to provide whatever medical evidence is required by Wye to support my extenuation.
3. Incidentally, I already have a PhD; but had decided that my studies should not end with that so registered for an MSc afterwards.
Hope to hear from you at the earliest.
Shan
University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by guarantee, registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office: Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
Hide original message
On Sunday, 3 January 2016, 10:25, Linda Nicolaides <L.Nicolaides@greenwich.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Shan,
This is good news. I had thought talking to Andrew might be a better approach, however, I have forwarded your mail to him and copied you in so that you are now in contact.
I believe that Wye would also require medical evidence to support your extenuation. Good Luck with your submission and I look forward to celebrate you being awarded a PhD.
Best wishes
Linda
Linda Nicolaides, MPh, FRSPH Principal Scientist Programme Leader, MSc Food Safety and Quality Management (e-learning/Control systems and trade) Co-programme Leader, MSc Food Innovation
From: Shan Panigrahi [shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 02 January 2016 16:33 To: Linda Nicolaides Subject: Re: Document written in old Word5 document
Dear Linda
Do not worry about reading the document as I managed to salvage the full document by copy pasting from the Preview in the email attachment. I have recreated the entire dissertation.
Give me Andrew's email address now please.
Shan
On Saturday, 2 January 2016, 16:07, Linda Nicolaides <L.Nicolaides@greenwich.ac.uk> wrote:
Dear Shan,
I will take the file wit me when I go back to work on Tuesday and see if the IT specialists can open it. I cannot open it on my pc which is running windows 10!!
I will also send you mail to Andrew.
More news next week.
Best wishes
Linda
Linda Nicolaides, MPh, FRSPH Principal Scientist Programme Leader, MSc Food Safety and Quality Management (e-learning/Control systems and trade) Co-programme Leader, MSc Food Innovation
From: Shan Panigrahi [shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 01 January 2016 15:53 To: Linda Nicolaides Subject: Document written in old Word5 document
Dear Linda
As discussed, please see if you can read the attachment document (URBANIS1A.doc) and if possible save it in the 97 or later version of Word and send it back to me
Thanks
Shan
University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by guarantee, registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office: Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
University of Greenwich, a charity and company limited by guarantee, registered in England (reg. no. 986729). Registered office: Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, Greenwich, London SE10 9LS.
Instead of dealing with a straightforward application, here was Linda picked on to pit her wits with me to show that I am suffering from mental illness and so lets give him the right to submit his dissertation late. She made no mention of what I had sent Dr Westby as if she knows not a thing about it. So I had to play along to that. She mentioned a letter will be issued twice so somehow knew of my email to the OIA yesterday or why would she write that? Little did she know that this was warfare on my part to knock the stuffing out of the British for all the suffering that it has put me through. The way to knock the stuffing out of them is to ensure that each and every one of their morons are stuffed to their cubby holes unable to move, while the Blog speaks for itself. I feel that the sledgehammer to knock the shit out of Linda has been delivered now. Any opportunity Linda gives me and I will ask her ‘did you ask the wicked witch of a Queen what she knows about all this?’ I did not copy it to the OIA to make Ms Liddell suffer to the realisation that she is nothing but a State-moron. She has to reply to my last letter for me to work out what battering ought to be delivered to her if she surfaces again.
This chapter-document is not going anywhere now that it’s production and retention as a Word document in my computer has had its desired effect of fishing out a State moron in the shape of Mrs Linda Nicolaides so it is appropriate to file the contents here to concentrate on the book preparation again.
I said to myself ‘just look at these wicked bastards’: nothing was returned by Linda Nicoloaides but a reply then comes from OIA trying to dislodge the proceedings there and kick the complaint into the long grass. My reply was to prod the witch to open up so that I could get an opportunity to deliver my evidence and arguments:
Service complaint (7)
Shan Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk>
To
servicecomplaints
5 January 2016 at 2:55 PM
Dear Sir
1. You have my formal complaint against the University of London who were solely responsible for examining my application for the award of the MSc by examination of the attached dissertation and conducting all the investigations properly and thoroughly before making its decision on whether the MSc should be awarded. These investigations of the University of London were completed and the complaint reported to you.
2. All the way along you have prevaricated in order to deny me my right to have the University of London disciplined.
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
On Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 14:38, servicecomplaints <servicecomplaints@oiahe.org.uk> wrote:
Dear Dr Panigrahi,
Thank you for your email. We do not need to see any correspondence at this stage. If you formally submit a complaint to us once the University’s internal procedures have been completed, you can provide supporting information then.
Kind regards,
Sarah Liddell
Head of Leadership Office
Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education
Second Floor
Abbey Gate
57-75 Kings Road
Reading
RG1 3AB
Tel: 0118 959 9813
Twitter: http://twitter.com/oiahe
·
·
· 1 Attachment
· No preview
MScDissertation .docx
Nothing was received from any source during 6 January 2016 so I prepared this chapter up to this point for blogging on guidance from God.
The following morning (7 January 2016) I blogged the following chapter after due modification having checked with God that it was necessary:
As I did, I picked up a letter from the Legal Ombdusman delivered to our house which had the following content:
Private and Confidential
Case Number: CMP-024216
5 January 2016
Dear Dr Panigrahi
Thank you for your email to the Legal Ombudsman dated 17 December 2015. You have raised a number of queries in your email so we are writing to address your queries in the order that you raised them:
(a) We received an email from you on 23 November 2015 and then two further emails on 27 November 2015. We responded to these by a letter dated 27 November 2015
(b) We have not contacted or informed any solicitor or law firm about your communications or contacts with us.
(c) As explained above, we received your initial email on 23 November 2015 and two further emails on 27 November 2015. We responded to these by a letter dated 27 November 2015. We are an impartial and independent organization so we do not act for, or represent, Hodge Jones & Allen or any other lawyer or law firm. Therefore, we cannot speak on their behalf as to why they failed to respond to you.
(d) You mention receiving our letter on 1 December 2015 so we assume you are referring to our letter dated 27 November 2015. The letter was drafted and sent to you on the same day i.e. 27 November 2015 after having examined the contents of your emails dated 23 November 2015 and 27 November 2015. The letter explained the process you would have to follow before we are able to get involved. We did not specify the name of the solicitors because we were unsure as to which law firm you were looking to complain about – something we explained in our email to you dated 17 December 2015.
(e) We have not received or been made aware of such an email.
(f) We responded to your email of 1 December 2015 on 17 December 2015. If you refer to our email of 17 December 2015, it clearly makes reference to your email of 1 December 2015.
(g) and (h) As explained in part (c) we do not act for, or represent, any lawyer or law firm and, therefore, cannot comment on their actions.
We hope the above information answers the queries that you have raised.
If you would still like to continue in making a complaint to us about a lawyer or law firm that provided a legal service to you then please call us on 0300 555 0333 so that we can capture the information we need and make a proper assessment of your complaint. Alternatively, please refer to our email of 17 December 2015 and fill in the complaint form that was enclosed.
Thank you for contacting the Legal Ombudsman.
Yours sincerely
(Signed - undecipherable)
Assessment Centre
Legal Ombudsman
Tel 0300 555 0333
This letter ignored the contents of my 18 December 2015 email that I sent to Hodge Jones and Allen and the Legal Ombudsman simultaneously as a single document and made no mention of Fosters Law and ELS Legal solicitors. It pretends that nothing is lodged against these solicitors at the Legal Ombudsman yet. It was therefore seemingly a letter to defend itself in the private prosecution lodged at Maidstone Magistrates Court. I did not comment on it nor did I write to Mr Malcolm Dodds concerning that and waited till late afternoon to see if I would receive any communication from Mr Dodds so as to put my arguments into the consideration of the Court in response. Since nothing arrived from anywhere I stuck to my principle of satya-advaita of having the last word and replied with the following email:
Case No CMP-024216
Shan Panigrahi <shanpanigrahi@yahoo.co.uk>
To Enquiries
7 January 2016 at 3:37 PM
To
Assessment Centre
Legal Ombudsman
7 January 2016
Dear Sir
1. Thank you for your letter dated 5 January 2016 sent in the post that I have received today.
2. I wish to clarify that the 8-week period that the three solicitor firms in my complaint lodged with you have under your Case No CMP-024216 are different because of the dates on which their help was requested, as follows:
Hodge Jones and Allen - 19 November 2015
ELS Legal - 28 November 2015
Fosters Law - 18 December 2015
3. Would you require three separate complaint forms to be submitted within this Case Number, or just one Complaint form?
Yours sincerely
Dr Shantanu Panigrahi
3 Hoath Lane
Wigmore
Gillingham
Kent ME8 0SL
There were no replies or any other communications from any party or institution that afternoon or during Friday, 8 January 2016. By Saturday morning too there had been no comments on the two latest blogposts posted.
Yorumlar