Proceedings of the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly assembled after the First General Election under Sovereign Democratic Republican Constitution of India.
The Assembly met at 10 A.M. on Monday, the 4th December, 1972 in the Assembly Chamber, Shillong with the Hon'ble Speaker in the Chair.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

STARRED QUESTIONS

( To which oral replies were given )

Opening of licensed Bars in the Shillong Town

Shri Jor Manick Syiem asked :

*3. Will the Minister incharge of Excise be pleased to state -

  (a) Whether the Government have taken any decision for opening of licensed Bars in the Shillong town so as to check illegal sale in the private houses or in the tea shops of the town?
  (b) If so, the steps taken so far?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister incharge, Excise) replied :

3. (a) and (b) - The matter is under consideration of the Government.

Shri Jor Manick Syiem ( Mylliem S.T.) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether the Government has formulated any policy as to how to check or stop this illicit sale of liquor in the town?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister incharge, Excise) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the matter is under consideration of the Government. In fact we are now having consultation with the representatives of various districts and especially with the hon. Members of this House on the policy in the matter.

Mr. Speaker :- Starred Question No. 4.

Illicit sale of Liquor and Gambling in the Upper Shillong area

Shri Jor Manick Syiem asked :-

*4. Will the Minister incharge, Excise be pleased to state - 

  (a) Whether any suitable action has been taken to stop illicit sale of Liquor and Gambling in the Upper Shillong area from the 4th mile to the 7th mile on the Shillong-Tamabil Road?
  (b) If so, how many cases were sent up since January, 1972 till to date?
  (c) Whether Government is also aware that illicit sale of liquor are still rampant or rather on the increase in the Shillong town and in the other part of the District?
  (d) If so, the steps taken to stop such illicit sales by the Government?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister incharge, Excise) replied : 

4. (a) -Yes.
  (b) -Twenty.
  (c) & (d) -The Government are seized of the problem and measures to be taken are under the active consideration of the Government?

Shri Jor Manick Syiem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether the Government is aware that the Police instead of trying to raid or detect the Excise offences in the Upper Shillong Farm they rather went in the morning and enquired whether the people were there selling liquor?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister incharge, Excise) :- The Government is not aware.

Mr. Speaker :- Starred Question No. 5.

Meghalaya Public Service Commission

Shri Nimosh Sangma asked :

*5. Will the Chief Minister be pleased to state -

  (a) Whether the Meghalaya Public Service Commission has started functioning?
  (b) If so, since when?
  (c) Whether there is any examination centre for recruitment by the Meghalaya Public Service Commission at Tura?
  (d) If not, why not?

Capt. Williamson A. Sangma (Chief Minister) replied :

5. (a) -Yes.
  (b) -The Commission has been constituted with effect from 14th September 1972.
  (c) & (d) -The question of location of different centres for holding examinations by the Commission is for the Commission to decide. However, the matter is being referred to the Commission.

Mr. Speaker :- Starred Question No.6 (not put Member being absent.) Let us pass on to Unstarred Questions.

Unstarred Questions

( To which replies were laid on the Table )

Commendable scheme for Land Reclamation, Irrigation and Terracing in the
northern part of Garo Hills

Shri Prittington Sangma asked : 

11. Will the Minister incharge, Agriculture be pleased to state -

  (a) What are the reasons that Government has not taken up any commendable scheme for land reclamation, irrigation and terracing in the northern part of Garo Hills during the last two years?
  (b) What Horticulture Development scheme do Government propose take and where?
  (c) Whether Government propose to take up the scheme of setting up of Government Seed Farm and Nurseries at Dilma?
  (d) Whether it is a fact that the Nokma has already donated about 50 acres of arable land for setting a Government Seed Farm at Nurseries at Dilma?
  (e) Whether there were demands from the public for Dambu-Rongjeng T.D. Block for coconut seedlings if so, how many coconut seedlings have been supplied to Dambo-Rongjeng T.D. Block by the Government during 1971-72?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) replied :

11. (a) -Government has taken up schemes within its resources for land reclamation, irrigation and terracing in the northern part of Garo Hills during the last two years, for example -
    1. Land reclamation .....     ......    .......    .......    ........    ....... 1,093 acres
    2. Terracing         ........    .........    .......    .......    .......    .......  686 acres
  For irrigation in spite of the handicap of technical staff, irrigation projects at Koksi, Abol, Atok, Dongrang, Menadoba, Bamil, Rongchek Gandual, Tongrem, Bangbong and Dilma have been taken up. Similar irrigation work at Songsak Block in the villages of Achengbok, Domba, Agin, Damalgiri, Bolongiri, Chidengiri and Rongdol have been taken up in the last two years.
  (b) -Horticulture schemes proposed to be taken up are -
    (1) Setting up of a temperate Horticulture Research Station at Upper Shillong.
    (2) Setting up of a Sub-Tropical Research Station in the Garo Hills District.
    (3) Setting up of a Sub-Tropical Research Station in the Khasi Hills District.
    (4) Rehabilitation of the Citrus Industry.
  (c) -The matter is under consideration of Government.
  (d) -The Nokma has donated about 35 acres of land.
  (e) -No special demand for coconut seedlings was made. However under regular scheme 50 seedlings were supplied.

Shri Prittington Sangma ( Kharkutta S.T. ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether the schemes are taken up by the C.D. Blocks or by the Agriculture Department?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, some of them are done by the C.D. Blocks and some by the Agriculture Department.

Shri Sibendra Narayan Koch ( Mendipathar ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether the lands so reclaimed are useful for cultivation?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Some of them are cultivable.

Shri Sibendra Narayan Koch :- What is the percentage of cultivable lands?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, for that matter I want notice.

Shri M. Reidson Momin ( Dadenggiri S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether it is a fact that no sanction has been given for the irrigation scheme in Garo Hills during the current year?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, during the current year no sanction has been granted for any district.

Mr. Speaker :- Now Unstarred Question No. 12.

The number of Agriculturists in Garo Hills

Shri Elwin Sangma asked :

Will the Minister incharge of Agriculture be pleased to state -

  (a) The number of Agriculturists in Garo Hills enjoying wet cultivation and dry or jhum cultivation?
  (b) The area covered by each of wet and jhum cultivation?
  (c) The Agricultural output by each of the wet and jhum cultivation received during 1971-72 and expect to receive during 1972-73?
  (d) Whether the food grains produced in Garo Hills is sufficient for the entire population of the District?
 

(e) If not, how Government propose to meet the deficiency?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) replied :

12.

(a) -According to a study conducted by the Assam Government published in 1969, 67 per cent of the total tribal population was dependent on jhuming in Garo Hills. According to 1971 census about 1,41,664 persons ( male and female ) were cultivators and 10,396 persons were recorded as agricultural labourers.

        Agricultural Census is in progress and the actual details will come out after its completion.

 
 
 
  (b) -Roughly, every year 70,000 acres are brought under jhum cultivation and 44,200 acres under wet cultivation.
  (c) -In jhum fields, mixed cropping like paddy, vegetables, maize, cotton, etc., is done. Out-put of jhum paddy is 5 to 7 quintals per hectare and that of transplanted paddy sali ( wet cultivation ) is from 8 to 10 quintals per hectare.
  (d) -No.
  (e) -The deficit is met from the neighbouring areas.

Shri H. Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Whether it is a fact that the wet cultivation is a permanent cultivation?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, wet cultivation is a permanent cultivation.

Shri H. Hadem :- May we know what is the total acreage under wet cultivation uptil now?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- It has been replied that roughly, every year 7,000 acres are brought under jhum cultivation and 44,200 acres under wet cultivation.

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to know what is the total acreage of lands that have been brought under wet cultivation uptil now?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- In that case we need a grammer pundit.

( Loud laughter )

Mr. Speaker :-  From the reply it appears that uptil now 44,200 acres are brought under wet cultivation. So, I think the word 'every year' should be substituted by 'uptil now'. I hope you do not mind for this correction.

Shri H.Hadem :- So no grammar pundit is necessary.

(laughter)

Mr. Speaker :- Now let us pass on to unstarred question No. 13.

Government servants serving in Jaintia Hills

Shri Lewis Bareh asked :

13. Will the Minister of Finance be pleased to state - 

  (a) Whether it is a fact that Government servants serving in Jaintia Hills are not entitled to draw Winter Allowance?
  (b) If so, the reasons thereof?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance )  replied :

13. (a) -Government servants serving in Jaintia Hills are entitled to draw Winter Allowance at the rate of 10 per cent of pay subject to a minimum of Rs.10 per month in each case with marginal adjustment at Rs.638 per month, provided their place of postings is at an altitude of 3,000 ft. or more above Mean Sea Level (M.S.L.)
 
 
  (b) Does not arise.

Mr. Speaker :- Unstarred Question No. 14.

Construction of Dam in Jaintia Hills

Shri Onward Leyswell Nongtdu asked :

14. Will the Minister incharge of Agriculture be pleased to state - 

  (a) Whether the Government proposed to construct a Dam over Khalang river in the Saipung area, Jaintia Hills District for Agriculture purposes?
  (b) If so, when shall it be started?
  (c) The area to be benefited by it?
  (d) Whether Government is aware of the fact that no assistance has been provided to the agriculturists in Jowai District who suffered losses of paddy crops during the last summer due to the damages caused by heavy rainfall?
  (e) If so, why not?
  (f) Whether Government is aware of the fact that many agriculturists lost their jhum cultivation in Jaintia Hills this year due to the early coming of the monsoon?
  (g) If so, what Government propose to help the affected agriculturists ?
  (h) Whether Government proposed to construct new Dams in Jaintia Hills for the purpose of agriculture?
  (i) If so, what are those Dams ?
  (j) If not, why not?
  (k) Whether Government proposed to help and encourage the cultivators who depend mostly on jhum cultivation to apply other methods of cultivation, e.g., cultivation of potatoes, etc. ?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) replied :

14. (a) -Yes.
  (b) -Survey and investigation are in progress. After collection of Hydrological data and Geological study of earth and after finalisation of its feasibility, it will be taken up.
  (c) -200 acres.
  (d), (e), (f) and (g) -Yes, and the matter is being enquired and processed.
  (h) -Yes.
  (i)  -1. Umsallang Irrigation Scheme.  2. Kwai Valley Irrigation Schemes.
  (j)  -Does not arise.
  (k) -Every possible steps are being taken by the Agriculture Department and Block Agencies to encourage cultivators to take to other methods of cultivation like growing potatoes and sub-soil mulching in lieu of the present method.

Mr. Speaker :- Unstarred Question No. 15.

Removal of the Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Nongstoin Division 

Shri Raisen Mawsor asked :

15. Will the Minister incharge of P.W.D. (R. & B.) be pleased to state - 

  (a) Whether it is a fact that on 19th August 1972 there was a public demonstration before the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department at Nongbah village where the public demanded removal of the Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Nongstoin Division from Nongstoin Division immediately?
  (b) If so, what action Government propose to take in the matter?
  (c) Whether it is a fact that there was a proposal from Government to transfer the above Executive Engineer from Nongstoin ?

Shri G.S. Marak [ Minister of State, P.W.D. ( R. & B. )] replied :

15. (a) -Yes.
  (b) -The matter is under examination of the Government.
  (c) -No.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :- Whether the Government has set up any Enquiry Commission for that matter.

Shri G.S. Marak [ Minister of State, P.W.D.] :- Yes.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :-  Have the Government received any report from that Enquiry Commission ?

Shri G.S. Marak [ Minister of State, P.W.D.] :- The Government has received a report but no decision has been taken yet.

Shri Sibendra Narayan Koch ( Mendipathar ) :-  How long will it take for the Government to take a decision ?

Shri G.S. Marak [ Minister of State, P.W.D. ] :- I cannot say.

Mr. Speaker :- Unstarred Question No. 16.

Setting up of the Heads of Departments at Tura

Shri Pleander Gare Momin asked :

16. Will the Chief Minister be pleased to state -

  (a) Whether it is a fact that Government propose to set up some of the Heads of Departments at Tura in Garo Hills?
  (b) If so, what are those Departments and when are they going to be set up ?

Shri Williamson A. Sangma ( Chief Minister )  replied :

16. (a) -There is no proposal at present to set up any Heads of Departments office at Tura.
  (b) -Does not arise.

Mr. Speaker :- Now let us pass on to item no.2 - Demands for Grants. The Minister incharge of Revenue to move Grant No.1.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Revenue ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.5,942 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head - "9 - Land Revenue".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received a Cut Motion from Shri H.S. Lyngdoh. Since he is absent, I will put the main question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of of Rs.5,942 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head - "9 - Land Revenue".

        The Motion is carried. The grant is passed.

Mr. Speaker :- Demand No. 2, to be moved by Mr. B.B. Lyngdoh, Minister, Finance, on behalf of the Chief Minister.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.56,390 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head - "18 - Parliament, State/Union Territory Legislature - C - Election".

Mr. Speaker :- The demand is moved. I have received a Cut Motion from Mr. Humphrey Hadem and Mr. H.E. Pohshna. Will Mr. Hadem move his Cut Motion?

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.56,390, under Supplementary Demand No. 2, Major head "18 - Parliament, State/Union Territory Legislature - C - Elections", at page 2 of the List of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1, i.e., the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.56,390 do stand reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Speaker :- Cut Motion moved.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, from the explanatory notes we find that the total amount is meant for meeting the expenditure on pay of officers, staff and contingencies, etc., of the three District Election Officers at Shillong, Jowai and Tura.

        Mr. Speaker, Sir, keeping of a permanent office and  staff would necessarily mean that the electoral rolls and other election matters would be kept up to date. But, Sir, it was found that it was not so because even if persons who have by this year attained the age of 21 years, their names could not be enrolled as voters. Since this office is functioning for routine matters and not for public interest, I do not see any reason why there should be permanent staff. As such, I move that the grant be reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Speaker :- Anybody would like to take part, Mr. Pohshna?

Shri H. E. Pohshna ( Nongtalang S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in supporting the Cut Motion, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to one very very important point. From the public point of view and in so far as the Election Office of Jowai is concerned, I do not know on whose recommendation, the site has been selected although it is a temporary office. Many people of the villages do not know where this Election Office is. Therefore, it is for the convenience of the people of Jaintia Hills that the Election Office be situated in a prominent place. Sir, while supporting the Cut Motion moved by the hon'ble Mover, I would like to point out regarding the electoral rolls. Although much discussion on the subject has taken place, yet as we have not got the proceedings of the last session we have to say the same thing. Therefore, we have again to remind the Government that the preparation of the electoral rolls which has been neglected by the Department should be done in right earnest. With these few words, I support the Cut Motion.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, in supporting the Cut Motion, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to the fact that not only in Jaintia Hills but the same thing happened here in Khasi Hills also during the last two elections. Sir, there were more than half of the population of some particular villages who could not cast their votes because their names were not included in the electoral rolls. I remember some time in 1971, the Government has appointed Enumerators and these Enumerators have gone out to different villages to enroll the people whose names have not been registered in the electoral rolls. And if I remember aright, these Enumerators have distributed the forms in which there were instructions that when they go for voting they have to produce their identity cards. In the last elections, the people from the villages were going to the polling stations along with these identity cards which they have collected from the Enumerators. But surprisingly enough, these people could not cast their votes because their names were not registered in the electoral rolls.

Mr. Speaker :- May I draw the attention of all the hon'ble Members that in this particular respect, the head of expenditure which the House is discussing is only an additional amount which is urgently required to meet the necessary expenditure of pay of officers, etc. It does not say about the expenditure incurred on payment of Enumerators and the publication of the electoral rolls and other matters. That perhaps might have been included in the main Budget.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Aright, Sir. The aim and object of the supplementary demand is for the pay of the regular staff..... .....

Mr. Speaker :- Only the pay of officers.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- I do not know. But as already pointed out by Mr. Hadem, when we have the  regular staff I do not see any difficulty why the Government is not in a position to enroll the people as voters. What the officers are doing if they are not doing their duty even only to register the names of the persons? So, Sir, I would like to press the Government to see that in the next elections no one who is eligible for voting should be excluded from the electoral rolls and those who have applied must be registered accordingly. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker :- May I request the Minister to reply?

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the question of the electoral rolls, we have had the experience and the understanding of the human material that it requires both the officers and staff and also the public leaders and the public for complete co-operation to make a success in having the people enrolled completely from year to year. So, on this question we would very much from the Government side try to take all possible steps to augment the number and efficiency of  the Enumerators. But at the same time, we would also appeal to the hon. Members of the House and also leaders of the public to take interest in collecting and submitting the names of the people who are from year to year attaining maturity to be enrolled. This will go a long way in solving this chronic problem that has been going on in our hills for so many years so far as enrolment is concerned. For 1971, the Election Commission has decided to have an intensive enrolment but because of the Bangladesh question in the border States which created implications, this intensive enrolment could not be taken up. However, the Election Commission will again take up this question of intensive enrolment, and in this matter, the Government will do their best to improve the number and quality of enumeration. At the same time the public leaders and members may also play their effective role in this connection. On the question of Jowai Election Office, which  the hon. Member has mentioned it is only a rented temporary house. In any case, we will take up the question with the Deputy Commissioner and see how the situation can be improved.

        Now, Mr. Mawlot raised the question to which I have already replied. So, in view of all this, I would request the hon. Members to withdraw their cut motion.

Shri H. Hadem :- Sir, there is only one point which was not clarified and that is, that the people who had attained the age of maturity had applied for enrolment. But that was ruled out and inclusion of their names could not be made.

Mr. Speaker :- Whether those who have attained the age of 21 applied for enrolment?

Shri H. Hadem :- They have applied, Sir.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Now enrolment has always received the consideration of the Election Commission. Of course, every year it is open for any member to apply for enrolment . 

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I do not know anywhere, whether in the Khasi Hills or in the Garo Hills. But in the Jaintia Hills they would not accept or take up the matter.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :-  But I am replying for the Assembly.

Shri H. Hadem :- Sir, there is no separate enrolment for the District Council. According to Rule 28 of the Constitution of the District Council it is said that we have the same electoral rolls. Anyway, this matter seems to be pursued by the Government and we hope that by next year everything will be alright. So, Sir, I withdraw the cut Motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Has the hon. Member leave of the House to withdraw his cut motion?

( Voices ---'Yes')

        Now I put the main question. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.56,390 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973, for  the administration of the head "18 - Parliament, State/Union Territory Legislature - C - Elections".

        The Motion is carried. The demand is passed.

        May I now request the Hon. Minister, Finance to move Grant No.3 on behalf of the Chief Minister.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg, Sir, to move that an additional amount of Rs.44,961, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of the payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "19-General Administration - III - Commissioner and District Administration".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Since there is no cut motion I put the question before the House and the question is that an additional amount of Rs.44,961, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of the payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "19-General Administration - III - Commissioner and District head -Administration". 

        The Motion is carried and the demand is passed.

        May I now request the Finance Minister to move Grant No. 4.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg, Sir, to move that an additional amount of Rs.12,500, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of the payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "26-Miscellaneous Departments - I - National Savings Organisation".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Since there is no cut motion, I put the question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.12,500, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of the payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "26-Miscellaneous Departments - I - National Savings Organisation".

        The Motion is carried and the demand is passed.

        I now request the Minister incharge of Education to move Grant No. 5 on behalf of the Chief Minister.

Shri D.D. Pugh ( Minister of State, Education ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg, Sir, to move that an additional amount of Rs.5,64,544, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of the payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "28 - Education".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received cut motions from three hon. Members, Shri Hadem, Shri Kharbuli and Shri Pohshna. May I now request any one of them to move the cut motion.

Shri H. Hadem (Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.5,64,544 under the Supplementary Demand No. 5 Major Head "28 - Education" at page 6 of the List of Supplementary Demand be reduced to Re.1, i.e., the amount of the whole supplementary demand of Rs.5,64,544 do stand reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Speaker :- Cut motion moved.

*Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise only one point which, according to me, is a fact. In the Explanatory Notes, No.2, we find that Rs.35,000 is required for holding training camps and the final Mass Youth Rally to be staged in the State Capital, Shillong, on 17th November, 1972, as part of the celebration of 25th Independence Jayanti as it was not provided in the Budget as no prior information was received for making provision in the Budget for holding the Mass Youth Rally. It so happened, Sir, that I attended the Rules Committee held on 17th November, 1972, here in Shillong and when I came to Shillong I did not find that this Mass Youth rally had been held. So, Sir this is not a correct position and since the Rally was not held I do not think that any expenditure had to be incurred and so, I should think that one rupee would be sufficient ( laughter ) ( interruption )...... It was specifically mentioned here 17th November, 1972, and even if it were 1971, the month of November has already gone. As such, I want to move that Re.1 will be sufficient for this purpose.

Shri H. E. Pohshna ( Nongtalang S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in supporting the cut motion I would like to say a few words on the Explanatory Notes. This is only a clarification about those primary school teachers who have not been paid up till now. If they have not been paid they should have been put to great difficulty. Therefore, regarding the first portion I just want a clarification from the Education Minister : whether these school teachers have been paid or not . Regarding the second portion, Sir, sometimes I have to differ with the hon. Member who moved the motion because the amount required i.e., Rs.35,000 - for the Mass Youth Rally is in the State Capital. Perhaps he has only attended the Rules Committee and there was a Youth Rally but not in the compound of this State Assembly. If the Education Minister can tell us where this Mass Youth Rally had been held I think the amount may remain there. But if it is a fact that the Rally had not been held I do say that this is very bad for the Government to bring this motion and to grant the amount for nothing; it is a very very serious matter. If the Rally was not held why this demand should have come before the House for no purpose. With these few words, Sir, I support the cut motion. 

Shri Upstar Kharbuli ( Malki ) :- In supporting the Cut Motion, my intention is also to point out to this Government through you, Sir, that this explanatory Note No. 2 is wrong, and in a sense it is true that the mass rally was not held as had been said by my friend.

Mr. Speaker :- May I request the Minister to reply.

*Shri D.D. Pugh ( Minister of State, Education ) :- It is a fact that the mass rally was scheduled to be held on 17th November and in fact all preparations had been made but it could not be held because of the tension that existed in the State capital round about that time and because of recommendation of the Police Department who had advised not to conduct mass youth rally. Therefore, the Department had to decide to defer it to the month of March. On the clarification sought by the hon. Member, Shri Pohshna, whether the Lower Primary school teachers have been paid, I would only like to inform him, through you, Mr. Speaker, Sir, that as stated in the explanatory  notes, the amounts have already been taken as advance from the contingency fund and these teachers have been paid. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I believe that I have replied and given the clarification to the satisfaction of the hon. Members who have moved this cut motion, through you. I would request them to kindly withdraw the cut motion. There is one point that Shri Pohshna raised when he said that the youth rally was to be held on 17th November and that the Department is making a demand only today. Some amount had already been spent from the Contingency Fund for making preparation and we have to regularise it.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Hadem, Mr. Pohshna and Mr. Upstar Kharbuli will you kindly withdraw your cut motion.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- When the amount has already been spent for the youth Rally to be held on 17th November, 1972, I do not understand why it was not held at all during 1972.

Mr. Speaker :- The Financial Rule is quite regular. That is why in every Budget Session this House would always vote for a big amount to be advanced from the Contingency Fund. It is from the Contingency Fund that any Department would take an advance.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- What I mean to say is this. Specifically it has been mentioned for a specific purpose. Now, the approval of the House has been sought for that particular thing. Whether any correction is necessary.

Mr. Speaker :- The Minister of State had already stated that the youth rally was scheduled to be held on the 17th November but due to the tension in the State Capital on that date it had to be deferred  to March, 1973. But in spite of that, the rally was not held. But at least a part of the amount might have been spent for making preparation, but not the whole lot. Are you satisfied?

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- One more clarification then we shall consider to withdraw the cut motion. Here an amount of Rs.35,000/- has already been spent.

Mr. Speaker :- That is part of the amount.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- An amount of Rs.35,000 by taking an advance from the Contingency Fund !

Mr. Speaker :- The amount is still with the Department.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- I thought they would come again with supplementary demand to compensate this Rs.35,000 which they have spent for nothing. I think we can withdraw the cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :-  Do I have the sense of the House that the cut motion be withdrawn. (Voices : yes, yes)

        Now, I put the question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.5.64,544 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973, for the administration of the Head "28 - Education ".

        (The Motion was carried and demand passed.)

Mr. Speaker :- I now request the Minister of State incharge of P.W.D. to move demand No. 6.

Shri Grohon Singh Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.49,99,848, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "30 - Public Health - II - Public Health Engineering, etc.".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. But I have received a Cut Motion from Shri Rowell Lyngdoh, Shri Humphrey Hadem and Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw. Any one of them may move the Cut Motion.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to move that the total provision of Rs.49,99,848 under Supplementary Demand No.6, Major Head - 30 - Public Health - II - Engineering, etc." at page 7 of the List of Supplementary demands be reduced to Re.1.00, i.e., the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.49,99,848 do stand reduced to Re.1.00.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, we might appear to be the enemies of the Public in opposing a demand of about 50 lakhs of rupees for Public Health purposes. As a matter of fact, at pages 8 and 9 of the list of Supplementary Demands, details of 12 Water Supply Schemes for the three districts of the State have been enumerated. We actually have no grudge against spending of money provided money is actually spent for Water Supply Schemes. But one of the reasons why I move this Cut Motion is because of the tremendous amount of corruption in this particular Department. I have given a copy of the Inspection Report to the Secretary for placing it on the Table of this House relating to the accounts of the Public Health Executive Engineer, Hills Division, Shillong for a period from July, 1970 to September, 1971. This is the Audit Report Mr. Speaker, Sir, containing 25 pages and out of which 23 pages are the audit objections for the irregularities of the amount and some audit certificates for such irregularities. This is a black report containing black activities of this Department. Mr. Speaker, Sir, in this Report we have got such things as 'purchase of a large stock of materials' without actual requirements for the same amounting to Rs.14 lakhs and then we have got a long list of water supply schemes.

Mr. Speaker :- Before you proceed further, may I know the source from where you get this report, so that the House may know the authenticity of the document.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- I have received by post a document and made comparison myself. It is only a copy and not the original document. It was sent anonymously by post to me and on checking up I found that it is a correct copy.

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister incharge of Agriculture, etc. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I object that anonymous thing is brought to the House.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is not anonymous, it is the Inspection Report by which our Government can check up.

Mr. Speaker :- I think you should remember that the House is a responsible House which can take information only from reliable and official sources. But at the same time, even if a document is supposed to be a true copy of the report, I think it is not for this House to accept it as an official report unless you receive an official copy.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, nobody would give an official report and in a sense it is not yet time for publication of this report. But as watch-dogs of democracy and for the good administration of our State, it is our duty sometimes to bring to the knowledge of the House some irregularities in the functioning of Government Departments because we have to protect our own sources in case of a revenge or penalties against the persons who supply us the information on the terrible amount of corruption that is going on in some of these departments.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Majaw, you can say tat you learn these things from reliable sources but we cannot accept this document as official. So unless we receive the official copy we cannot accept it.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Yes, Mr. Speaker, Sir, but since I have compared this and taken pains to compare, I can give a certificate and present it to the House.

Mr. Speaker :- May I know from the Minister incharge whether you have received the Inspection Report against the Public Health Engineering Department, Hills Division or whether you have disclosed it to any other sources without informing the House.

Shri Grohon Singh Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have not received any such report.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have personally written a letter to the Chief Minister at the beginning of this Session enclosing a copy of the report. Of course the Chief Minister today is absent, but I have got a copy of my letter to the Chief Minister which I wrote right at the beginning of the Session and also there are other documents to show that Government has entered into a lot of correspondence on this Inspection Report.

Mr. Speaker :- Prof. Majaw, I have given a ruling that unless and until this document is placed officially on the table of the House, we cannot take it as an authentic report.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I humbly submit to your ruling. Therefore, from my own source, I can say that from the register for the maintenance of works for the Public Health Engineering Department there are references to the expenditure involved for various water supply schemes. One such scheme is for Cherrapunjee of which a sum of Rs.3,96,000 was earmarked. This is very excellent water supply scheme. So also in Nongbah, Rs.3,92,000, in Mawsynram Rs.1,10,000 were given for their respective water supply scheme. Sir, it is really very interesting to see that the money is spent for the purpose of water supply schemes only. But according to the report of the Audit, there was very irregular maintenance of register of work and there are no details of money being spent. The total amount of Rs.22 lakhs every year was not shown in detail and how this money was spent is not known in detail. So, I do not see why we should approve of this supplementary demand for about Rs.50,000. The Minister incharge has pointed out that the Central Government was involved in this 50 lakhs of rupees. But the question is that this money goes into wrong places. It will, of course, flow like water every year. So this Department cannot control money and it cannot spend properly. There are irregularities of purchases as is seen from the list of purchases and most of these purchases were made only from Marwaris. Therefore, we are asking the Minister incharge to give us his explanation.

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh ( Mawkyrwat S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in supporting the Cut Motion moved by the hon. Member from Mawhati and also in supporting the points which have been correctly pointed out by him, I feel that a colossal amount of money has been spent on this department. Just in the year 1971-72 an amount of Rs.81,84,000 was earmarked for this department and again, in the last budget session, Rs.63,00,000 were voted and again, this time Government is asking for another Rs.50,00,000. As has been pointed out already, this entire amount is meant to give water to the people and also some sanitations. But, Sir, we don't understand what is the criterion for selection of these Water Supply Schemes. As is seen from the schedule at page 8 we find that the Water Supply Schemes had been selected mostly on political consideration rather than on the actual needs of the people. I know, Sir, in few of these schemes, water supply is already there; construction has been done earlier by some Government Departments of Assam. I know also that in few villages appearing in this Schedule there are only 40 or 45 houses. These schemes are also concentrated in some particular area instead of distributing the water in a proper way so as to cater to the needs of the people in the State. Therefore, Sir, looking from this angle I find partiality everywhere and if we compare the needs of water in the water scarcity areas, particularly in the Bhoi area and the War area of this district with those which have been provided with Water Supply Schemes, we find that these people are rather experiencing greater difficulties. That is why I said that the criterion for selection of those Water Supply Schemes, is based mostly on political consideration. Sir, it is not only the people of those areas who have demanded water supply for their particular villages but many others in other constituencies which faces water scarcity like Phlangdiloin Constituency Mawkyrwat Constituency, Nongspung, Nongpoh and Mawhati Constituency have been praying for such schemes. Many of the people used to come down to Shillong to meet the Public Health Engineers. But when even they asked whether their applications had been processed, they say 'no' we don't have staff or Engineers to make survey or to prepare estimate. This shows that the Government must have directed the Department not to listen to any request for water supply in those area where I have mentioned. Thus, the Government has not paid any attention and did not see to the water problem of the people of those areas mentioned. Moreover the performance of this Department is poor. For example, the Mawlai Water Supply Scheme has been implemented and construction has been going on for at least two years now but it has not been completed or commissioned. Twice or thrice information was given to the people by the department, saying that they will open on so and so day but no water has been received by them till now. Therefore, Sir, I do not know what is the need of having this Scheme if the Government cannot even complete it for such a long time of two or three years. And what is the use of having many new schemes and projects if they are not able to complete even one. This delay in completing the Water Supply Schemes has put the people into lot of difficulties and therefore, I would request the Government that at least those schemes which have been undertaken earlier, should be completed immediately so that the people could enjoy the most needed water which they have anticipated for a long time. I would also request the Government to pay proper attention to those people in the most acute scarcity areas of the State by supplying them drinking water, especially, in the War area and Bhoi area and villages in Mawkyrwat Constituency which fall in the War area, and also in other constituencies. Sir, I know that this amount of Rs.50,00,000 was granted by the Central Government under the accelerated programme Rural water supply and I feel that distribution of these schemes as shown in this Schedule, was not done in a proper way. There should have been many schemes to include few from the western part of this District with this amount. It should have correctly examined in order to avoid concentration of Schemes in any particular Constituency as to where the Government acts mostly on political consideration. With these few words, Sir I resume my seat.

(At this stage the Speaker left the Chamber and the Deputy Speaker took the Chair).

*Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, first of all I would like to get a clarification on the Explanatory Note in the first paragraph. A number of schemes had been approved by the Government of India to be taken up this year by the P.H.E. Wing of the State P.W.D. under the accelerated Programmes of Rural Water Supply Schemes Here, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have seen two words 'P.H.E.' and 'P.W.D.' and I want to know whether the staff of the P.H.E. can be classed as the P.W.D. staff. Secondly, Sir, what I want to point out is about the working of this Department according to which the schemes have been listed now. If we look into the schemes properly we find that there are some schemes which were pending and not to finalised by the Department. It has been found that certain works have not been completed up till now, even though nothing has been mentioned in the present year schemes. This schemes include the Water Supply Schemes of Shangpung, Raliang and Mynso. These scheme, according to our information, have been surveyed and estimated by the staff of the P.H.E. but for which no sanctions have been endorsed by Government. So, Sir, it appears that the working of the Department is very very slow. I do not think that it is necessary to maintain such a department. With these few words, I support the Cut Motion.

Shri Onwardleyswell Nongtdu ( Sutnga S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in supporting the Cut Motion as moved, I want to make some observations. Sir, I hope if or the Minister incharge of the P.W.D. would make a surprise visit to the C.E's office at Shillong, he will find that expensive materials have been purchased but they were being kept somewhere in the office. So, Sir, it would be very interesting to know if someone makes a surprise visit to his office; he would find that a large sum of money is being paid to some firms for purchase of articles which actually, were never received in the office. Mr. Deputy, Speaker, Sir, there is one more thing which is surprising to learn. That one U.D. non-tribal Assistant in the Office of the Chief Engineer, demanded a sum of Rs.500 from one Khasi L.D. Assistant whose promotion is due, and it is alleged that unless the required amount is paid his case for promotion would not be considered by the U.D. incharge of that Branch. So, Sir, I would request the Minister incharge of P.W.D. to look into the matter so that corruption should be done away with in this Department. Sir, with these few words, I support the Cut Motion.

Shri Sibendra N. Koch ( Mendipathar ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, about the corruption and inefficiency of the Department, the less we speak, the better it is. Lakhs of rupees have been spent for Tura Water Supply Schemes but still there is no proper water supply. Moreover the officer posted there are also not helpful. If somebody goes for their assistance, he will have to come back empty-handed and disappointed. The officers, right from the Executive Engineer, - though of course there is no Executive Engineer at present, - but there is one officer holding his charge upto the level of the plumbers are corrupt and nobody can talk to them without giving some money. In this respect, I would like to point out one instance. There are two main pipes which run from Upper Babupara which were installed by the P.W.D. The pipes were just hanging for last several years because the earth below it slipped away due to erosion. I know this very well because the pipes run adjacent to my place. I requested the Public Health Engineering Department on several occasions to look into this and to divert it into a better and more secure place because the land over which the pipes run is sloping. There are big stones over the pipes and at any moment stones are likely to slip and roll down. Thus there is every likelihood of pipes being damage and the people to suffer as a consequence. The Public Health Engineering Department turn a deaf ear for the last three years. I spoke to them verbally and also written to them personally but they did not do anything. Thereafter, after becoming an M.L.A., I wrote a petition and went twice and met the Executive Engineer incharge. On one occasion, the Executive Engineer incharge called one officer and in my presence asked him to attend to it. The Executive Engineer appreciated the danger and the hardship of the consumers. Thereafter several days, weeks and months passed but no action has been taken. And on one Sunday I forgot the exact date a big stone fell down and damaged and disconnected the pipe and the water came out and rolled down and threatened my a retaining wall. So, I had to rush to the District Council and to the Public Health Officer. But everywhere they said that there were no staff because it was Sunday and I had to spend the whole day - not less than 8 hours - on that day and thus the public had to suffer due to the inefficiency and malpractices of the officers of the Public Health Department.

( Voices .............. Shame, Shame. )

        If corruption is not there and had the efficient officer been there, this would not have happened and the work could have been attended to quickly. The Executive Engineer, no doubt appreciated the difficulty and the danger but after that appreciation or such appreciation, they just sit tight and the public has to suffer consequently.

        Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this supplementary demand is not need based but politically motivated. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, from the list and from the schedule it appears that almost all the projects taken up for the places belonging to the Members from the Ruling Party like Mahendraganj Dadenggiri, Rongram and the like. It clearly shows that they think only for the benefit of the areas represented by the Ruling party and no Water Supply Schemes are sanctioned by the Government for the people of those areas which Members from other political parties represent. So, I feel that this House would be doing wrong and injustice to its own people, if this demand is granted. Discrimination is so apparent and we cannot ignore this. With these few words, Sir, I resume my seat.

Shri S.P. Swer ( Sohra S.T. ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, since the hon. Member from Gauhati.............

(Voices ............................. Mawhati ....................laughter ).

Since the hon. Member from Mawhati mentioned about the Water Supply Scheme at Cherrapunjee, I would like to say a few words for the information of the hon. Member and the House. This scheme at Cherrapunjee is no doubt a big scheme and it has been completed. The work there was done by a contractor under the supervision of the Public Health Department. The people are not getting water from this scheme in the area even today. Some of the members have referred to the delay in the implementation of the water supply schemes. I do not claim that I am an expert but at least I have some knowledge of what kind of preliminary works are to be done before taking up a scheme. I find that it is not so easy to take up a scheme because the Engineer has to see first the water source and whether the water is fit for drinking. Some chemical test has also to be carried out and not only that they have also to see whether the water source will be sufficient to cater to the needs of the population existing at present and they have also to think about the increase of population that may come about a few years later. They have to take the increase of population also into consideration and another thing, they have to survey also the water source in the driest season of the year. So there are the things which have to be carried out before taking up any water supply scheme and therefore, naturally it takes time. In selection of schemes also I had some occasions to discuss with the officers of this Department that a big scheme for small population is generally discouraged. The big or small scheme is for greater number of population. That is generally the first consideration before taking up a scheme. So it may happen in some areas of the State that although for years together the people have applied to the Government for a Water Supply Scheme but it never comes. I hope in future as we all know the policy of the Government is to provide good drinking water for each and every village, we will get good drinking water for all villages whether big or small. So with these few words, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I resume my seat.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Cut Motion and I would like to say a few words in this connection. My attention has been drawn by the last Speaker regarding selection of schemes. Over and above what has been said by hon. Member that a lot of corruption in the Department has been noticed during the last 4 or 5 years, there has been discrimination in selecting the schemes and works have been carried out for the benefit of somebody. So Sir, from the schedule on this Supplementary Demand it appears that selection of schemes is done for the interest of some of the hon. Members from the Ruling Party or for the interest of certain contractors. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would also like to point out that in the Schedule itself, in the Jowai areas - I mean the Jaintia Hills District there are 3 schemes in the Khasi Hills District there are 4 schemes and in Garo Hills District there are 5 schemes. Sir, considering this Supplementary Demand over and above what has been provided in the Budget shows that selection of schemes was done not in conformity with the policy of the Government that water should be supplied to the people who are really in need and that there must be proper distribution. Mr. Deputy Speaker Sir,  I would like also to point out that in the Bhoi areas and in the Western Areas of the Khasi Hills District where half of the population of the State are living, not a single scheme of water supply has been selected.

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think it is not fair to say that this additional amount which we have received from the Government of India directly is utilised for water supply. In fact we have water supply scheme in all districts of the State from our own State Plan and even Nongstoin has got water supply from the State Plan. The amount in question has been received recently.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, even in the State Plan I do not see any scheme for those areas. That is why in the last Budget Session on the subject of the water supply we had mentioned through a Cut Motion that scheme should be selected for implementation in the whole of Western area where more than half of the population of the State are living. Investigation in a number of schemes was done by the Assam Government under the 4th Plan and money for the purpose has been provided. A number of schemes have been surveyed but none of them had been selected for implementation. This year is the last year of the Fourth Plan and also the last part of the financial year and the Government has come forward with this Supplementary Demand but nothing has been done with all the schemes already surveyed and investigated. Sir, as the hon. Member said that the policy of the Government is to see for the bigger villagers, I do not see any reason why a small village like Pohkseh should have priority for water supply, if it is not because of the fact that the residence of a certain Minister is situated there?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister has his own personal water supply.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it appears that for supply of drinking water to this small locality, a scheme has been taken up for bringing water from the Umkhen river whereas for other areas of Shillong town, water is being supplied from the same source, i.e.,  Shillong Peak. So, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the selection of schemes is being localised for the interest of somebody of Ruling Party or for the interest of some contractors and the Minister or on the recommendation of some contractors the officers of the Department are given priority to the schemes. Therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to support the Cut Motion that is the amount of the Supplementary Demand be reduced to Re.1.

Shri Blooming Shallam ( Jowai S.T. ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, contrary to what has been stated by my friend from the opposite camp, I would rather to say that I am thankful to the Government as well as the Department concerned for having been able to implement certain water supply schemes. On the basis of what has been stated by my friends from the opposite camp when talking about corruption Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to say this that if I find a man who is corrupted, I will certainly take him first to the Police. I will not tolerate such a person who is corrupted and I will take him to the police and put him in jail for some time so that he may learn a lesson. But just bringing things here I cannot accept this as a correct approach. It only amounts to blaming the Government and Department.

        Secondly, it has been stated by the Mover of the Cut Motion that the policy of the Government is to extend water supply only to those villages or areas where the people are supporting the Ruling Party. This is not correct, in so far as it concerns my district. I have seen three schemes have been taken up and one of them is the Sutnga Water Supply Scheme. It must be remembered Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that the representative of the Sutnga Constituency is Mr. Onwardleyswell Nongtdu who does not belong to the Ruling Party; he is not a man from the Ruling Party.

        ( At this stage the Deputy Speaker vacated the Chair for the Speaker ).

Prof. M.N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- But he is from the Jowai District Council.

Shri B.B. Shallam ( Jowai S.T. ) :- Please ! I am not talking about the Jowai District Council. Interruption should not come in the wrong way. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have to repeat again. My friend, Shri Pohshna is the representative of War Jaintia Constituency. However there are scheme in his Constituency. I must thank the Government and the Department concerned for having taken up the schemes in the Constituency of member who do not belong to the Ruling Party. This is the duty before us as the Ruling Party. Not only that, I would like to say also something about another scheme, Terrain Water Supply Scheme.

Shri H.E. Pohshna ( Nongtalang S.T. ) :- The Schemes have been prepared at the time of the election.

(Laughter )

Shri B.B. Shallam :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, if the hon. Member does not want the scheme the Government can as well withdraw it but I feel that the schemes should be implemented because it will give benefit to the people of that area and not to one member alone.

Mr. Speaker :- Do you suggest that the schemes should be diverted to some other areas?

Shri B.B. Shallam :- No, Mr. Speaker Sir, the schemes remain no matter how much harves the member had against the Ruling Party. We should return good for bad things done to us.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- He appears to be very generous although the reply is to be given by the Minister himself.

Shri B.B. Shallam :- I was trying only to explain my view points on the charge made by the mover of this cut motion so as to remove the wrong reflection in the House that our party is doing something good to its supporters. Otherwise a number of our friends in the Gallery will get the wrong impression. That is why I want to point out.

Prof. M.N. Majaw :- May I point out that under Rule 275 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the House a member shall not while speaking make any reference to the strangers in any of the Galleries.

Mr. Speaker :- He is not making any particular reference to any member in the Galleries.

Shri B.B. Shallam :- I think I am right, Mr. Speaker, Sir. Now I come to the point. I must thank the Government also for having implemented the Water Supply Schemes in Jowai Town. However I would like to inform the Government through you Sir, that inspite of what has been done by the Department there is shortage of water supply. I cannot expect in a number of localities at Jowai Town. Therefore I request the Government to further provide more funds to the Departments so that extension of water supply be made available to the people living there.

Mr. Speaker :- This demand is meant primarily for 12 schemes mentioned in the Schedule not for Jowai or any other places that have already been mentioned in the budget.

Shri B.B. Shallam :- That is why I oppose the Cut Motion. I still maintain that what has been stated by my friends opposite is completely wrong.

Shri S.N. Koch :-  On a point of clarification, Sir.

Mr. Speaker :-  No, you are not allowed to interrupt at this stage. It is only when the Minister has finished his reply that you can seek further clarification because you have already been given a chance earlier while speaking on the Cut Motion. Now you may resume your seat.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, while supporting the Cut Motion I would like to say a few words. Some of the hon. Members from the Ruling Party have got extra benefits from the other schemes beside this.

Mr. Speaker :- I have already ruled out that this demand relates to only 12 schemes and not for any other scheme.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the hon. friends have said about  "concentration of schemes in a particular area of Mr. Pohshna". Actually the schemes were prepared before the last election. Sir, while supporting this cut motion I would request only one thing that our Government will expedite implementation of the schemes.

Mr. Speaker :- So you do not oppose the demand but you want only to draw the attention of the Government to expedite implementation of the schemes.

Shri H.E. Pohshna :-  Why I say that is because these schemes have been pending for the last two years. There are many schemes pending including the Jowai Water Supply Scheme which have not been expedited and as such before I take my seat I support the contention made by some of my friends that most of the Schemes were meant only for the Constituencies of Members belonging to the Ruling Party. It appears that the petitions of the opposition members for the schemes that have been submitted for the past years were not considered.

Mr. Speaker :- What about the Constituencies of the Speaker and Deputy Speaker?

Shri H.E. Pohshna :-  It appears that the Deputy Speaker was also an opposition member during the last term. Therefore his area is not included in the Scheme.

Mr. Speaker :- I would like to remind the Members of the House that whatever Scheme the Government has taken up is not on the basis of political consideration or on the affiliation of the hon. Members to this or that Party. The Government always think in terms of the State as a whole. Now, I request the Minister incharge to reply. 

Shri Grohonsing A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- I rise to explain the position of the Government regarding this Water Supply Scheme as referred to by the hon. Members of this House. The Government realised that this a very important subject. I remember many of  the hon. Members of this House have given good suggestions and advice to implement the Water Supply Scheme in the rural areas during the last Budget Session. Government is studying every suggestion made by the hon. Members during the last Budget Session and is trying its level best to implement whatever schemes that have been approved. Now, regarding this particular Supplementary Demand, Sir, I would request the hon. Members to see very carefully these are the 12 individual schemes out of the approved amount of Rs.50 lakhs from the Government of India for which concurrence of Finance Department has already been obtained. In this 2nd para, it is stated that it is purely a Central Programme with a cent per cent Central assistance and therefore, there will be no financial implication on the State resources. Now, Sir, the Government of India have sanctioned some special financial assistance to certain States; not all of the States in India have received so far during this financial year. Government of India thus suggested to implement a certain amount of money in certain districts. Fortunately, this 50 lakhs sanctioned by the Government of India, - 100 per cent assistance to the State, - is to be spent on this Water Supply Scheme in the Garo Hills District alone. In Assam also they have selected certain districts; likewise other States in India have done the same thing. Now Meghalaya Government after receiving this information have stated the schemes and asked the Department whether this Rs.50 lakhs can be spent during this financial year in the Garo Hills District alone or not. Whether we have sufficient schemes or not. But due to shortage of trained personnel or officers, they had to reply that so far the Department has no ready scheme. Therefore, we had to refer back to the Government of India saying that we cannot spend this amount in one district alone and to allow us therefore, to spend for the State of Meghalaya. Finally, we got the concurrence from the Government of India and they agreed to our proposal. So we had to select these 12 Water Supply Schemes for the entire State of Meghalaya. This is completely out of the Normal Budget. So the hon. Members should not doubt or be hesitant that it will drain out our humble resources. It will not affect at all. This is from the cent per cent Government of India assistance. Now Sir, many hon. Members have suggested and have expressed that in selecting of the Water Supply Schemes for different villages, the Government have done it on political basis or with some political motive. Personally, Sir, ......................

Mr. Speaker :- So far as this is concerned, the Hon'ble Minister must dwell mostly on two points - No.1 - that the total amount is to be granted by this House, otherwise the amount will have to be refunded, and that point has to be explained. No.2 - most of the Members are concerned with the implementation and selection of those schemes that have been finalised.

Shri Grohonsing A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like, for the information of the House, to say that whatever schemes we have taken up and we are implementing one by one, are the schemes of Fourth Five Year Plan which have been selected by the Government of Assam earlier. We are just implementing them. The Government of Meghalaya in selecting those schemes have done it as per list approved by the State Planning Board. I would like to inform the House that while drawing up this programme, Government have given high priority to the villages where there is no water source within a mile or so, and in those places which are mountainous and difficult to get water. Now,  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to reply to all the charges made by the hon. Members. In the beginning, Mr. Prof. Majaw...........

Mr. Speaker :- Prof. Majaw and not Mr. Prof.

( Laughter )

 Shri Grohonsing A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- Prof. Majaw made certain charges against one Executive Engineer of the Public Health Department. This will be looked into. I would like to inform the House on the charges made that proper records are not maintained, etc. These things happened during the emergency period. Since we do not have enough staff and for several other reasons, the irregularities might be there. So this also will be looked into. Mr. Hadem mentioned about the slow implementation of the work of survey and investigation. I would like to inform him that in his Constituency the Raliang Water Supply Scheme - survey and investigation - are in progress and estimates have already been sanctioned and at Mynso, survey and investigation have been completed and the estimate is under preparation . The hon. Member from Sutnga spoke about the Water Supply Scheme at Shangpung. Here survey and investigation have already been completed. For the information of the House, I would like to say that we have taken up in War areas also many schemes. For Water Supply Schemes at Mawkyrwat, Balat, Mawhati and Nongpoh also amounts have been sanctioned, investigation, survey and estimates have been completed and in the case of Mawhati also survey and estimates have been completed. We have taken up many schemes of Water Supply. As the hon. Member from Mawhati has asked .............

Mr. Speaker :- I do not know whether the Minister should reply to all the charges made by all the hon. Members. Actually you must reply only to those charges which have come under this particular Demand.

 Shri G.A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :-  In that case I will reply briefly. The Fourth Plan outlay for water supply and sanitation is Rs.195 lakhs and out of this outlay, an amount of Rs.170 lakhs has been earmarked for Rural Water Supply and Rs.25 lakhs for Urban Water Supply Schemes. This does not include the requirement on account of the Greater Shillong Water Supply Project costing about Rs.3.36 crores which scheme was recently technically cleared by the Ministry of Health and Family Planning, New Delhi. Under the State Plan, an amount of Rs.113.26 lakhs was spent in the first three years leaving a balance of about Rs.81.74 lakhs for the remaining two years. In drawing up the programmes, high priority has been given to the villages having no water source within a radius of one mile and mountainous areas which are highly disadvantageous matters of water supply.

        In the State,  the Rural Water Supply Schemes on completion are handed over to the Village Committees for maintenance. For the bigger Schemes such as Tura, the schemes were handed over to the District Council for maintenance.

        38 Nos. of water supply schemes i.e., both continuing and new schemes have been taken up since 1969-70 and 21 numbers of these schemes have been completed so far in Meghalaya.

        The Government of India has since approved 23 ( twenty three ) numbers of Rural Water Supply schemes amounting to Rs.66.08 lakhs under the Accelerated Programme for implementation during the current years 1972-73 and 1973-74 and more schemes are expected to come after approval. Necessary action has already been taken for execution of these schemes limiting an expenditure to Rs.50.00 lakhs released by the Government of India.

        The expenditure is reimbursable by the Government of India and work on all the schemes as approved by the Government of India and the State Government will be commenced simultaneously otherwise there will be lapse of funds.

        Therefore, as I have said, Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is an additional, supplementary demand which is entirely different from the original budget. Therefore, I would request the hon. Member to withdraw his cut motion.

Shri H. Hadem :-  Just only point on which I want a clarification. In the remarks column page 8 it has been stated that the employee of the P.H.E. are the employees of the P.W.D.

 Shri G.A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the employee of the P.H.E. is under the P.W.D. and from the Executive Engineer level to S.D.O level there is shortage of officers. So sometimes we are to depute personnel from P.W.D. to P.H.E. say for 213 months.

Shri H. Hadem :- Sir, I could not get his point clearly.

Mr. Speaker :- Here we are discussing about the schemes and not employees. I understand, you want to know whether the employees of the PHE are considered as the employees of the P.W.D. Department. But you should have brought it in the form of a Question. Actually it cannot be raised in so far as discussion on the Grant is concerned.

Shri H. Hadem :- Sir, it has been stated in the remarks column that the "Government of India for taking up this year by the P.H.E.". 

Mr. Speaker :-  P.H.E. is the wing of P.W.D.

Shri G.A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :-  Sir, I would like to clarify his question . The Secretary, P.W.D. that is Chief Engineer P.W.D. is responsible for Public Health Engineering in administrative matters but the Executive function is that of  the P.H.E. Chief Engineer.

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh ( Mawkyrwat S.T. ) :- From the reply of the Minister in charge we came to know that 23 Water Supply Schemes would be taken up during the current year or in the next financial year. I want to know whether out of these 23 schemes the Mawkyrwat water supply scheme would be implemented.

Mr. Speaker :- Now if you are not satisfied with the statement made by the Minister incharge, you may raise a motion for discussion out the statement. But at this stage we are considering only the schemes may be the number is 23, 100 or whatever it is. So we are to concentrate ourselves only on this particular grant of Rs.49,99,848 which comes directly from the Centre.

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh :- Sir, we are not satisfied probably because we had 12 schemes only. So instead of 12 schemes for the whole State, we should initiate more schemes under this Grant from the Central Government.

 Shri G.A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, so far the special allotment by the Central Government is only Rs.50 lakhs. We have taken up 12 schemes only so that within this fund these 12 schemes could be implemented.

Shri H.S. Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker Sir, I rise to speak a few words on the grant. In the Fourth Plan programme there are many schemes which have been surveyed and their estimates prepared. But we find from the schedule here that 12 schemes were selected. So, we do not understand the policy of the Government in selecting the schemes. In this District of Khasi Hills no schemes could be taken up in the Fourth Plan period. I want some clarification as to why we cannot have these schemes also in the western area of Khasi Hills like Pariong, Mawkyrwat, Nongstoin, Laitseh, Momyor, etc. In the last Budget Session we have raised this question but the reply was that they would get it done during the financial year. So we are in the dark as to the procedure, in selecting the schemes and the actual position of all these schemes.

Mr. Speaker :- Before the Minister gives a reply, May I know whether this amount of Rs.50 lakhs has been sanctioned by the Government of India after approving these schemes or whether the Government of India gave Rs.50 lakhs and then the State Government select the schemes.

Shri Grohonsing A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D.) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, after approving the schemes.

Mr. Speaker :- So this amount of Rs.50 lakhs was given only after the 12 schemes had been approved. But Mr. Lyngdoh was raising some other projects which do not fall under this.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :-  But, Sir, last year there were many schemes under the Fourth Plan and the whole plan was approved by the Government of India as prepared by the Planning Commission ! Now how can the State Government bring them under Supplementary Demand ? That is my question, Sir.

Shri Grohonsing A. Marak ( Minister of State, P.W.D.) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, we are, as I said earlier, expecting that some more schemes will be approved by the Government of India under Rural Water Supply Schemes. Garo Hills - Simsanggiri, Resubelpara ............ ( interruption )

Mr. Speaker :- It is not time for you, Mr. Marak, to give this information. In fact, it is only when the hon. Member seeks clarification from the Government, on any other demand which is related to that or in the form of a question to elicit information, then you can come forward. Now this demand relates to these 12 schemes. So, it appears that Mr. Lyngdoh is not happy that these 12 schemes should be selected in this manner. It appears to me that of the 12 schemes at least one scheme should have been taken up for the western area. I think that is your contention. Am I right ?

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Yes, Sir.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Agriculture ) :- Mr. Speaker Sir, the Minister incharge has already made it clear that this amount is a special amount allotted by the Government of India and when we received this amount it is meant for Garo Hills District alone. Then when the P.H.E. was asked as to whether they had any ready scheme for Garo Hills to be taken up that would consume the whole of Rs.50 lakhs their reply was 'No'. Then Sir, we approached the Government of India to allow us to spend Rs.50 lakhs for the whole of Meghalaya. These 12 schemes were approved by the Government of India and now we have to carry on the work. That is a short explanation of the whole thing, Sir.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the reply of the Minister is contrary to the fact that when a scheme is approved by the Government of India ........... ( Interruption ).

Mr. Speaker :- No, it is not contrary. The State Government sent schemes which have already been ready and then the Government of India approved. There is no contradiction.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- But, Sir, mine is a simple question regarding the selection of schemes. What happened ? Whether they have been really sent to the Government of India for sanction or not because none of the schemes have taken in the western area.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Agriculture ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, we received 12 schemes ........ (Interruption).

Mr. Speaker :- Now, there is a misunderstanding here. But the Minister has clearly outlined the procedure that at the time when the Government of India asked for the schemes only 12 were ready for which the State Government received sanction of Rs.50 lakhs. Apart from that, the Minister has also said that the Government have taken up works in many villages in the State and that he is expecting to get some additional amount to be spent for different schemes like water supply, etc., this year and perhaps in the coming years also many schemes will be approved by the Government of India. So far as this amount is concerned it is between now and the 31st March, 1973. So, what about the mover of the cut motion ?

Shri Martin N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, as a matter of fact, we had moved this cut motion on two considerations. One was the criteria for the selection of these 12 schemes and the other was regarding the rampant corruption that exists in the Department. Now, since the Hon'ble Minister has replied to both - one, by saying that there will be other schemes with the hope to get more funds to implement there and, secondly, because he has promoted to look into the matter, I withdraw the cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Is it the sense of the House that the cut motion be withdrawn ? (Voices - Yes).

        Now I put the question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.49,99,848 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973, for the administration of the Head "30 - Public Health - II - Public Health Engineering, etc."

        ( The motion was carried and demand passed ).

        Now the Minister incharge of Co-operation to move Grant No. 7.

Shri E. Bareh :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move Grant No. 7.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved.

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to raise a point of order as the motion is irregular. Now in this connection I would like to refer to Art. 203 (2) which lays down that " The provisions of Articles 202, 203 and 204 shall have effect in relation to any such statement and expenditure or demand and also to any law to be made authorising the appropriation of moneys out of the Consolidated Fund of the State to meet such expenditure". Sir, let me now refer to Art. 203 (3). "No demand for a grant shall be made except on the recommendation of the Governor". But the Minister while moving the grant has only mentioned the grant number. This must be done according to the procedure because we are moving our cut motion in a regular manner. Sir, if you allow us also to move our cut motion like that it will be alright for us. But I think that would be improper and I would like to have your ruling on this.

Mr. Speaker :- And by implication everybody. It is only under the recommendation of the Governor that the Minister can move. But in order to raise the dignity of the Head of the State it will be better to say " On the recommendation of the Governor I move Grant No. such and such ". Actually there is no ground to cut short. It will be more polite but I do not say that it is irregular.

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, can we take it for granted that we can add anything not spoken in the House?

Mr. Speaker :- There is an abbreviation for everything. Even the Contingency Fund can be referred to as C.F. by the Minister.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- This is relevant. I am referring to a particular provision of the Constitution which says that no demand should be granted except on the recommendation of the Governor.

Mr. Speaker :- I understand your point. I do not even inform that on behalf of the Chief Minister, so and so Minister will move a grant because I have already got information. I have got the sense of the whole House that on financial demand without the recommendation of the Governor would have been allowed to be moved inside the House. As I said it would be better and more dignified at least to say " on recommendation of the Governor " while moving the Grant.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Agriculture ) :- I am sorry to say this is a practice right from the Budget Session. On the recommendation of the Governor I beg to move Grant No. 7.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received a cut motion from Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh, Shri Winstone Syiemiong and Prof. M.N. Majaw. Any of the three may move the cut motion ?

Shri W. Syiemiong ( Nongspung S.T. ) :-  Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.3,39,400, under Supplementary Demand No.7, Major Head "34 - Co-operation " at page 10 of the List of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1.00, i.e., the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.3,39,400 do stand reduced to Re.1.00.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved.

Shri Winstone Syiemiong :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, as stated earlier by the hon. Member from Mawhati, I also feel as a public enemy when I am supposed to move this cut motion because we all know that the basic objective of Co-operative society is to help the people especially in the rural areas and I believe that this object is a laudable one. One of the factors that make the Green Revolution successful  in Punjab was through proper implementation and utilisation of this Co-operative Society. But, Sir, I would like to make one observation in this connection that in our State, it is just the opposite. We have made a provision of Rs.3,39,400 as subsidy for the construction of godowns. But Sir, what I have learnt about these godowns some of which were constructed from the time of the Assam Government is that they were in such dilapidated condition that it is very hard to say whether anyone can put anything there. At Shngimawlein Sohiong and Mawngap under Sohiong Constituency where the Member from Sowing and also testify to the conditions unless Government improve the condition fresh construction of godowns will be a waste of money. These godowns there are nothing but places where people committed nuisance. Nothing can be kept inside. It appears they belong to nobody, and the money meant for the godowns is merely a wastage because people are not doing anything. We have seen Sir, from the growth of work of these Co-operative Societies and I would like to say that in some places it serves good purpose, but in some other Societies these godowns instead instead of belonging to the Co-operative Societies, they may belong to some persons and this is what has been happening.

        The other day myself and Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh went to Umjarain just to help the people there to regularise the amounts and maintain things. Therefore, Mr. Speaker unless Government do something to help these people, I think this money would be only as sheer wastage. It would be quite good if we take this money and place it on some other Department. With these few words Sir, I resume my seat.

*Prof. Martin Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the cut motion on this particular demand in view of the explanatory notes at page 11 of the list of Supplementary Demand on the one  hand as well as pointed out by the hon. Member, Shri Syiemiong on the condition of the existing godowns. We have a few godowns very badly run. As will be seen from the Explanatory Notes the Government are surrendering the amount of Rs.2,97,400 from the loan for construction of godowns under State Plan Schemes. It is unfortunate Mr. Speaker, Sir, because one of the reasons why our people suffered economically is because of the lack of market facilities and lack of control over the markets. But if we run and maintain the godowns properly there is a way out to help the local producers, particularly those who grow potato and also help them to control the markets.

        Mr. Speaker, Sir, the major quantum of potato comes from at least this district. But the important function in marketing the commodity is not in the hands of the local growers except for about one percent as distribution and marketing is controlled by outside big traders. This provides forward trading which means buying before the potatoes are rooted not from the ground. The sale operator have already made commitment all over India that the trader he received advance payment he gets the money even before the potatoes are supplied. But he has to keep his commitment. In the meantime he has to collect the potatoes and despatch them at time. Most of the farmers started gathering their potatoes and started storing them. They have to sell the potatoes because they are poor and due to the pressure of their needs. Sometimes they sell their potatoes at cheaper prices and when the original price comes up by 3 times they have no potatoes to sell as we cannot provide them with godowns to store potatoes I think if we have godowns, these godowns can be made into warehousing Co-operation which can help the people. The Secretary can get a receipt and on the basis of that receipt he can go to the State Bank and can get loan of 3 per cent of the prevailing market of the value of this potato. Therefore, he will get 60 per cent and with that he will be able to reinvest his money in some other trade. The potatoes will be covered by the Insurance price because there is receipt system as introduced. This also will help the growers economically. Then the grower can divate the price. But not it is the traders who fix the prices. One of the reasons is that there is no godown. If the godowns are properly maintained that will help the growers gradually and many of these outside traders will leave the trading business to our people.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Cut Motion. The construction of godown is very very essential throughout the State. The purpose of constructing these godowns here is for the co-operative sector. As Mr. Winstone Syiemiong has said, Sir, we have to see that all over the State the conditions of the existing godowns were very bad. Godowns at Mawkyrwat, Sohiong, Mairang, Pynursla, Mawmih are the examples in the State, - these godowns are in a very wretched condition and not properly maintained. Some of them are monopolised by some individuals in the name of the Co-operative Societies. If you look around the State, you will find that these godowns are there without proper maintenance and not properly utilised. Sir, here the Government propose another additional amount over and above what has already been provided by the Government of India. As the hon. Member from Mawhati has said that there is need for construction of a Government godown here in Shillong, as it happened last month that some poor cultivators from the rural villages brought potato here in Shillong for transporting to Gauhati but unfortunately about hundreds tons of potato remained at Mawlong hat for a number of days. We learnt that there was a previous arrangement with the Minister incharge to give transport for the cultivators but by the time they brought the potato, the Minister was not in the Headquarters. So because of no arrangement for transportation as provided by the minister, the poor cultivators had to suffer and we saw that at Mawlong hat the road was blocked for the whole day till late in the evening because there are no godowns there. The difficulties could have been removed, if there were good godowns. Due to the absence of better godowns, the agricultural produces of the people was held up only in Shillong and they have to give them to the middlemen and other traders who are taking advantage of the poor people who can take their produce to Gauhati or Calcutta directly and hence they are always compelled to hand over to the unscrupulous traders at low rates. I have seen and I know that in other States there are godowns constructed by the Government and these godowns used to cater to the needs of the cultivators. So, Sir, I say that here also in our State there is a need for constructing Government godowns in order to relieve the difficulties of the poor cultivators. Sir, I just want to know the policy of the Government in this respect and why not Government take charge of those godowns already in existence because there is a department of the Government to look after the Co-operative Societies where practically some officers were deputed to be the secretaries of the Co-operative Societies. So, Sir, instead of having Co-operative Societies without proper management and guidance under certain rules and procedure to manage the godowns, it is better that the godowns are run by the Government itself. Because, Sir, I have seen that all the money allotted to the Co-operative Societies has been wrongly utilised since many societies are being run by some families and monopolised by one or two persons and which give rise to a lot of corruption. Moreover, Sir, nobody is interested in such societies manned by one family in the name of village society. Whenever any amount was sanctioned to such societies by the Government, it is bound to lead to corruption because money will never be appropriately utilised by them. So Sir, I am afraid that unless godowns are properly maintained and money properly utilised by the Co-operative Societies, corruption will be more and more and cannot be checked in future. As such the amount of grants proposed by the Government here is better diverted to some other schemes which will benefit our State.

Shri Blooming Shallam ( Jowai S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, there are a lot of criticism in many ways against the functioning of these Co-operative Societies. But I feel for the sake of some good societies which are functioning or performing their duties successfully, that I should oppose the Cut Motion. I had belief on what has been stated by my hon. friends from the opposite camp that there are some Co-operative Societies which are functioning so horribly rather I would agree with them that some of the societies have been monopolised by the so called Secretary or President of the societies and therefore, I do agree that there was no proper maintenance of the godowns. Even Sir, some of the godowns were being rented to the people.

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister, Co-operation, etc. ) :- This information was not received by the Government so far.

Shri Blooming Shallam :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, these godowns had been financed by the Government through the Co-operative Societies. I feel Sir, with this money we should encourage the people to construct those godowns of the Co-operative Societies.

Mr. Speaker :- In this House, we have courage to blame this side or that side but you have no courage to name any particular Member. It is up to the Minister to see if the godowns of any Co-operative Societies are properly maintained and the loan properly utilised. If such things arise, it is your duty to inform the Minister in time. And this will encourage the people, who were involved in the management.

Shri Blooming Shallam :- I must express my view point Mr. Speaker, Sir. Well, do not want to name any society.

Mr. Speaker :- But on this particular Demand, the grant is meant to give loan to the society, generally for any specific purpose.

Shri Blooming Shallam :- In that case I would divert my mind and I would urge upon the Government to examine thoroughly the functioning of the societies so that they are really developed for the good and well being of the people. Generally speaking, the societies were established in all State to help people. Trucks were given to them but I can say there are some trucks belonging to the societies which are supposed to carry the produces of the local people. However, instead of doing so commercial commodities of non-local people are being carried.

Mr. Speaker :- But you do not agree to report the matter for fear of being unpopular.

Shri Blooming Shallam :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, now I will come to the main part of the discussion. I feel this is a matter of misappropriation rather then corruption which I would like to bring to the notice of the Government.

Mr. Speaker :-  But this is a cut motion. It is a motion which you should either support or oppose the Government policy on particular matters.

Shri Blooming Shallam :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I had stated earlier that I oppose the cut motion for the sake of some good societies, however, I feel that the Government should enquire in to the performances of some societies specially in the Border Areas of Jaintia Hills and find out if the societies there are functioning for the benefit of few individuals or for the people at large. With these words I conclude my speech.

Shri D. Dethwelson Lapang ( Nongpoh S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, first of all I would express my observation on the suggestions given by my hon. friend who has spoken before me. It has been a matter of grave concern that there has been misusing  of godowns in some places. I fully appreciate the Member who is a colleague of mine from Mawhati, who has boldly pointed out that our produces in the State, had been monopolised by some unscrupulous traders. Potatoes and other produces for example, which grow wild in our areas had been subjected to monopolisation. He has also suggested that there should be a Warehousing Corporation in this State. Financial assistance should be extended to the growers. This will be a very welcoming suggestion in which the hon. Member perhaps did not say that the Co-operation Department should be closed down altogether but rather said that we should encourage the Department so that Government also will come forward to modify its objectives in strengthening the poor people and farmers of our State. Also, we should see that these aims and objectives should be implemented very effectively for the people. This is a crying need of the people. Mr. Speaker Sir, while referring to the speech made by Mr. Hopingstone Lyngdoh I would also emphasize the urgent need that proper maintenance of godowns can only be done through proper checking and management, and if possible, rules should also be enforced.

Mr. Speaker :- I will remind the hon. Member that whenever he refers to any other Members' speech in the House, he should name the Member rather than the name of his Constituency like Pariong.

Shri D. Dethwelson Lapang :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I believe there was some sort of misusing of funds in the department and steps should be taken to see that those defects which form the subject matter of our discussion today, are removed from the department. So, Sir, with these few words, I oppose the cut motion.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, while supporting this Cut Motion, I take this opportunity to bring out some facts which I have observed in some particular Co-operative Societies existing in our State. It is of course encouraging to our people to note that the Government renders some amount of money as grants or loans to our Co-operative Societies whether for cultivation or trade as the case may be. Of course, I am not against it but I appreciate the Government and while appreciating it, I would like to draw its attention to the fact that there is maximum corruption that I see in this department. I have seen this in so many Cooperative Societies in many places.

Mr. Speaker :- I think I have heard enough from all the hon. Members who have used the word corruption. I do not know whether it is really a case of corruption or not or simply misusing of money.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Sir. Then I will use the word 'misappropriation of money'. For example, the Co-operative Societies like the Lyngngam-Nongtrai actually had its godown at Riangdo Bazar. Some time ago, it was run by the Members of the Ruling Party and it was running smoothly and quietly. But after the enrolment of some members who were not from the Ruling Party I don't know what has happened to those people there. There was also a big amount of money which was misappropriated by the members of that Co-operative Society. I don't know why the department concerned did not take any action as to whether this money was refunded to the department or not. This was a misappropriation case, but who is responsible for that nobody knows. There is a similar case with the Lawdidoh Co-operative Society which is newly registered.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, time is up.

Mr. Speaker :- The House will continue with this Cut Motion in the afternoon. The House stands adjourned till 2 p.m.

The House resumed its sitting at 2 p.m.

Mr. Speaker in the Chair.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Mawlot to continue the discussion.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Mr. Speaker Sir, I have come to the Lawdidoh Co-operative Society. Members of the Society are only few. They are only five in number whereas others of the same village, namely, Mawrok the number of members is more than 150. The proposed Mawrok Co-operative Society has also applied for registration but I do not know why the Department refused to register that Society and instead has registered this Lawdidoh Co-operative Society with only five persons. This, of course, I can say to some extent that there is a political pressure here, because that  Co-operative Society has connection with one of the Members of the Ruling Party and she recommended it when she was an M.L.A.

Mr. Speaker :- The wishes of the hon. Members are satisfied by the Government as far as possible and now your recommendation as hon. Member would be counted upon.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- I have brought this state of affairs to the notice of the Government. But I am sorry to say that I have failed to make the Government understand that 150 members are more in number and more important than five (5). I am not exaggerating or am here to blame the Government. But we are compelled to bring to the notice of the Government and to express our sorrow here on the floor of the Assembly and I request through you, Sir, that the Government from now on at least should not be partial. If we are to encourage our cultivators, let us not be partial and let us not put the political ideas in front of us, but let us see for the development and welfare of the masses. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Sonapahar-Lyngam Nongtrai Co-operative Society, now ceased to function as the sub-area marketing society snatched away the office and the godown; and that the members of the the Lyngam - Nongtrai Co-operative Society are not included in the list of members of the Sub-area Marketing Society. Actually, when the members of the Lyngam-Nongtrai Co-operative Society are not included in that Sub-area, I suppose, those persons, who were the members previously and have got their shares, should get back their own shares. But so far the shares of those persons in the Lyngam-Nongtrai Society have not yet been refunded to them.

Mr. Speaker :- Do you mean to say that old members have been kicked out?

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Yes. They have been kicked out without notice. Mr. Speaker, Sir, in order to shorten my speech, I would say that I encourage the Government and I give any full support to the Government to continue or rather to strengthen the Co-operative Societies. But in order to be able to uplift our people, I think it is proper that the Government appoint Inspectors for these Co-operative Societies. But when I suggest appointment of Inspectors, I do not mean those persons who are loyal to the Ruling Party should be appointed but persons who have the sense of responsibility and who know their duties and are anxious to expedite things and do things which are entrusted to them sincerely should be appointed as Inspectors. With these few words, Sir, I resume my seat.

Mr. Speaker :- For the information of the hon. Members I would say that it should always be borne in mind that the Government servants must be loyal to the Government. Today you have one party to form the Government. After 5 years you will have another party and after 10 years another. But whatever party may come to power, a Government servant must be loyal to the Government. Now, I would call upon the Minister to reply.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Co-operation ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, first of all, I should thank all the hon. Members who have participated in the discussion on this cut motion. Most of them appreciated that godown is necessary for the Co-operative Society. I also agree with them that some of the godowns of the Co-operative Societies are really in a very bad state. I have seen with my own eyes and I have no reason to be surprised about it. Most of the societies, rather Marketing Societies, are in the defunct state and many of them are to be liquidated. The additional amount required in this grant is the money, that is, 7 lakhs of rupees, which the National Co-operative Development Corporation offered to us by way of loan to give loans to the Co-operative Societies for construction of godowns. That means, the National Co-operative Development Corporation will bear 62   per cent of the cost of construction and the State Government will bear a subsidy 37 per cent , as already explained in the Explanatory Note. Many of the hon. Members agreed that godown is necessary for the Co-operative Societies. One of the hon. Members, I think, from Mawhati referred to the construction of Ware Housing. Mr. Speaker, Sir, for this information I would say that this Government has allotted Rupees 3 lakhs for expansion of the Warehouse here at Shillong and for the construction of new Ware houses - one at Jowai and the other at Tura. For the extension of Shillong Warehouse at Mawlai, a sum of Rupees 3 lakhs has been earmarked and the Ware Housing Corporation will contribute three lakhs of rupees. That means, Rupees 6 lakhs will be spent this year for the construction of  Warehouses at Shillong, Jowai and Tura. So, this amount here is the 37 per cent contribution which we as the State Government will have to subsidise for the cost of construction of these godowns all over the State, and the Government have also decided to contribute this amount by giving loans to the Apex or Corporation godowns of Rs.45,000 for construction of 800 tonnes capacity godowns and then to the Sub-area Marketing Rs.19,685 each for 10 godowns for construction of 350 tonnes capacity and the Rural Service Co-operative Societies at the rate of Rs.8,435 each for 21 rural godowns with a capacity of 150 tonnes for each godown. So the break up of this will be as follows - in the Khasi Hills 5 sub Area Marketing Godowns and 10 Rural Service Co-operative Society Godowns; in Garo Hills, 3 Sub-Area Marketing Godowns and 7 Rural Service Co-operative Society Godowns and in Jaintia Hills 2 Marketing Society Godowns and 2 Rural Service Co-operative Society Godowns. So, Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is the amount which we have to provide otherwise we will not get this amount of Rs.7 lakhs from the  National Co-operative Development Corporation. Some of the hon. Members have expressed concern on the condition of some of the godowns. That I agree. I have seen one such godown in Sohiong; at least on the way we have seen by the side of the road. I have asked my officer to enquire into the reason why that godown is in that condition. And to be frank, Mr. Speaker, Sir, there are godowns which I have found are rented to private persons. We are also trying to find out why and how and whether any amount of the Government is involved in these godowns. So, I do appreciate the feeling and the anxiety of the hon. Members when they say these things. But we cannot do in a short time; we have to take some time to find out and get the real fact of all these affairs. Therefore, I can only assure the hon. Members of the House that it is not a fact that we do not look into these things, in fact we are looking into them. But it will take some time to enquire into all these defects and irregularities in the maintenance of these godowns. But to say, because of these defects, that the State should be deprived of getting the amount of Rs.7 lakhs from the National Co-operative Development Corporation, I do not think it is reasonable and justifiable. I hope hon. Members will not agree to lose this amount but we have to be careful about its utilisation . The hon. Member from Nongstoin referred to one Lyngam-Nongtrai Society and he said this Society was snatched away by the Sub-Area Marketing Society. But this is not a fact. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this Lyngam-Nongtrai Co-operative Society is a defunct society, and it is a fact that some of the share-holders have requested that their shares be refunded. But we cannot do that. We have to liquidate this Society and they will get back their shares when that process of law is completed. The fact is that the office of this Society was rented by the Sub-Area Marketing Society but not snatched away because there was a proposal of this Lyngam-Nongtrai Society to start some Co-operative Societies with 150 members. Mr. Speaker, Sir, we have been noticing that a lot of societies have been registered in the past and many of them did not function. Now, our policy is not to encourage the formation of this Small Co-operative Society; we want to encourage Big Co-operative Societies so that we can tackle this trade business. There is also a reference made to the marketing of potatoes. Now, the Co-operative Department is studying ways and means how to tackle this trade on potato which our people have been suffering for quite some time. But we cannot say at the present moment what will be the outcome of that study. But we are trying our best to organise big societies so that such Co-operative Society or Corporation will tackle this business on potato trading. But that would take some time as we have to go into the pros and cons of the matter, because if we make a mistake, we may land ourselves into difficulties. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I do not want to refer to so many Co-operative Societies which have been mentioned during the discussion because the question before us now is whether we need godowns or not. Most of the hon. Members have expressed that godowns are not necessary. Therefore, I think they will not agree to lose this amount of Rs.7 lakhs from the National Co-operative Development Corporation. I hope, after hearing all these facts which I have placed before the House, the hon. Mover of the Cut Motion will not mind to withdraw his cut motion. So, I request him to withdraw the cut motion.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Sir, on a point of clarification. If that office of the Lyngam-Nongtrai Co-operative Society is rented, may we know when was it rented, with the amount of rent and by whom was it rented?

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Co-operation ) :- It was rented to the Sub Area Marketing Society but how and when it was rented, I cannot say offhand because it is the concern of one Society with another Society.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :-  In that case, who was entitled to allow that office to be given on rent?

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Co-operation ) :-  It is the Marketing Society.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise on a point of clarification. I was a member of the old Society and other Service Co-operative Societies of the Lyngam-Nongtrai but I was not informed as to what has happened to my share and other rights as a member when the society was stopped. It was also a fact, Mr. Speaker, Sir, that the office and the land belonging to that society has not yet been disposed of and nobody has given rent to the new society which is styled as the Sub-area Marketing society.

Mr. Speaker :- Actually I do not want to exercise prerogative - rather I would like to inform the hon. Members to take the best advantage of the time allotted  to them. Now on this particular demand I think most of the members have diverted their speeches. This demand is not concerned whether this co-operative society is rented to another society or whether that society is defunct or whether you are a member of this or that society. But the question is that this amount is required during the current financial year for giving assistance to the deserving co-operative society for construction of godown. This is the specific point raised in this demand and also in the Cut Motion. So far as the discussion on the working of innumerable number of societies in the State of Meghalaya, I think it will take months together to discuss here.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, my point is that the Hon'ble Minister has replied that a particular society's office and godown have been rented to the Sub-Area marketing Society.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Lyngdoh, the Minister is kind enough to reply to your points which are not actually necessary in this demand. So what about the Mover of the Motion. 

Shri Winstone Syiemiong ( Nongspung S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, since the Hon'ble Minister has assured that all the godowns which are in the wretched stage will be looked into by the Government, I withdraw my motion.

Mr. Speaker :- It is the sense of the House that the Cut Motion be withdrawn ( voice yes, yes, yes ). Now I put the main question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.3,39,400 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "34 - Co-operation". The motion is carried. The demand is passed.

        Now, I request the Minister incharge Industries to move grant No. 8.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Industries ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.1,30,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 35 - Industries - II - Cottage - Industries".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received one Cut Motion from Mr. H. Hadem. Mr. Humphrey Hadem.

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to  move that the total provision of Rs.1,30,000 under the supplementary demand No. 8 major head " 35 - Industries - II - Cottage - Industries" at page 12 be reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Speaker :- Cut motion moved. Now you can raise a discussion. 

*Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, here according to the explanation given, the whole amount is meant for one single exhibition which has cost the State exchequer Rs.1,30,000. Sir, according to me, this amount is very much on the high side compared to the benefit to be divided the people of the State. Ours is a very small State and we are having a very small amount to be utilised for its development. But if one particular exhibition cost more than a lakh  then I am afraid other development works will be held up. Therefore, I would like to submit that the entire amount of Rs.1,30,000 need not be spent on this particular exhibition but that certain amount may be left over for utilising in some other development works. I would also like to point out to the Government through you, Sir, that during the last financial year grants for development of Cottage Industries were distributed to some persons who do not need held or subsidy at all from the Government. Mr. Speaker, Sir, specifically I would like to say that there are so many primary school teachers who were supplied with sewing machines thereby they neglect their own duties. This has happened, Mr. Speaker, Sir, even in my own village of Mynso. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to bring it to the notice of the Government that if we are to help any body. (interruption )

Mr. Speaker :- These sewing machines have no connection with this demand.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- No, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am speaking about the contingency fund. What I said was that some amount may be taken out of the amount meant for this exhibition to be utilised for some other purposes. I would like to request the Government through you, Sir, to see that if any subsidy is to be given to the people it must be given to most deserving and poor people. With these few words I move my cut motion.

*Prof. M.N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Cut Motion moved by the hon. Member on one ground that it is reported that one or two stalls belonged to persons who provide wax i.e.,  candle goods manufactured from wax. Now, Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is a well known fact that the Cottage Industries Department has given allotments of wax to bogus firms masquerading in the name of tribal persons for two reasons (1) to encourage the officers to increase wax quota and (2) to escape income tax and wealth tax. Some of us may not know black marketing.

Mr. Speaker :- That means you are not objecting to Meghalaya participation in the Asia-Fair, 1972 but you are objecting to the method by which the participation is being participated.

Prof. M.N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I will add a little to that. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would not object to the holding of the Exhibition but I have certain observation on that part of the exhibition relating to candles and the manufacture of candles. The black marketing rates defer from the controlled rates to the extent of Rs.3,500 and there are some concerns located in Shillong and Gauhati belonging to traders, etc., who have specialised in selecting was quota from the Industries Department. This Department is new and does not know the black marketing business in order to find out the difference per ton of wax per ton. In this way the difference per ton of wax between the controlled rate and the black marketing rate is Rs.3,500 last year. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Government of Meghalaya suddenly worked out the details and cancelled the sanction. There is an officer who comes from outside the State and insisted upon the setting up of the Advisory Board with only three or four members of Legislative Assembly to sanction a quota for wax.

Mr. Speaker :- Before you proceed further let me remind you that it appears there is something wrong in so far as wax dealing is concerned. Since there is something wrong there are objections to the inclusion of the candles exhibition in the Asia Fair, 1972. But this wax selling is quite different from the expenditure incurred and to be incurred in the State's participation in the exhibition on the year 1972.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw (Mawhati S.T. ) :- The exhibition was supposed to deal only with the local people and the Industrial labour.

Mr. Speaker :--  The products may be transported to foreign counties.

Prof. M.N. Majaw :-  It has also become the exhibition of black-marketing to some extent and since it has become the of black-marketing we have to move and support this Cut Motion, as one of the most profitable items for the outside traders is wax. The people in the market are shouting for shortage of wax. We are hoping that the Minister will to some extent cancel some of the permits in this connection.

Mr. Speaker :- May I request the Minister to reply.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Industries) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, this amount is required for regularizing the advance which the State Government decided to participate in Asia 1972 Exhibition. The hon. member from Mynso-Raliang has objected to spending so much of money  like Rs.1,30,000 on a simple exhibition. May I inform him that this is reported to be the largest exhibition that India has held and by any means it cannot be called a simple exhibition. However, the Government decided to participate in the exhibition to publicize the goods of our new State and from the tourist point of interest in our State because we have some of the potentials for industries at least for some of the small scale industries. Therefore, I am afraid, I do not hold with him that this amount has been wrongly spent. It has been in fact for the good of the State and it is going to be the most important exhibition that we have in India. So far as the funds under the Contingency are concerned, he has forgotten that it comes under the Head - " Exhibition " and will be utilised only in the Asia 1972 Exhibition and it will not be diverted to any of other uses of the Industries Department. So this is the intention I am afraid it is not correct to say that this will be utilised in any other manner. To pick up one item, being exhibited out of the Small Scale Industries, to make a big thing out of that, as stated by the hon. Member from Mawhati and to say that this exhibition is an exhibition of black marketing is contrary to the facts. If the wax had been used for black marketing it would not be possible to make candles but whatever it was, attempts are being made to produce them for sale. Therefore, I do not agree that it is an exhibition of black marketing, although the wax may be black-marketed. Any attempt to say that these supplies will be misutilised - that is a different matter altogether. But the Department has collected items which have actually been made in our State and exhibited also. It is quite incorrect to say  that this is an exhibition of black-marketers. Some people may still escape in spite of various inspections and procedure for trying to see that all the industrialists used the raw materials properly. It may be true. But we will certainly try our best with or without the help of the hon. member from Mawhati to catch the persons concerned but it does not justify the criticism as has been made by the hon. Member. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I feel that this is a very important exhibition, this is a very important exhibition and this is the first in India - this all Asia Exhibition where the Government of Meghalaya have participated in a short period of time and this we did for the benefit of the State as a whole. With these few words, I would request the hon. Member who moved the cut motion to withdraw his cut motion.

Prof. Martin N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, for clarification, I would request the Minister incharge to let us know the products that were exhibited.

Mr. Speaker :- The main items from the Industries Department in that exhibition.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Industries ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have not got with me all the lists of items being exhibited at present and I did not expect that question otherwise I would have all the lists of items. But I know that there are baskets, cane and bamboo work which are small scale industries and some photographs have, as part of the said exhibition, been shown. I do not have the list, of all the items exhibited but whatever the Department has been able to collect from a few of the Small Scale Industries.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, actually I did not use the word 'single'. Anyhow, Sir, there is a difference between Meghalayan pronunciation and American pronunciation. Moreover, Sir, since the Minister has already said that he will look into the matter and also into the charges of corruption, if any, I withdraw the Cut Motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Is it the sense of the House that the Cut Motion is withdrawn? ( Voices - Yes, Yes ).

        The Cut Motion is with leave of the House withdrawn.

        Now I put the main question. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.1,30,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 35 - Industries - II - Cottage Industries ".

        The motion is carried. The demand is passed.

        ( At this stage, the Speaker left the Chamber and the Deputy Speaker took the Chair ).

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- I now request the Minister incharge of Community Development to move Grant No.9.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister incharge of Community Development ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.12,74,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 37 - I - Community Development Projects - National Extension Service and Local Development Works ".

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Motion moved. In this respect I have received a Cut Motion from three hon. Members, Shri H. Hadem, Shri Lewis Bareh and Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh. Now anyone of them can move. 

Shri Lewis Bareh ( Rymbai S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.12,74,000 under Supplementary Demand No.9 Major Head - "37 - I - Community Development Projects - National Extension Service and Local Development Works" at page 13 of the List of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1, i.e., the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.12,74,000 do stand reduced to Re.1". 

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Cut motion moved.

*Shri Lewis Bareh :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in moving my cut motion, I want to make some observation on item (D) - Crash Scheme for Rural employment. Crash Scheme for Rural Employment, Sir, has been implemented during the last financial year in our Jowai District prior to the creation of the Jaintia Hills District. In all the three Blocks in the Jaintia Hills District, Crash Schemes have been implemented with a view to generating employment and giving work to the people. But I want to inform the Government, Sir, through you, that the Crash Scheme that has been implemented in my Constituency at Lakadong area, the operation of which areas was supervised by the Block Development Officer. But while implementing the said scheme by the Officer incharge, there has been no wide publicity to the other villages. Therefore, the surrounding villages there never get the opportunity to work under the said scheme, and in a short period of time half of the work of that scheme was completed with half of the amount spent. While the people in that village are crying for being employed in the work the other half was sub-let on contract basis. Therefore, Sir, I would like to request the Government that in future during the implementation of this scheme, they should strictly instruct the officers concerned to look after the interest of the public as a whole and not for a few interested people. With these few words, Sir, I move my Cut Motion and I resume my seat.

*Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso- Raliang S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, while supporting the cut motion, I would like to refer to the second para of  the Explanatory Note regarding the work of a particular branch of the Department. While executing the Crash Scheme in the Jaintia Hills, especially in a road construction from Kyndongtuber, Basi-kyndong to Raliang in the Mynso-Raliang Block, it was found that the Overseers and the officers of the Block did not properly supervise the execution of the work. This work was entrusted to the so-called Local Committee for execution and supervision. They submitted the muster roll to the Block Development Officer who after formal paper verification, passed the amount and then paid to the persons concerned according to the muster roll. But it is regrettable to say  that preparation of the list of muster roll labourers is not a reality because some persons who did not do the actual work are listed and others who really did the work are excluded from the list. This complaint was brought to the notice of the Government but uptil now nothing has been done. Moreover, it was found that the last payment was not yet paid up till now. I would also like to request the Government, through you, Sir, to see this is expedited. We would also, at the same time request the Government that in future, if the same types of work is to be executed, it must be done through proper supervision of the officers concerned. With these words, Sir, I support the Motion.

Shri H.S. Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in supporting the cut motion on the subject, I would like to point out to certain irregularities which have been practised regarding the crash scheme from the Government of India. Sir, we have been hearing about this Crash Scheme since the last two or three years. I think after collecting some extra revenue more than has been estimated in the Plan, the Central Government has offered this crash money to the States. Sir, subsequently this money was given to the Blocks. Last year an amount of about 2/3 lakhs was given to each Block. How far the Block Committees and Sub-Committees initiated schemes and utilised the money? From my own experience I can say that in Nongstoin Block as many as five schemes were taken up two years ago. But till now there is no sign of utilisation of money as there was no implementation of any scheme. In some cases we have seen that the Blocks have spent the money, but there was no proper supervision of the work. They have not utilised the fund as per instructions prescribed by the Government of India, i.e., to give grant to the rural areas which are thickly populated so that the schemes may generate employment in that area and to enable the people to get some employment. But what we find is that so many schemes recommended for certain area by the B.D.C. have been diverted to other areas. As for example the Mawsynram and the Mairang Blocks have made such diversion. And whenever we wanted to know the reason why that diversion was made the reply was that the Deputy Commissioner, Khasi Hills, has made the diversion. I do not know how after the recommendation of the B.D.C. or Sub-Committee, a scheme can be changed by the Deputy Commissioner. That is why there is delay in implementing the schemes. Every year there is a lapse of grant. So I am sure there is some foul play, if not corruption, may be it is misappropriation of money.

        Now Sir, I would like to point out something about the Development Board in Khasi hills. So far I know the members of the said Board are not the representatives of the people of this State. They are somebody else may be the prospective candidates of the Ruling Party or may be the defeated candidates of the Ruling Party. I believe, schemes are being changed on the recommendations of these people with view to manipulate for their political motive. So, Sir, without a definite clarification from the Government we are not ready to agree to vote for such a huge amount of Rs.12,74,000. With these observations I support the cut motion.

Shri Fuller Lyngdoh Mairang (S.T.)  :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the cut motion moved by the hon. Member from Rymbai. According to the instructions received from the Government of India and from the Government of Meghalaya itself, old schemes should be completed first. That is the policy of the Government of India. But I find that, as has already been stated by the hon. Member from Pariong, most of the schemes have been changed by the Subdivisional Development Board even when the B.D.C. has recommended that these old schemes should be completed first. I cite the example of the Lyngkhoi-Ja-ud road which is already an old scheme but was rejected by the Sub-Divisional Development Board. Another scheme, i.e., the Kynshi-Mawlangren road which is an old scheme, has not yet been completed. This particular scheme was sent to the Deputy Commissioner after having been recommended by the B.D.C. But to our utter surprise the scheme was also rejected. So in this connection I would impress upon the Government through you, Sir, that the policy of the Government of India which is also the policy of the Government of Meghalaya itself should be followed. With these few words I support the cut  motion. 

Shri K.M. Roy Mawsynram (S.T.) :-   Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to oppose the cut motion moved by my hon. friend from Rymbai. It has been stated that some Blocks make changes even when the Block Development Committee has already recommended. The hon. Member from Pariong has stated that certain blocks have changed even though the schemes have been decided by the Block Development Committees. He particularly cited the Mawsynram Development Block. But I think this is a very wrong information. As a matter of fact, the hon. Member from Pariong was also a member of the Sub-Committee and certain schemes had been taken up by the Sub-Committee. I do not know the reason why one scheme was implemented and the other was not implemented. But so far as I understand there must have been some misunderstanding between the Block Development Officer and the people of that area. This must be the reason why the scheme was not implemented. But it is not correct to say that the Block Development Committee's decision has been taken at the level of that Committee.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is not the Committee that has made the changes but the so-called Development Board at Shillong or the Sub-Divisional Development Board.

Shri K.M. Roy :- It is not changed by the Block Development Committee. I hope the correct position is that the Sub-Divisional Development Board from Shillong cannot change any scheme which has been decided at the Block Development Committee.

( A Voice - That is wrong ) 

        Sir, I stand corrected on that point. But no such scheme has been changed at Shillong particularly in this Block. Perhaps it may be due to the misunderstanding between the BDO and the people of the area that the scheme sanctioned could not be implemented. With these few words I oppose the motion.

Shri Reidson Momin ( Dadenggiri S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to oppose the cut motion moved by the hon. Member on the ground that the C.D. Blocks in Meghalaya have not been functioning well due mainly to lack of funds and may be due also to inexperience during the last few years. This Department, particularly in this country, should have the maximum amount so that we may be able to improve our new State. We know that in the past we have spent some amount and the Government of India have been kind enough to allot the amount. Well Sir, we have many activities under this Department and as we have not enough money, we want more funds in order to revitalise the activities of these Development Blocks in order to develop our country as a whole. Now, in this respect, this Supplementary demands meant to help our border our border people living in the border with Bangladesh and due to the closure of the border trade the people residing in the borders are suffering. It is meant to help and rehabilitation them and it is for this reason that we have requested the Government of India to grant us this amount and the Central Government have been kind enough to concede to our request. So, Sir, it will be wrong to say that this amount should not be granted to the Government. Rather we should be grateful to the Government of Meghalaya for getting this amount from the Central Government for the benefit of our people. But, as I said earlier, Sir the activities of the Development Block are not enough. So, I would request the Government, through you, Sir, to appoint more B.D.Os and Extension Officers in the C.D. Blocks. Then again, Sir, it is quite wrong to say that certain programmes are to be approved by the BDC and that the Committee should also look into the allocation of funds and then execute schemes. But actually the Sub-committee cannot select certain schemes and give allocation of works in the Block Development area. So, Sir, with these few words I oppose the cut Motion moved by the hon. Member from Rymbai. 

Shri S.P. Swer ( Sohra S.T. ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to oppose the cut motion and I would also thank the Government of India for giving more funds to our State for creating more employment opportunities. We have many Development Blocks in our State, and if I am not wrong, there are about 24 Blocks in the whole State. The amount is Rs.37 lakhs for the 24 Blocks. We can understand from the amount as to how much each Block can have as a share. We find that the Block Development Committee have approved and recommended four, five or six schemes and the total estimate of these schemes is more than Rs.3 lakhs and in certain cases it goes to the extent of Rs.18 lakhs for each Block. It is the duty of the Sub-Divisional Development Committee to see and examine these schemes and it is also for the Sub-divisional Development Committee to see that other Blocks also get proper share. It is not a fact to say that the Sub-divisional Development Board rejected the schemes recommended by the Block Development Committees. But they were asked to see that these schemes tally with the amount earmarked for the respective Block. Therefore, I would like the hon. members to understand why, when they submitted schemes of Rs.18 lakhs, they were allotted only Rs.1 lakhs. It is wrong to say that the Sub-divisional Development Board changed any scheme in any way they like. I just want to clarify this, when the Government provide more funds it means for more employment. Therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I oppose the cut motion. 

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang ) :- On point of information, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the hon. member has clarified the point with authority or without authority?

Shri S.P. Swer :- It is for the Government to reply with authority.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- That means we cannot take it as an authority as approved by the Government.

Shri S.P. Swer :- The question actually is what is going on with the Subdivisional Development Board and the reply in this regard is according to my own information in respect of some Block Development Committees and the Subdivisional Development Board, United Khasi and Jaintia Hills.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, why we are referring to that is because the hon. Member tells us about the Subdivisional Boards, as if there are no Subdivisional Development Boards as far as Jowai is concerned.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Will the Minister incharge of Community Development reply ?

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister, Community Development ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Crash Scheme was started from 1971-72. Therefore, it is not correct to say that it was there for the last 2 or 3 years and the amount sanctioned for 1971-72 by the Government of India is only Rs.25 lakhs because we were having at that time only two Districts, i.e., United Khasi-Jaintia Hills and Garo Hills District for which an amount of Rs.12 lakhs has been sanctioned for each District, the total comes to Rs. 25 lakhs. But in 1972, the Jaintia District was created and therefore, this year, 1972-73 we are getting Rs.12 lakhs extra for the Jaintia Hills, that is, Garo District Rs.12 lakhs, Khasi District Rs.12 lakhs and Jaintia District will get Rs.12 lakhs, because there are three districts, we are entitled to get the sanction from the Government of India for the year 1972-73 of an amount of Rs.37,50,000. The hon. members who moved the cut motion do not want to express that they do not want the money. They want the money. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I do think that they stick to the motion to criticise about the working of the Department. There may be shortfalls here and there. We cannot say all those who worked in these Schemes are angels. There may be black sheep also. This particular scheme can give employment to the local and rural people during slack seasons. There may be loopholes and irregularities here and there. We hope we can see to this in the coming year, because only last year this scheme was started. We have also heard from the hon. Member from Mynso-Raliang that there are people who have never appeared in the work, but their names are there in the muster roll. That may be due to the dishonesty of the Secretary of the local Committee. We will look into that and the matter will be taken into consideration and instruct our Officer incharge to be more vigilant in executing the scheme. It was also stated that the rich people are becoming sordars or contractors. All these will be looked into thoroughly to find out what is the exact position. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we need this amount for the Jaintia Hills because this extra money of Rs.12 lakhs is meant for Jaintia Hills, as Jaintia Hills has been upgraded to the status of the District only this year. So, I hope hon. Member who moved the cut motion from Rymbai Constituency will not mind to withdraw the cut motion as this amount of  Rs.12 lakhs belongs to the Jaintia Hills.

Shri H.E. Pohshna ( Nongtalang S.T. ) :- He wants the money, but he is afraid of the crash !

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister, Community Development ) :- We are putting more fuel so that there will be no crash. The hon. Member has mentioned about the schemes for the Nongstoin Block. 5 schemes have been recommended by the B.D.C. But the Subdivisional Development Board did not approve three new schemes. It only approved the two old schemes. There is also certain deviation about the Mairang Block. The Subdivisional Development Board rejected the recommendation of the Block Development Community to discontinue the old schemes because it is old and not profitable to the public and they wanted to substitute it by new schemes. The recommendation of the Block Development Committee and the Sub-Committee also should go to the Subdivisional Development Board where all the Members of this House from Khasi Hills are the members of this Subdivisional Development Board. So by virtue of being M.L.As, they can also become members of the Subdivisional Development Board, but if they are not included now, I do not know, but it should be like that. But if it is not so, we will certainly look into this matter and see why the members of this Legislative Assembly are not included as members of the Subdivisional Development Board; because they are entitled to be the members of the Subdivisional Development Board also. It is a fact that the life of the Subdivisional Development Board in Jaintia Hills has expired and we are now seeking the recommendation of the D.C., for its re-establishment. Regarding Mawsynram and Mawkyrwat, I do not know anything so far. But I know that the schemes of the Mawsynram Block has not been changed by the Subdivisional Development Board. Actually, the Subdivisional Development Board is above the Block Development Committee because it is more representative. Therefore, the schemes as approved by the Government are recommended by the Subdivisional Development Board. As far as Jaintia Hills is concerned, I know the life of the Board has expired and as I said, we have asked the D.C., to call for the representatives of Jaintia Hills to recommend the schemes for the crash programme in Jaintia Hills. So I hope since I have clarified the position Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member from Rymbai Constituency, who is the mover of this Cut Motion will withdraw his Cut Motion and I request him earnestly to kindly withdraw his Cut Motion on this grant.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on a point of information, I would like to say that the Shillong Subdivisional Development Board is not consisting of M.L.As, or representatives of the people.

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister incharge of Community Development ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if they are not included, we will see that they are included.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, just one clarification, whether the road construction is to be entrusted to the local bodies or the work charge staff appointed within the Block ?

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister incharge of Community Development ) :- Yes, they are to be entrusted to the local bodies though in executing the work we have some work-charged establishment, which may look and supervise the work.

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh ( Mawkyrwat S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification, the Minister incharge has referred to one of the roads under the Crash Programme at Mairang Block and said that the old scheme was a useless one and is not profitable to the public and that so much of amount has been spent for useless purpose.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with reference to the Lyngkhoi-Jaud Road money has been spent under this scheme as this road is a very important road stretching from Sohiong to Pariong linking Lyngkhoi village which consists of about 400 houses and all the nearby villages are by the side of this road. So it is not a useless road. It can partially offer employment opportunities to the people in that area as about thousands of people who are living there are expecting employment with the construction of this road. But, Sir, the money spent for that road is very small.

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister incharge of Community Development ) :- I think this matter, as I have told, is according to the recommendation and it is still under correspondence of the Subdivisional Development Board. Once the Subdivisional Development Board recommended to drop it but we pointed out that as per rule we cannot insist to drop it. So I am not in a position to say whether this will be dropped or not because it is still under correspondence between the Government and the Subdivisional Development Board.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- After hearing the Minister, may I know the mind of the Mover ?

Shri Lewis Bareh ( Rymbai S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would only request the Minister incharge to look into all these and withdraw my Cut Motion.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Has the hon. Member, leave of the House, to withdraw the Cut Motion (Voices : Yes, Yes ). The Motion with leave of the House is withdrawn. Now I put the main question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.12,74,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "37 - I - Community Development Projects - National Extension Service and Local Development Work".

        The Motion is carried. The Demand is passed.

        Now let us come to Grant No.10. The Minister incharge to move Grant No. 10.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister incharge of Industries, etc. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.40,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 38 - Labour and Employment - II - Factories ".

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Motion moved : I have received two Cut Motions from two hon. Members. One is from Shri Francis K. Mawlot and another from Shri H. Hadem. Any one of them can now move the Cut Motion.

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.40,000 under Supplementary Demand No.10, Major Head "38 -  Labour and Employment - II - Factories " at page 14 of the List of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1, i.e., the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.40,000, do stand reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Cut motion moved.

*Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find that the amount of Rs. 40,000 according to the explanatory note includes also the expenditure for purchase of a car. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this demand is concerning the factories. Actually, Sir, I do want to stress on that since many factories have been already established in this State. But most particularly, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the Cement Factory which we have already discussed in the last budget session. It seems that the factory is running up till now. Sir, I do not see the proper maintenance can be ensured by the purchase of a Car. As such, I am moving this Cut Motion for reducing the total amount to Re.1 only.

*Prof. M.N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in supporting the Cut Motion moved by the hon. Member from Mynso-Raliang, I would like to raise only two points. Firstly, now, at page 14 of the Demand for factories, we have got contingencies of Rs.34,390. Now the latest price of one Ambassador car, I say Ambassador because that is the car that is being proposed to be paid as per statement at the bottom of the Explanatory Note. The latest price of a car is Rs.35,000. When you deduct this amount from the original Major Head under 'Labour and Employment, you get Rs.3,900 for contingencies whereas for the Assam Cement, Rs.3,000 as allowances and Honoraria the amount comes to Rs.2,500. Therefore, it is difficult to spend this Rs.9,000 for contingencies as the price of the car will cost Rs.35,000. Secondly, Sir, this is with regard to factories which come under the Major Head 'Labour and Employment and Factories'. I would like to draw the attention of the House to a press statement of October 29th, 1972 issued by the National Industrial Corporation Ltd. for the Company's Secretary for the Government Cement Factory in Meghalaya. Actually, Sir, it was Government of Meghalaya only in title- a misowner - but in reality it was the Government of Assam undertaking. Now, no doubt it has become Government of Meghalaya undertaking. To my mind, the Government of Meghalaya is only the caretaker of the Assam Cement Factory which will befool thousands of our educated unemployed youths of this State. In that sense, it is quite inappropriate to call it 'Meghalaya Undertaking' so far as Assam Cement is concerned. Actually, the Company's Secretary is for general administration from the Advertisement. We had already stated that we have an administrative officer in the Cement Company who is our own tribal of this district and because the said officer does not come from outside the State, it is really a Government of Meghalaya undertaking. The Company on 21st and 22nd November had some interviews for appointing Accountants. 4 Accountants have been appointed and only 1 tribal out of 3 non-tribals was appointed. What is this? But the Company has given an excuse that the 3 nominees were those who have passed B.Com. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, today, I have with me a Gazette of Meghalaya. In the Gazette at page 496, we have got this. One post of Accountant has been advertised through the Secretary of Meghalaya Selection Board and the required qualifications were P.U. passed in Arts or Science.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Industries, etc. ) :-  I am sorry to interrupt. But the hon. Member has gone far from the topic of the discussion. Whatsoever, this Grant is for the Inspectorate of Electricity and unfortunately, it was the Member's misunderstanding in so far as the Grant is concerned, because it has been listed under 'C' - Normal - Factories. But this is meant purely for the equipment of the Car for the Inspectorate of Electricity. It has nothing to do with Assam Cement.

Prof. M.N. Majaw :- But the cut motion which was moved by the hon. Mover under Major Head - "Labour and Employment - Factories" was to raise a general discussion. If I am to say a little more Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in matters of factories there is no doubt that if we look at page 5 of Demand No.10 the hon. Member wants to raise a general discussion under Head "38 - Labour and Employment - II - Factories" I beg to say that we have one Factory and that is under Government of Meghalaya Undertaking.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Industries ) :- No. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if the hon. Member will look down further in the Schedule he will find '(b)' Inspectorate - Electricity and this definitely implies that it is for Inspectorate of Electricity.

Prof. M.N. Majaw :- I will require a ruling from you Sir, in this regard, whether the hon. Mover who has moved this Major Head "38 - Labour and Employment - Factories " want to raise a discussion or not but a dispute in one of the items under that Head is that he wants to raise a general discussion on that Major Head. May we be allowed to refer to that important matter?

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Under Rule 152 of the Rules of Procedures and Conduct of Business, it is laid down that "The debate on the supplementary grants shall be confined to the items constituting the same and no discussion may be raised on the original grants nor policy underlying them save in so far as it may be necessary to explain or illustrate the particular items under discussion."

Prof. M.N. Majaw :- I am not raising any discussion other than the items relating to the Supplementary Grant.

Shri Ripple Kyndiah ( Jaiaw, S.T. ) :- Participating on the discussion in this Cut Motion, I have only one or two points to make. I am happy that the hon. Member from Mawhati had made it clear about his intention in making a statement now, it is clear that it has got nothing to do with the Assam Cement. I may recall the fact that this grant is meant for the Inspectorate of Electricity and it was mainly meant to provide equipment to the Inspectorate of Electricity. So far as this grant is concerned, it falls within the normal head Labour and Employment. It does not concern with any other industrial tempo of the State, but strictly for the Inspectorate of Electricity. There were officers that should be provided with car and other paraphernalia to conduct their business satisfactorily. Now, the hon. Member from Mawhati remarked a very interesting diagnose of the expenditure that out of Rs.40,390, Rs.25,000 will be for the purchase of a car.

        On going through the figures, I was prompted to say that apart from the pay of the establishment, allowances and honoraria, there is a major head of expenditure or p.o.l. So, if you take the total need, I think this amount is certainly necessary. I therefore, oppose the Cut Motion.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Now, I request the Minister incharge to reply.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Electricity ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this demand is only for the Inspectorate of Electricity which is a newly created Inspectorate and recently the budget of Rs.5,000 was made to meet the expenditure upto the month of November, 1972 and now this Supplementary Demand is for contingent items such as type-writer, stationery, furniture, appliances, etc. - which are essential for this technical department to discharge its responsibility under the Indian Electricity Act and Rules. That is why, this additional amount of Rupees forty thousand has been demanded. This is essential for carrying out the testing of all electrical installations and to conduct immediate enquiries and to supervise and provide safety and for protection of all electricity establishments. This has unfortunately been misunderstood by the Member concerned. So far as Rupees nine thousand are concerned, it is calculated that this will be required, apart from the expenditure for the car, for the Inspectorate for providing type-writer, stationery, furniture, appliances, etc. That is why this demand has been made and it has nothing to do with the Assam Cements, etc. So, with these explanations, I trust, the Member from Mynso-Raliang will kindly withdraw the Cut Motion. 

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, after hearing two contradictory explanations both from the hon. Member about p.o.l. and from the Minister incharge, I take this to be entirely meant for the new office and appliances for that office and this being a new one, I withdraw my cut motion.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Has the hon. Member leave of the House to withdraw the Cut Motion ?

( Voices ........... Yes, Yes. )

        The Cut Motion is with leave of the House withdrawn.

        Now I put the main question before the House. The question is there is an additional amount of Rs.40,000.00 only be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 38 - Labour and Employment - II - Factories".

        The motion is carried and demand is passed.

        Now, let us come to Demand No.11. I request the Minister incharge to move.

Shri S.K. Marak ( Minister, Labour ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an  additional amount of Rs.2,23,300 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "38 - Labour and Employment - IV - Employment and Training".

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- In this respect, I received a Cut Motion in the name of hon. Member Shri Humphrey Hadem.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, due to shortage of time, I refrain from moving my Cut Motion.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Now I put the main question before the House. The question is that an additional amount of Rs.2,23,300 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "38 - Labour and Employment - IV - Employment and Training".

        The motion is carried. The demand is passed.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Now let us move to Demand No. 12. I request the Minister incharge to move.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Forest ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an  additional amount of Rs.30,00,000, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 70 - Forests".

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Here I have received a Cut Motion in the name of Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.30,00,000 under Supplementary Demand No. 12 , Major Head " 70 - Forests " at page 16 of the list of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1.00, that is, the amount of the whole supplementary demand of Rs.30,00,000 do stand reduced to Re.1.

        In moving this Cut Motion I want to raise a discussion.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Cut Motion moved.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the additional amount of Rs.30,00,000 is required by the Minister incharge to pay for the supply of materials - shelter materials - to the Bangladesh people. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this additional amount of Rs.30 lakhs will be paid from the Miscellaneous provision and it may be reimbursed by the Government of India later on. It seems that there is the direction of the Government of India to spend for these shelter materials needed by the Bangladesh people. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, no doubt we have nothing to say against the need of the Bangladesh people, they need help, but the Government of India has now asked our Government to spend Rs.30 lakhs for supply of these shelter materials. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have seen in the last few months that lot of timber and large quantity of woods have been sent to Bangladesh for reconstruction of the buildings which have been destroyed. So, consequently, our Government, either through the help of the U.N.O. or with the help of the Central Government, have taken these materials from the State. They have supplied these timbers from the forests, both from the Government forests and also from the private forests. Contractors have been asked and they have been given contract to supply to Bangladesh. What we have seen Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, is that the materials that have been supplied and allowed to be cut by the Government are all young trees and young timber which are available throughout the State. If you go about the country side you will find that cutting down of trees for supply to Bangladesh has denuded our forest to a great extent and many of the hills that are covered with forests have now become bare. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, with the policy of the Government to cut down young trees for supply to Bangladesh, I am afraid in the near future we will have no more forests and our lands will become barren and cultivation will ultimately become poor over and above wanton destruction of our forest products. Therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if the Government of India is willing to help Bangladesh with this money they can ask other State Government like West Bengal and Uttar Pradesh, etc., which are advanced and more developed than our State to Supply those building materials to Bangladesh as they have got enough finished metals. But I for one would like to say that our State is under developed; it has no means or materials to be supplied to Bangladesh for building purposes. Therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I feel that this amount of Rs.30,00,000 be refused so as to put an end to further denudation of our forests. Sir, since I do not have a clear explanation as to what kind of materials to be supplied to Bangladesh, I reserve my observation and I move this Cut Motion in order to raise a discussion and to get a clarification from the Government.

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh ( Mawkyrwat S.T. ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Cut Motion moved by the hon. Member from Pariong. In supporting the Cut Motion I have only one point to place before the House for consideration of the Government. It is about those building or shelter materials which the Government of India has allotted to the State for supply to Bangladesh. Lot of timbers have already been delivered and transported to Bangladesh. In this connection two roads or centres have been authorised for transporting and delivering these materials. Sir, the contractors who supply these timbers have complained that they are going always inside the territory of Bangladesh to deliver the goods. This is dangerous and illegal for our nationals to go inside the territory of Bangladesh without a proper permit. Therefore, I would like to appeal to the Government that if it is possible, to arrange that Bangladesh nationals should come to take delivery of these timbers from our territory or such delivery of timbers may be done in no man's land. To go inside the Bangladesh territory is dangerous especially nowadays when there is tension was pointed out during the discussion earlier of the ill-treatment meted out to our tribal people inside Bangladesh. This question is very important and I would like to appeal to the Government to take steps to prevent and protect the lives of our people if they have to go inside Bangladesh territory for delivery of these materials. With these few words Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Cut Motion.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Forest ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, this grant is actually to be totally reimbursed by the Government of India . It is actually the plan of the Government to assist the Government of Bangladesh in an emergency for immediate need of temporary shelters like Ballies, Bamboos and timbers. Since our State is near to Bangladesh and we have surplus of these commodities, we have been asked to supply these things to Bangladesh. A number of our people have been given assistance in the form of work and supply and most of the trees have been cut down to remove congestion in the growth of trees in the Government forests. These timbers are utilised for earning money. Now regarding the point raised by the hon. Member from Mawkyrwat, I would like to say that our contractors are delivering these materials just at the border. Our Customs Department has been trying to deliver these materials in various spots along the border but since the Bangladesh Government has not got adequate staff or organisations to do the work, this could not be done. Anyway these things are being worked out and looked into and whatever difficulties our contractors are facing or the people from the other side, will be solved mutually. The quantity concerned is not so huge as to destroy our forests  compared with the damages caused by jhumming and large scale exploitation of our forests for commercial purposes. But since smaller trees are cut down for thinning in the Government forests, I believe the objection raised by the hon. Member from Pariong may be withdrawn and this is done to bring certain revenue to the Government and the Government of India will reimburse the same. So I request the Mover of the Cut Motion to kindly withdraw it.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have been asked to withdraw the Cut Motion but before I do that I would like to say that I have found that in the last quota which was supplied before this Supplementary Demand of Rs.30 lakhs comes up there was a thinning of the protected forests of Marshilong. There was also thinning and selling of these timbers and ballies and posts from the forests of the Thyllaw people; not only in these two places but in many other places also. So, Sir, may I get a further clarification from the Minister or from the Government whether the new quota of supply will be supplied by the Department or will be supplied on contract basis and if this Rs.30 lakhs as the Minister has stated will be spent for timbers out of  jhumming and cutting of timbers or ballies will be done in the forests which are necessary for thinning them. I do not have any objection.

Shri S.D.D. Nichols Roy ( Minister, Forest ) :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the materials to be supplied are timbers, ballies and bamboos only. As I said earlier, the quantity is not so huge so as to denude our forests. The arrangement is that we ask the contractors to supply on certain points. I shall further look into the matter to make sure that serious deforestation is not there. When the contractors are asked to supply, they will be given contract and they will supply from forests where thinning or jhumming take place and so on.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, after hearing the assurances of the Minister incharge that he will look into the matter and stop the indiscriminate cutting of trees and that he will not allow deforestation and destruction of the forests. I withdraw the cut motion. 

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Has the hon. Member leave of the House to withdraw the Cut Motion ? ( Voices ........ Yes, Yes ). 

        Now I put the main question before the House. The question is that an  additional amount of Rs.30,00,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 70 - Forests ".

        The motion is carried and the demand is passed

DEMAND No.13

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance on behalf of the Minister of State i/c District Council Affairs) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.4,42,748 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head "71 - Miscellaneous - II - Donations for Charitable purposes, etc.".

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received a Cut Motion in the name of Shri H. Hadem.

*Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs. 4,42,748 under Supplementary Demand No.13, Major Head "71 - Miscellaneous - II - Donations for Charitable purposes, etc." at page 17 of the list of supplementary demands be reduced to Re.1 i.e.,  the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.4,42,748 do stand reduced to Re.1.

        Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in this connection I want to draw your attention to the two paragraphs of the Explanatory Notes, i.e., third and fourth paragraphs. Third paragraph reads - The amount of Rs.2,00,000 is required for regularising the advance taken from Contingency Fund during 1971-72 as grants-in-aid to the United Khasi Jaintia Hills District Councils for its normal administration. The said amount will be adjusted later against the dues payable by the Government to the Council on minerals, etc. Sir, in this particular point I would like to have a clarification from the Minister. What does the Government mean by the words "grants-in-aid" and if it is the grant-in-aid, why should that amount be again adjusted by the Government from the District Council. Secondly, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the last paragraph it is stated that the amount is required to meet the expenditure in connection with the last general election to the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District Council which will be adjusted later from the District Council's share on royalties accruing from minor minerals. As there is no provision in the budget, hence the Supplementary Demand. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, here I want to point out the different policy of the Government towards the District Council, which means that the Jaintia Hills District Council was asked to deposit some amount in connection with the Election. If I am correct, an amount of Rs.20,000 has been asked by Government to be deposited in connection with the election expenses of the District Councils there. In this particular District Council, the amount has been met by the Government which will be adjusted again from the royalties on minor minerals. I do not think, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that there in Jowai, we do have any minerals. As such I would like to get a clarification from the Minister incharge why different policies within the State are adopted for the Autonomous District Council in the particular matter, viz., the Election of the District Council. With these few words, Sir, I move the Cut Motion.

*Shri Darwin D. Pugh ( Minister of State, District Council Affairs ) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member who has just moved the Cut motion has sought clarification in respect of paragraph 3 of the Explanatory Notes. He says that he did not understand why it was given as grants-in-aid and then at the same time, Government stated that the amount is to be adjusted. The reply to that question, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, is that the amount is given as a loan with the intention to assist, which means to aid the District Council to continue functioning and the United Khasi and Jaintia Hills District Councils claimed that approximately 28 lakhs are due to it from the State Government and this amount has accrued over a period taken from 1952-53 up to 1970-71. It is obvious, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that this period relates almost entirely to the time when the District Council was under the Government of Assam and because the claims are made under various and numerous Departments, it will take time for our Government to collect necessary information and therefore, we as a Government decided to give this 2 lakhs as a loan to assist and aid the District Council to carry out its normal administration. Then the hon. Member who has moved the Cut Motion has also, by implication, charged the State Government of meeting our preferential treatment to the District Council of this District. He has said that while the Jowai District Council has been asked to deposit the cost of conducting the election of this particular District Council, the Khasi Hills District Council was not asked. This is not a fact, the District Council of the Khasi Hills was also asked to deposit the money. But when they were asked to do so, they pointed out to the Government the amount of 28 lakhs which is still due to them and since the election had to be held, therefore the Government has deposited this amount of Rs.2,17,748 on behalf of the District Council on the same basis to be adjusted against whatever amounts due to the District Council. With this clarification, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I request the hon. Member through you, to very kindly withdraw the Cut Motion. (The Deputy Speaker vacated the chair for the Speaker).

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, can we take that the expression grants-in-aid used in the 3rd paragraph does not actually mean grants-in-aid but it means loans without any interest ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh ( Minister of State, District Council Affairs ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is only the name of the Head of Account under which the loan was given.

Mr. Speaker :- May I know the mind of the mover.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am not fully convinced, of course. Any how, since it was a matter that had been paid already and at the same time it is to be adjusted again, I hope it is a matter for the particular District Council to see that it is to be refunded. With these words Mr. Speaker, Sir, I withdraw the Cut Motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Has the hon. Member leave of the House to withdraw his Cut Motion ? ( Voices - Yes, Yes) Then I put the main question. The question is that an amount of  Rs.4,42,748 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 71 - Miscellaneous - II - Donations for Charitable purposes, etc.".

        The motion is adopted and the demand is passed.

        Now I request the Minister incharge of Health to move Grant No. 14. 

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Health ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor, I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.2,00,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 71 - Miscellaneous - III - Grants-in-aid, Contribution, etc.".

Mr. Speaker :- I have received one Cut Motion from Shri Hadem and Shri Francis K. Mawlot. Now any one of them can move.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the total provision of Rs.2,00,000 under Supplementary Demand No.14, Major Head " 71- Miscellaneous - III - Grants-in-aid, Contribution, etc." at page 19 of the List of Supplementary Demands be reduced to Re.1, i.e.,  the amount of the whole Supplementary Demand of Rs.2,00,000 do stand reduced to Re.1.

Mr. Speaker :- Cut motion moved.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, from the explanatory notes, we find that the intention of the Government for asking this Supplementary Demand of Rs.2 lakhs is to be given to the Shillong Municipality for the improvement of Shillong Town. It is a fact, and everybody, I think, has seen that Shillong has become dirtier and dirtier every day. I remember in the past years, Shillong was quite a beautiful city. When I was reading in class III, my teacher told me that Shillong is known as the "Scotland of the East". But today Shillong has become so dirty that it beggars any description. Now what I want to point out specifically is the portion of Barabazar around 'Motphran', - I do not know how to call it in English - it has become so dirty and rather it has become a public latrine. I do not know whether the Government are aware of that, but it looks odd to anybody that such a centre or place where everyone who come from Gauhati, Cherra, Jowai, etc., have to pass through it. The Ministers of Assam and Meghalaya, also even the Union Ministers have to pass through it whenever they come to Shillong. It is also dirty and so congested - of course about congestion that depend on the P.W.D., but as regards cleanliness, it is the duty of the Municipal to look after it. I would suggest to the Government, to see and prevent the public from committing nuisance around Barabazar side.

Mr. Speaker :- The Government may not be able unless and until there is a co-operation from the public.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, of course, public co-operation is also necessary. I on my part, whenever I see anyone committing nuisance , I used to kick him on the back, but I am afraid that some day I might be kicked back.

Mr. Speaker :- I think it is for this that this loan for the Municipality is required.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :-  Not only that, this Motphran area is as a matter of fact, the front door of the Shillong Municipality or Shillong town as a whole. There are nullas or drains which are completely blocked by the refuses of the town. But I am sorry to say that these drains remain blocked for months together or even for years without anybody to look after. I take this opportunity to point out that Jaiawshyiap in the locality in which I reside, i.e.,  Jaiaw, all the drains are destroyed by rain water and that was since two or three years back and I do not know that happened when nobody came to inspect. No sweeper was sent to clean the drains. Nobody came to repair those destroyed drains and now there is one house which has the victim, I mean the occupants of that house have become victims of someone's septic tank which leaked out and over-flowed of its compound. I brought this thing to the notice of the Municipality through the Vic-Chairman. He promised to send sweepers to clean the drains as well as the Municipal Inspectors to look into these drains which are being damaged by rains. But those promises were never fulfilled. I hope this 2 lakhs of rupees which will be given to the Shillong Municipality through this supplementary demand and if this amount will properly utilised, one day Shillong will really be the Scotland of the East. So I heart fully support the cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Hadem ?

Shri H. Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have nothing much to say. In this particular grant I want only one clarification. On the portion which I could not understand. It has been stated that the Shillong Municipal Board has been taken up by the Government of Meghalaya. I could not understand it properly. 

Mr. Speaker :- The Shillong Municipal Board has not been superseded by the Government. Formerly Shillong Municipal area was under the jurisdiction of the Government of Assam. Now it has come under Meghalaya.

Prof. M.N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the words are very clear in the corrigendum wherein it has been stated categorically that the Government of Meghalaya has taken over the Shillong Municipal area under Article (b).

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Upstar Kharbuli ?

Shri Upstar Kharbuli ( Malki ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in supporting the cut motion I would like to make a few observations. I think the Government is seized of the problem faced by the Shillong Municipality for all these years in tackling the sanitation problem in this town and as such Government considered necessary to appoint an Executive Officer there to function together with the Board. There is a Chairman of the Board, and over and above this, one Executive Officer had to be appointed. We do not know what improvement could be achieved by doing so but we know for certain that the expenditure involved for appointment of an Executive Officer which is to the extent of Rs.1,500 to 1,800 per month will be an extra burden to the Board. Moreover, the various Departments under the Shillong Municipality are in confusion as to whom they are responsible. They do not know whose direction they are to follow, that of the Chairman of the Board or that of the Executive Officer? They are now in a state of dilemma. For instance, in so far as sanitation problem is concerned, there is a Health Officer under the Municipal Board who has to formulate programmes and such programmes which are normally required to be approved by the Board and then carried out. But on many occasions it is found that the Executive Officer is interfering with the programme of the Health Officer. So, I think if the Government is not satisfied with the function of the Board, it may not  be advisable to appoint an Executive Officer but rather, it would be better if the Government supersede the Board straightway till a new Board can be constituted or till fresh elections of Wards Commissioners can be held.

        Another thing is that we have come to know that there is one Organisation known as Civic Welfare Organisation. They have submitted a proposal to the Government for increasing the number of Ward Commissioners in this town and we have seen that Government have issued notification also to that effect demarcating the various Wards. But again it was found that there were many technical mistakes and from the notification it could be learnt that demarcation was made on the suggestion made by the Shillong Municipal Board. So seeing all these things we are very much dissatisfied with the functioning of this Board at present. So, we would urge upon the Government, through you, Sir, to expedite the delimitations of these wards and to have fresh elections of Ward Commissioners as soon as possible. So, Sir, with these few words I support the cut motion.

*Shri D.D. Lapang ( Nongpoh S.T. ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, while taking part in the discussion I would like to draw the attention of the hon. Members to the two lines contained in the Explanatory Notes that is, the Government of Meghalaya has taken over the Shillong Municipal Board only very recently. The hon. Members have given their views on the dirty picture of Shillong - the dirtiness that the travelers from outside can see and feel that there is no inspection by officials at all. In brief, we can say that there is no good administration and while we are saying that the administration of the  Shillong Municipal Board has only very recently been taken over I would also draw the attention of the hon. Member that these are not the only defects or dirty items of Shillong because they forget to speak of the sweeper line and unauthorised road-side stalls, the presence of beggars and water scarcity in the whole town. We all agree that a lot of things should have been done by the Municipal Board particularly when the Government have taken over.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Lapang, has Government taken over the administration of the Shillong Municipal Board?

Shri D.D. Lapang :- Yes, if these two lines are not wrong that "Meghalaya has taken over the Shillong Municipal Board only very recently ". Mr. Speaker, Sir, I know that the Government of Meghalaya has posted one I.A.S. Officer to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Municipal Board none can deny the fact that the Government has got a hand in the affairs of the Municipal Board. I fully agree with the hon. Member from Nongstoin when he said that when the Board had been allotted a sum of Rs.2 lakhs we are all expecting a new picture of Shillong. I do fall in line with the Hon. Member that with this amount the Government should be able to have a free hand to implement the same. So, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I oppose the cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Before the confusion becomes confounded may I request the hon. Minister to clarify the same.

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Municipal Administration ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, much has been expressed by the hon. Members on the Municipal Board. But as you know, this came under Meghalaya only very recently. The explanation given there is wrong. Government has not taken over the Shillong Municipal Board. The Shillong Municipal Board was outside the Autonomous State of Meghalaya and it has come within the area of Shillong only with effect from the 21st January, 1972.

Mr. Speaker :- may I draw the attention of the Minister to what has been stated here in the Explanatory Notes. It is stated "as Meghalaya has taken over only very recently" and you have to clarify the position. I think it will be better for the Minister to make this correction.

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Municipal Administration ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, here it has been stated "as Meghalaya has taken over only very recently". I think the confusion is there. Actually the Government of Meghalaya has not taken over. It is a mistake unfortunately.

Mr. Speaker :- Then the correct position would be : "As the Shillong Municipality has come under the control of the Government of Meghalaya only recently".

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Municipal Administration ) :- There had been discussions; the mover of the motion was not satisfied with the cleanliness of Shillong. Of course, we want cleanliness, but it is not up to the Government alone. He has also pointed out that there are so many of the citizens who have to observe civic roles and to see that people should not pass urine on road-sides and all that. The amount of Rs.2 lakhs, is not much and we cannot do much with this meagre sum. This is the only Municipal Board that we have, at present, within Meghalaya. Of course, we are trying to improve it. To cut short I will just read out "The Shillong Municipal Board came under the control of the Government of Meghalaya on the 21st January, 1972 .................... like the construction and maintenance of roads, drainage, supply of water and such other works .......... " When the Municipal Board came under the control of the State Government, the Board applied for a grant to meet the expenditure on these schemes and the Government sanctioned only Rs. 2 lakhs to help the Shillong Municipal Board. The budget provision in 1972-73 under this Head is only Rs.15,000 - the break-up of which is Rs.10,000 for the Tura Town Committee Fund and Rs.5,000 for the Shillong Municipal Board and the budget Estimate for 1972-73 was first submitted towards the end of 1971. The Tura Town Committee was already within the Autonomous State of Meghalaya and the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs was advanced from the Contingency Fund. This supplementary demand is to regularise the said advance as the amount sanctioned was to help the Board to execute its functions in the public interest and I would request the mover to kindly withdraw his Cut Motion.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to make a last request and I think it is not difficult for the Government to post at least two policemen in the Motphran area at least to prevent people from passing urine there.

Mr. Speaker :- But the people may take it as a provocation.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- No, Sir. You see it has affected our morality and modesty and I think the Minister will not refuse to do that.

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Municipal Administration ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, we may consider keeping Policemen to stop people committing public nuisance, but it will be better for the citizens to have civic sense .... (interruption) ( Voices :  They drink a lot ) Well, Sir, I do not know that.

        Mr. Speaker, Sir, I will try to make some measures to see that the public do not commit nuisance at least on the road side. I would also appeal to the hon. Members, as many of them are leaders of the public, to co-operate with the Government by punishing those who commit nuisance in their own areas.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- On a point of information. It is not that the tribal people are so much lacking in civic sense. Mr. Speaker, Sir, this remark is not meant only for the tribal people but for the passers by who are mainly non-tribals. As such, I request the Hon'ble Minister not to mention this specifically for the tribal people.

Shri Sandford K. Marak ( Minister, Health ) :- Let me make it clear. That part of Shillong is very much tribal. But I do not say thereby, that only the tribals had committed these things. I do not mean that. Many tourists are coming. Many of these people I know. There are many Khasis, Garos, Nagas, Marwaris, Bengalis and so on.

        For the information of the House, Mr. Speaker, Sir, there is a latest Census figure, for Shillong 99,000 non-tribals and 51,000 tribals.

Mr. Speaker :- Shillong is inside Meghalaya and the population must be cosmopolitan. So it does not matter.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- At least I have got one bird, although my cut motion refers to this amount of Rs. 2 lakhs for the repairs of the Jaiaw Shyiap lane. So with the permission of the House I withdraw the cut motion. 

Mr. Speaker :-  Is it the sense of the House that the cut motion be withdrawn ( Voices - Yes, Yes ). The cut motion is with leave of the House withdrawn. Now, I put the question before the House.

        The question is that an additional amount of Rs.2,00,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 17 - Miscellaneous - III - Grants-in-aid, Contribution, etc". ( The motion was carried and demand passed ).

Mr. Speaker :- The Minister, Finance to move grant No. 15.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Finance Minister ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor , I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.2,23,380, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 71 - Miscellaneous - VIII - Civil Defence, etc".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Since there is no cut motion I put the question before the House.

        The question is that an additional amount of Rs.2,23,380, be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " 71 - Miscellaneous - VIII - Civil Defence, etc".

        The motion was carried and the demand passed.

        Now, the Minister of State, District Council Affairs to move Demand No. 16.

Shri D.D. Pugh ( Minister of States District Council ) :- Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor , I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.8,00,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. ( III - Loans to Autonomous District Councils, etc.)"

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. I have received one cut motion from Mr. Hadem. Will Mr. Hadem move the cut motion?

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- Due to shortage of time, I do not want to move my cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Since the mover is not going to move his cut motion, I put the question before the House.

        The question is that an additional amount of Rs.8,00,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. ( III - Loans to Autonomous District Councils, etc.)".

        (The motion was carried and demand passed).

Mr. Speaker :- Now, the Minister incharge of Corporation to move Demand No.17.

Shri Edwingson Bareh ( Minister, Co-operation ) :-  On the recommendation of the Governor , I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.8,40,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. (IV - Loans to Co-operative Societies)".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Will Shri Francis Mawlot move the Cut motion?

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Since we have discussed this subject, the other day, and due to shortage of time I do not want to move my cut motion.

Mr. Speaker :- Now, since the hon. Member is not moving his cut motion, I put the question before the House.

        The question is that an additional amount of Rs.8,40,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. (IV - Loans to Co-operative Societies)".

        ( The motion was carried and demand passed ).

Mr. Speaker :- Now I request the Minister, Finance to move Demand No.18.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Sir, on the recommendation of the Governor , I beg to move that an additional amount of Rs.12,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. (VII - Educational Loans )".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Since there is no cut motion I put the question before the House.

        The question is that an additional amount of Rs.12,000 be granted to the Minister incharge to defray certain charges which will come in the course of payment during the year ending the 31st March, 1973 for the administration of the head " Q - Loans and Advances, etc. (VII - Educational Loans )".

        ( The motion was carried and demand passed ).


The Meghalaya Appropriation (No. II) Bill, 1972

Mr. Speaker :-  I request the Finance Minister to beg leave to introduce the Meghalaya Appropriation (No. II ) Bill, 1972.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- I beg leave  to introduce the Meghalaya Appropriation (No. II) Bill, 1972.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. The question is that  leave be granted to introduce the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972.

        The Motion is carried.

        Before the Minister, Finance introduces, the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill,1972, let my Secretariat distribute the Bill. In the mean time let me read out the message from the Governor.

Raj Bhavan,

Shillong,

3rd December, 1972.

         "I recommend under Article 207 (1) of the Constitution of India, the introduction of the Meghalaya Appropriation (No. II) Bill, 1972 in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly.

Sd- BRAJ KUMAR NEHRU,

Governor.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- I beg  to introduce the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. The question is that the Meghalaya Appropriation (No. II )  Bill, 1972 be introduced. The motion is carried. The Bill, is introduced. ( The Secretary read out the title of the Bill ). Before I call upon the Minister, Finance to move the motion for consideration, let me read the message from the Governor. 

Raj Bhavan,

Shillong,

3rd December, 1972.

        "I recommend under Article 207 (3) of the Constitution of India to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly the consideration of the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972.

Sd- BRAJ KUMAR NEHRU,

Governor.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- I beg to move that the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972, be taken into consideration.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Now, I put the question before the House.

        The question is that the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972 be taken into consideration.

        The motion is carried.

Prof. Martin Narayan  Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed to say a few words on this Bill. Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is with a very heavy heart that I stand here today to oppose this Misappropriation Bill.

Mr. Speaker :- You cannot say that you oppose the Misappropriation Bill, as this is the Appropriation Bill.

*Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I mean the Appropriation Bill. Only this morning, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I got a shock of my life when I totaled the amounts of money that have already been spent by this Government in running the State since the 2nd of April, 1970. Again today we have before us this Bill for further expenditure of Rs.1,32,09,013.00 and the hon. Members will be aghast and shocked to know how much has already been spent during the last 2 years. What we have today has come in the form of Supplementary Demand and I have totaled all the Supplementary Demands made in 1971-72 and the budget expenditure in 1970-71 and 1971-72 and 1972-73 which amount to something very ignoble. It stood at Rs.1,036 crores of rupees and also 80 lakhs 77 thousands 835 rupees. So, Mr. Speaker, Sir, this is a huge fantastic amount beyond our dreams and this amount of 1,036 crores means 1,036 lakhs of rupees. Mr. Speaker, Sir, of course you will find that actually 14 crores had been spent on Relief and Rehabilitation Department with the remaining 122 crores of rupees within 2 years. Had this Government distributed this money among the people of Meghalaya - to every single man, woman and child, the amount will be 1,228 rupees for every single person in the State and if you multiply this amount by a family of six people it will amount to 7,368 rupees for every single family in Meghalaya. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have totaled the amount of expenditure for the Ministers which amount to 22 lakhs 75 thousands 689 rupees only for seven persons whereas for the M.L.As, the expenditure was only about 7 lakhs 65 thousands spent as salaries and about 3 lakhs on D.As amounting to about 10 lakhs only. But Sir, this amount of 1036 crores of rupees is a very fantastic amount and whatever the Finance Minister may say, he cannot wipe out this amount, he will have this huge colossal figure of Rs.1036 crores 80 lakhs. Mr. Speaker, Sir, 74 crores was from the Budget and 62 crores by way of Supplementary Demands. So this is the back-door method of spending money. Here is another Supplementary Demand again. Heaven alone knows how many Supplementary Demands this Government will bring before the next financial year because uptil now, 62 crores was for Supplementary Demands. So cannot this Government do proper budgeting and bring out one consolidated sum at that time instead of this back door method. This is because they do not want the public to know; they are doing it quietly and privately how to utilise this money and they do not search their conscience before God as well as before the people of this State. This is a very serious matter although I can see them smiling. It is such a horrible insult to us and they are all smiling and they can smile because perhaps they all know how the money has been spent in the State of Meghalaya. Mr. Speaker, Sir, in 2 months 11 days during elections between the 21st January and 31st March, an amount of Rs.3,62,00,000 was spent only on roads and we are hunting for this road in the countryside and in Shillong for this silver plated and gold plated road. I don't think Mr. Hopingstone Lyngdoh found this road in two months. Rs.25 crores was spent in a matter of 2 months 11 days during the elections. It is easy, of course, Mr. Speaker, Sir, for this Ministry to spend crores of rupees for that breakfast and lunches alone but, for us poor people it is a horrible matter. Let this Government reply to the people as to how this money was utilised.

Mr. Speaker :- I do not know whether we can continue after 5 o'clock. It appears to me that there is one specific charge against the Government in so far as expenditure is concerned. I now call upon the Finance Minister to reply.

*Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am very surprised for this unexpected sudden outburst on the part of the hon. Member. He has rightly remarked that we were all smiling when he was making this outburst because the tone and tenor of his voice are very very serious indeed. So we smile on the tone and substance of his speech. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the whole day we have been going through all these amounts. This is only a consolidation Bill for all the amounts we have asked right through . Today, we are discussing, and in fact, if I remember correctly, no Member pressed for this. They have all withdrawn and agreed with the Government that this money is required and they have moved the Cut Motions with a view to raise a general discussion and to suggest and criticise here and there on the actual working for which these demands are being made. Therefore, I should again say that it is very very surprising that this fag end move is taken by the hon. Member to oppose this Bill with such a tone and voice which carries no substance at all. I am also surprised with the Member's contention of his own imagination. If the hon. Member or any of us would be contented with 10.36 crores of rupees then I think the hon. Member should not have come forward with more amount. But I should like the Member to come forward with not only lakhs and thousands but with more crores of rupees. I like that the Member should raise and pass any remark because we are the tribal people and are still backward in these Hill areas. So, we should come forward with thousands and crores of rupees and we should not ask why this amount of Rs.10.36 crores only was to be spent. Therefore, there is no substance at all in his speech. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would request in view of the fact that the whole House had agreed to these demands and as it is only a matter of formality to consolidate these demands which have been passed. I would request the House to pass this Bill.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, on the remark made by the Minister that we are like frogs living in the small pond, we on this side of the House took it very seriously.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I have not charged any of the Members individually.

Mr. Speaker :- In fact, the Minister has not charged any hon. Member individually. What he says is that we the Members of this State should not live in a backward stage only but should advance ourselves as far as practicable.

Prof. M.N. Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- On a point of clarification Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to point out that we expect that the reply of the Hon'ble Minister should be at least to ensure that this amount of Rs.136 crores will be carefully spent. I am a Member of the Public Account Committee and we have not received even the grand total for 1970-71 which stands as an audit objection.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- This is a false argument.

Mr. Speaker :-  I think the charge is rather very thunderous and is equally matched by the charge from the other side. But I think, it is not proper that the hon. Member should bring about this charge at this stage which should have come at the time when these Grants were presented before the House when there was scope for general discussion. But, at this juncture when the Meghalaya appropriation  ( No. II ) Bill of 1972 is presented, whatever suggestion you may have, will be within the ambit of this House and the demands should be specific. I have already extended the time according to the exigency of the case but in spite of the cold of the evening, I am feeling still warm, with this kind of discussion. Therefore, I will close the discussion and I call upon the Minister to move the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, 1972 for passing.

Shri Humphrey Hadem ( Mynso-Raliang S.T. ) :- On a point of clarification Mr. Speaker Sir, we were deeply concerned with the remark of the Finance Minister that we were frogs living in a small pond. I think, Mr. Speaker, Sir, the word is unparliamentary as I think, you were also included.

Mr. Speaker :- I do not think that I am included there.

( laughter )

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- So Sir, you think that the word includes only the Government. But the proceedings of this House are not only those of the Government alone but also of the Opposition benches.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, there is a mis-understanding on the part of the hon. Members. I have said that unless we develop the State economically in a most rapid pace, we will be still at a stake, living like frogs in an empty pond. This is not the charge.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh ( Pariong S.T. ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, we feel very much about it. He did say  that we will therefore, remain backward like frogs in a pond. As we have the feelings of the tribals who are marching forward in development, we were no frogs at all. 

Shri Francis K. Mawlot ( Nongstoin S.T. ) :- He was not answering to the charge he had made. So I take it seriously that the charge was against us in the Opposition.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw ( Mawhati S.T. ) :- Is the Minister prepared to withdraw the charge ?

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, you have already ruled out how is it that matter is still being raised ?

Mr. Speaker :- As I said the word "We " is very big. But one thing which I now, like to point out, is that I am excluded from that pond. Because as you all know, I do not have that spirit, I don't think anybody has that spirit of narrow mindedness.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, if you were not included then we also from this side should not be included, it must be the Ruling Party Members who were like the frogs in the pond.

( Laughter )

Mr. Speaker :- As I have told you, I do not expect that I will be included there. I will close the discussion now and I would request the Minister, Finance to move that the Meghalaya Appropriation No. II Bill, 1972, be passed.

Shri B.B. Lyngdoh ( Minister, Finance ) :- I beg to move that the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill, be passed.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Now, I put the question before the House. The question is that the Meghalaya Appropriation ( No. II ) Bill 1972, be passed.

        ( The motion was carried and the bill passed ).

Mr. Speaker :-  In order to dispose of all matters in the order paper for today, I will further extend the sitting of the House. I now call upon Mr. S.D. Khongwir to move his calling attention motion.


Calling Attention

*Shri S. D. Khongwir ( Mawlai S.T. ) :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I call the attention of the Minister for Education under Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business of the Assembly to the outcome of the " Subroto Mukherjee Cup Football Tournament, 1972 at New Delhi".

Mr. Speaker :-  You may now proceed by way of clarification.

Shri S. D. Khongwir  :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, this " Subroto Mukherjee Cup Football Tournament, 1972 " is an All India Tournament. It is the All India Schools Tournament in which all the schools in India sent their teams for competition, where each State will select at least one team for this Tournament to be held at New Delhi this year. So here, in the State of Meghalaya, the Education Department was responsible for the conduct of this tournament, in which the St. Anthony's High School, has appealed to the Minister of State to order for a " Tie-Break " with the Jowai Multipurpose School as the earlier game ended in a draw. At the same time, there was the order from the Assistant Deputy Inspector of Schools for the shifting of the Venue of the game which was scheduled to be held in Shillong. But, Sir, both the orders of the  Assistant Deputy Inspector of Schools have fixed the game between the Sacred Heart High School at Mawlai versus  the Jowai Multipurpose School to be shifted from Shillong to Jowai.

        This information to the Mawlai Sacred Heart High School came very late. The game was fixed for 23rd October whereas the information sent to the school reached only on the 22nd, which was Sunday. So the Sacred Heart High School appealed to the Minister of State to stay the order and that the game already fixed for Jowai should be played at Shillong as earlier decide and the Minister of State was very kind enough to hear the appeal and stay the order. He at the same time issued necessary orders for the game to be played at Shillong on the 25th of October and Mr. Speaker, Sir, it was very surprising that when the teams had arrived at Polo Ground to play their match, the stay order came from the Minister of State saying that there was an appeal from the Jowai Multipurpose School. To this, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister of State whether it is a fact that there was really an appeal against the order of the Minister of State from the Jowai Multipurpose High School. To my knowledge, Mr. Speaker, Sir, the Jowai Multipurpose High School never submitted or filed any appeal either to the Jowai Hon'ble Chief Minister or to the Minister of State for Education. I cannot understand why the Minister of State in the absence of any appeal filed by the proper person, that is, Jowai Multipurpose High School, stayed this match scheduled to be played between the Sacred Heart Boys' High School and the Jowai Multipurpose School. All that I know, Mr. Speaker, Sir, is that the petition supposed to be an appeal came from one of the representatives of Jowai - the Hon'ble Minister, Mr. E. Bareh as an M.L.A. In this respect, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I submit that an M.L.A., for that matter, is not a proper person to appeal for and on behalf of the Jowai Multipurpose High School. The proper person to make an appeal, if any, should be the Principal of the school concerned. So, on these points, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to get a statement and clarification from the Minister of State and on this account I would also like to express my feelings about the development of sports here in our State. For a very simple matter to conduct a school football tournament in our State if we are not able to do, how can we expect to run or to develop sports in our State, specially when in a simple matter we have done a lot of bungling. Thank you.

Shri E. Bareh ( Minister, Agriculture, etc. ) :- Since my name has been mentioned, Mr. Speaker, Sir, may I clarify the position. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I did not appeal or prefer any appeal against the Sacred Heart Boys' High School.

Mr. Speaker :- Minister of State for Education.

Shri D.D. Pugh ( Minister of State, Sports ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, after such a full statement that has been made by the hon. Member, I find it very difficult to make a statement because he has stated the facts. But I would only add that when we were informed by the organizers of the Subroto Mukherjee Cup Tournament in New Delhi that the tournament would be held in New Delhi sometime in November, we took necessary steps to select the best team or the best school to represent the State of Meghalaya in the tournament. I would say that while the game or selection trials went off smoothly and were completed successfully in the district of Garo Hills, some trouble arose in the two districts of U.K. & J. Hills and Jowai. As correctly stated by the hon. Member, the difficulty arose as a result of the game that was played between the St. Anthony's High School of Shillong and the Multipurpose Higher Secondary School of Jowai. The difficulty arose over the interpretation and implementation of the very skeleton rules that have put down in the notice which had also given the ties that they may resort to the tie-breaker or otherwise. When the Department faced difficulties, the matter was brought to my notice and, as correctly stated by the hon. Member who has moved the calling attention motion, I took certain decision. But just before the decision could be implemented, I also received an appeal from a colleague of mine who happened to be a Cabinet rank Minister and though he mentioned in the appeal that he was making the appeal as one of the representatives of the Jowai district, I could not divide the person into two because he happened to be a Cabinet rank Minister. I then referred the appeal to the Chief Minister but unfortunately he was out on tour. He was in Delhi at that time and by the time the Chief Minister got back to the headquarters, there was no more time left for the Chief Minister to dispose of the case. As a result, the case remained undisposed and it is unfortunate that Meghalaya as a State could not send a team to participate in the Subroto Mukherjee Cup Tournament in Delhi. At the same time I would like to take the opportunity of saying that whatever decision arrived at by any person whatsoever at any level it was the decision taken for one and only one intention to resolve the difficulties so as to enable the Department to successfully conclude the selection trial so that our State can be represented in the tournament in Delhi. I would also like to take the opportunity of stating that I am not as happy or I am not so sorry as the Member who has moved the Call Attention Motion for the inability to send a team to Delhi. I exhort the people that as good students we must prepare to learn from mistakes, because the mistakes whatever they might be will not be made again. Next time it is definite that a team from Meghalaya will be able to participate in the Subroto tournament, i.e., next year.


Adjournment 

Mr. Speaker :-  The House stands adjourned till 10 A.M. on Tuesday the 5th December, 1972.

R.T. RYMBAI.
Dated Shillong : Secretary,
The 4th December, 1972. Meghalaya Legislative Assembly.

******