Proceedings of the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly  held at 9 a. m.  on Tuesday, the 2nd July, 1974 in the Assembly Chamber, Shillong.


Mr. Speaker in the Chair.




( To which oral replies were given )

Mr. Speaker :- Let us begin the business of the day by taking up Starred Question  No.14.

Site for the Creation  of NEHU

Shri Nimosh Sangma asked :

14. Will the Minister-in-charge of Education be pleased to  state-


(a) Whether  the site for the creation of NEHU has finally been selected at Shillong ?


(b) If so, where ?


(c) Who is  the owner of the land ?


(d) The amount Government purpose to pay the land owner as compensation ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education)  replied :


(a) -Yes, Sir.


(b) -At Umshing-Mawkynroh area.


(c)-This has not yet been verified.


(d)-Compensation will be determined by the Collector.

Shri Maham Singh :- 14 (a), Mr. Speaker, Sir, may we know  what is the area of the land ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education)  :- Approximately about 900 acres .

Shri Maham Singh :-14 (d), May we know what is the likely amount of compensation to be paid ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education)  This has already been stated  in the reply. The compensation will be determined  by the Collector.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Whether this site at Umshing -Mawkynroh is one of the 4 sites recommended by the University Site Selection Committee ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in  the first instance, it was not only 4 sites which were looked into. But more  than 6 or 7 sites were looked into. Secondly, Sir, one of the sites looked into was called Mawtawar area which is part of the Mawkyrnroh are itself.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mawtawar and Mawkynroh are two quite different areas.

State Sports Council.

Shri P. N. Choudhury asked :

15. Will the Minister-in-charge of Sports be pleased to state-


(a) The names of the Members of the State Sports Council ?


(b) Whether  it is a fact that no representatives from Cricket and Volley Ball Associations have been included in the Council  ?


(c) If so, whether Government propose to include representatives from these Association ?


(d) Whether Government has taken step for coaching the  local players in various sports and games ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State, Sports, etc.) replied :


(a) -The hon. Members is requested  to refer to the rep to unstarred question 109 (a) during the Current Budget Session of the Assembly, 1974  in which the requisite information has been furnished in the House.



(b) -Yes, Sir.


(c) -No, Sir. The Articles of the Association of the State Sports Council of Meghalaya do not provide  for Government nominating representatives from Associations dealing with any particular sport and game.


(d) -Government  has appointed  a coach for football and steps are being then to utilize him for coaching players in the State .

Starred Question No.15 (d)

Shri  P. N. Choudhury :- Has  the Government proposed to arrange  coaching of any other item of sports ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education ) :-The Netaji Subhash Institute for Sports has been approached for coaches in the various  items of sports.

Appointment and employment in the office of the M. S. B. E.

Shri Nimosh Sangma asked :

16. Will the Minister-in-charge of Education be pleased to state-


(a) The reasons for the  delay in appointing a Garo as Assistant Secretary to the Meghalaya School Board of Education ?


(b) The number of Garos, who are being employed  in the office of the Meghalaya School Board of Education in Shillong ? (Grades and categories )

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State, Education) replied :


(a)-1 (one) Garo has been selected  for appointment as Assistant Secretary. The appointment will be made soon.


(b)-Assistant Secretary -1 (Position indicated in (a) above. Superintendent-1 (Already appointed, but not yet joined). U. D. Assistant -1 (Already selected , appointment will be made soon.)

  L.D. Assistant - 2
  Peon - 3.

Shri S. N. Koch :- 16 (b), How many posts of Superintendent are there ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, Education) :- So far only one post has been created and it is considered sufficient.

Construction of the Puksora bridge

Shri Winstone Syiemiong asked :

133. Will the Minister-in-charge, P. W. D. be pleased to state-


(a) Whether it is a fact that re-construction of the Puksora bridge under Mawsynram (Public Works Department) Division has been undertaken ?


(b) Whether tenders for the work has been called for ?


(c) If so, the number of tenders received ?


(d) To whom  the work has been allotted ?

Shri Darwin D.  Pugh (Minister of State, P. W. D.) replied :


(a) -Yes.


(b) -Yes.


(c) -10 (ten).


(d) -Shri Phoming Marbaniang.

Shri W. Syiemiong :- 133. (b) When was the  tender called ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, fortunately, I have a copy of the tender with  me but I am sorry to point that the date has not been mentioned. I will require notice for it.

Shri W. Syiemiong :- What is the estimates value of the work ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- It is Rs.25,000 (Rupees twenty-five thousand).

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- 133 (d). Is the contractor a local man ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- The reply is already given. He is a man from the locality.

Shri F. K. Mawlot :- Has the work been completed ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- The work is in progress.

Shri Maham Singh :- Is it necessary to appoint contractors only from the locality ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- It is not necessary.

Compensation for the lands occupied by P. W. D. at Jowai.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw asked :

134. Will the Chief Minister be pleased to state-


(a) The number of land owners with the names who are due to receive compensation for the lands used and occupied by the Public Works Department for the offices of the Executive Engineer and others at Jowai ?


(b) The number of those with their names who received compensation ?


(c) The amount each of them received ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, Public Works Department (R.  and B. etc., ) replied :


(a)-Not known.


(b) Only one person, Ka Sngi Laloo has received compensation.


(c) Rupees 19,585.65 P. was paid  to Ka Sngi Laloo.

Unstarred Question No. 134.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :-134, (a) May we know why the names and numbers of owners are not known ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- Because of the fact that it has not been decided as to whether they are due or not due for compensation.

Shri M. N. Majaw :- How many persons have been paid compensation ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) Only one person has been paid.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :-Are the other names being examined ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- In addition to the particular question, there are 5 fresh claimants.

Prof. P. G. Marbaniang :- 134. (a) When was land acquired by the Government ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- It was acquired in 1918.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- Is it not a fact that the amount for those pine trees was paid about 25 years back?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in those days, the claimant could claim only compensation on account of pine trees and that has been paid.

Unstarred Question 134 (a).

Shri K. M. Roy Marbaniang :-134 (a) What is the area acquired by the Government ?

Mr. Speaker :- This should have been asked in the other Unstarred Question.

Shri Maham Singh :-Whether the land is acquired or taken on private settlement ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- The question of acquiring land does not arise. Technically the Civil Authority is making allotment to the department concerned.

Shri K. M. Roy Marbaniang :- What is the area acquired by the Government ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister, P. W. D.) :- 13'34 Acres.

Shri F. K. Mawlot :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, may we know why for the last 26 years no payment of compensation was made ?

Mr. Speaker :-That is a thing of past history which the Government has no responsibility at all.

Official map of the State.

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw asked :

135. Will the Chief Minister be pleased to state-


(a) Whether Government of Meghalaya has prepared an official map of the State ?


(b) If not, when will it be prepared ?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister, Revenue) replied :


(a) -The State map has been prepared by the Survey Department and is now being examined by Government for further verification of the State boundaries all along  the Assam -Meghalaya Borders.


(b) -Does not arise.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- 135. (a), how long will the preparation of the State map take to complete ?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister, Revenue) :- We expect soon.

Warehouses in Meghalaya

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh asked :

136. Will the Minister in-charge of Excise be pleased to state-


(a) The number of bounded Warehouses in Meghalaya ?


(b) The number of licenses for foreign and country liquor issued to Bars, Clubs, Hotels in Shillong with the names of licenses ?


(c) The fees and taxes collected from the above during the financial year 1973-74 ?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister-in-charge, Excise. etc)  replied :


(a) -Two.


(b) -Foreign Liquor-



Retail Shops





Hotel and Clubs License





Bar Licence





Country Spirit Shops





No Country Spirit Bar has been licenses.



Particulars of the licenses are placed on the Table of the House.


(c) -The total amount collected during 1973-74 as duty, gallonage fee, license fee and availability fee excluding sales tax and surcharge on Sales tax amounted Rs.10,46,129.58 P.

Jute Mills in Garo Hills

Shri Singjan  Sangma asked :

137. Will the Minister-in-charge of Industries be pleased to state-


(a) Whether it is a fact that the Government propose to set up a Jute Mill in Garo Hills ?


(b) If so, whether any Project report for establishment such Mill has been prepared by any Committee or by the Industry Department itself ?


(c) If not, why ?


(d) The sites recommended by such Committees for establishing Jute Mills ?

Shri Stanley D. D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Industries) replied :

137. (a) - M I.D.C. has made an application to the Central Government for a letter of intent to set up a Jute Mills in Garo Hills.


(b) -M.I.D.C.  has also commissioned a consultancy organisation for preparation of a project report.


(c) -Does not arise.


(d) -It is understood that the Consultants are examining three possible sites, viz., Bajengdoba, Mendipathar and Phulbari .

Location for the Jute Mill in Garo Hills

Shri Samarendra Sangma asked :

138. Will the Minister-in-charge  of Industries be pleased to state-


(a) Whether the location for the Jute Mill in Garo Hills has been finalized ?


(b) If so, the main  factors taken into consideration in selecting the location of the Jute Mill ?

Shri Stanley D. D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Industries) replied :


(a) -No.


(b) -The Consultants have been asked to examine possible sites and their report is awaited.

Employment under the Half a Million Job Programme.

Shri Enowell Pohshna asked :

139. Will the Chief Minister be pleased to state-


(a) The number of persons who have applied for employment under the Half-a-Million Jobs Programme of the Government of India  in relation of the State of Meghalaya under :-

    (i) Commercial Transport Scheme ?
    (ii) Middle Class Hotel ?
    (iii) Training of Additional Teachers for Elementary Education ?


  (iv) Industrial Scheme ?


  (v) Poultry Farm ?


(b) The number of those who have been benefited by the Scheme ?

Shri Brington Buhai Lyngdoh (Minister, Planning) replied :

138. (a) (i)

Six hundred and thirty one.


One hundred and four.


Three hundred and sixty two.


  (iv) Ninety one.



One hundred and thirty three because of non-availability of bank finance the scheme was financed fully by the State Government.

  (b) (i) One hundred and twenty persons have been selected in consultation with the banks and the formalities are being completed.

Thirty six persons were selected, out of which 12 persons have applied for bank finance  which is being finalized.


Two hundred and fifty.

    (iv) Nil.
    (v) Fifty five.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- 139. (b) (ii), have those applicants received their vehicles ?

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Planning) :- Some of them have and some of then have not.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- May I know how many of them have received.?

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Planning) :- I require notice.

Shri F. K. Mawlot :-139 (a) (ii), how many of these applicants were given loan by the Government ?

Mr. Speaker :- In the reply it has been stated 104.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- But how many of them received loans a for opening middle class hotels ?

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Planning) :- Twelve.

Prof. P. G. Marbaniang :-139. (a). (v), are these 133 persons who have been sent for training to Naya Bungalow from Khasi Hills does or the number include the whole State of Meghalaya ? How many of these have been sent to Nayan Bungalow and how many of them have completed their training ?

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Planning) :- I want notice for that question.

Mr. Speaker :-Why not the hon. Members who have asked unstarred come forward with exhaustive sets of questions ? In fact, the scope for putting supplementary questions in unstarred questions is limited.

Provincialisation of Middle English Schools

Shri Brojendra Sangma asked :

140. Will the Minister-in-charge of Education be pleased to state-


(a). The number of M. E. Schools with their names which are going to be provincialised during the current year (district wise ) ?


(b) Whether  there was any proposal to provincialise any M. E. School during the last two years ?


(c) If so, the names of those Schools (district-wise ) ?


(d) Whether those Schools were provincialised as proposed ?


(e) If not, why ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, in-charge, Education) replied :


(a)-It is proposed to provincialised the following six M. E. Schools, namely -

  Khasi Hills -
    1. Myriaw Aided M.E. School.
    2. Shngi Mawlein Aided M.E. School.
    3. Mawlaiteng Aided M.E. School.
Jaintia Hills -
    4. Wahjajer Aided M.E. School.
  Garo Hills -
    5. United Thapa Kantolguri Aided M.E. School.
    6. Rongara Aided M.E. School.


(b)-Yes, Sir.

  Khasi Hills -
    1. Myriaw Aided M.E. School.
    2. Shngi Mawlein Aided M.E. School.
    3. Mawlaiteng Aided M.E. School.
Jaintia Hills :
    4. Thangbuli Aided M.E. School.
  Garo Hills :-
    5. United Thapa Kantolguri Aided M.E. School.
    6. Rongara Aided M.E. School.
  (d) -No, Sir.
  (e) -The delay was caused by inter-Departmental, consultation and re-examination of proposal

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- 140 (a), in the category of Jaintia Hills, why Thangbuli is not taken in place of Wahjajer ?

Mr. Speaker :- That is a matter of opinion. The Government has decided to provincialised the Wahjajer Aided M. E. School. So the question of Government not selecting another M. E. School does not arise .

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- But it was mentioned below in reply to this question that this School had applied since three years back.

Non-recurring Grants to M. E. School

Shri Jackman Marak asked :

141. Will the Minister-in-charge of Education be pleased to state-


(a) The total amount of non-recurring grant sanctioned to the Gasuapara M. E. School for the construction of its School building since it was established  (date -wise ) ?


(b) Whether the Government propose to provincialised the following M. E. School -



(i) Chokpot M.E. School.



(ii) Sibbari M.E. School.


(c) Whether it is a fact that the Chokpot M. E. School was sanctioned non-recurring grants during this financial year ?


(d) If so, the amount and the date of granting ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, in-charge, Education) replied :



(i) Rs. 3,000 (1967-68).



(ii) Rs. 2,000 (1970-71).



(iii) Rs.10,000 (1971-72)



(iv) Rs.10,000 (1973-74) (Storm damage)


(b) -No, Sir. To date there is no such proposal.


(c) -No, Sir.


(d) -Does not arise.

Crash  Schemes for Rural Employment 

Prof. Martin Narayan Majaw asked :

142. Will the Minister-in-charge of Community Development be pleased to state-


(a) The total amount sanctioned for the Crash Schemes for Rural  Employment during the year 1973-74?


(b) The amount  actually spent during the  year 1973-74?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister -in-charge of Community Development ) replied :


(a)- Rs.21,99,997.00 (Rupees twenty one lakhs, ninety -nine thousand, nine hundred  and ninety seven) only was sanctioned under Crash Scheme for Rural Development during 1973-74.


(b)-Rs.12,34,624.63 (Rupees twelve lakhs, thirty four thousand, six hundred and twenty four and paise sixty three) only was spent  upto the end of March 1974.

Shri F. K. Mawlot :- 142 (a), may we know how much of this amount was spent district -wise ?

Mr. Speaker :- It seems the Minister will take some time to reply I think you may issue fresh notice to the Minister.

Approach /Link  Roads within Tura Town

Shri Sinjan Sangma asked :

143. Will the Minister -in-charge of P. W. D. be pleased to state-


(a) Whether Government propose to take up certain approach/link roads within the areas of Tura Town?


(b) If so, the number of such roads proposed to be taken up during the current financial year ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, in-charge, P. W. D) replied :


(a)- Yes.


(b)-6 Nos. new construction and 7 Nos. for improvement .

Prof. P. G. Marbaniang :- 143. (a), is the Government taking steps to widen these roads in the bazaar area?

Mr. Speaker :- The main question is solely on approach road.

Prof. P. G. Marbaniang :- Does Government propose to widen the approach  road to the bazaar area ?

Shri D.D. Pugh (Minister of State, P. W. D) :- Yes, Mr. Speaker, Sir.

Mizo's Panchayat Elections at Nongthymmai, Shillong 

Shri Rowell Lyngdoh  asked :

144. Will the Minister-in-charge of Community Development be pleased to state-


(a) Whether it is a fact that the elections were held recently by the Mizos living around Nongthymmai  area in Shillong to form their Village Panchayats ?


(b) If so,  under what law, was that Election held ?


(c) The relationship  between those Panchayats and the Khasi villages head man of that area, who were  elected  by the people according  to customary  law and practice prevailing in the Mylliem Syiemship ?


(d) Whether  it is a fact that the Chief  Minister and other Cabinet Ministers attended the celebration of the completion of the said election ?

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister in-charge, Community Development Department) replied :


(a) -Government is not aware .


(b) & (c) -Do not arise.


(d) -No, Sir.

Social Welfare Scheme of the Director of Public Instruction

Shri D. Dethwelson Lapang asked :

145. Will the Minister-in-charge of Education be pleased to state-


(a) Whether it is a fact that the grants for the Cultural Clubs under the  the  Social Welfare  Scheme was drawn by the office of the Director of Public Instruction, Meghalaya in the month of March, 1974?


(b) Whether the grants have been distributed to the deserving clubs ?


(c) If not, why ?


(d) Whether it is a fact that the disbursement of such grants was made to two clubs only ?


(e) If so, the names of those clubs and the reasons for sanctioning grants to them ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, in-charge, Education )  replied :


(a) -Yes, Sir.


(b) -The grants are being distributed  by the District Social Welfare Officer, in batches after due verification.

The funds have been placed with him.


(c) -Does not arise in view of answer in (b) above.


(d) -No, Sir, it is not a fact.


(e) -Does not arise.

Shri Dlosing Lyngdoh :- 145 (b), does the District Social Welfare Officer understand the Khasi Language?

Shri D.D. Pugh (Minister of State, Education ) :- That is argumentative. The question here is whether the grants have been distributed to the deserved clubs.

Meghalaya College Teachers  Association.

Shri Dlosing Lyngdoh asked :

146. Will the Minister-in -charge of Education be pleased to state-


(a) Whether the Government had recognized  the Meghalaya College Teachers' Association ?


(b) Whether it is a fact that according to the provision of the constitution of the Meghalaya Teachers' Association every college can form individual units ?


(c) Whether  any college authority in the State had so far opposed the formation of the Meghalaya Teachers' Association Unit in a College ?


(d) If so, whether the Government proposed to direct all the college authorities in the State not to oppose  the formation of such  Association ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of State, in-charge, Education ) replied :


(a) - No Sir.


(b) -Yes, Sir.


(c) -Government has not information.


(d) -In view of answer to (a), above, does not arise.

Prof. P. G. Marbaniang :- 146. (a), may we know the reasons why Government has not recognized this Association ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State, Education) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the M. C. T. A. has been registered  with the Registrar of Societies under the  Registration Act. Yet we have stated in the answer that it has not been  recognized  by the Government  for the simple reason that the Government has not and perhaps cannot in the future also accord reorganization to the M.C.T.A. in the sense that the University  accords  recognition  to college.

Mr. Speaker :- In other words, the Government recognize  it as a co-operative.

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State, Education) :- The question of recognizing does not arise.

Expenditure for construction of seven Roads

Shri Enowell Pohshna asked :

147. Will the Minister-in-charge of Public Works Department be pleased to state-


(a) The total amount spend during the year 1973-74 for the works done on the following roads -




Muktapur - Borghat Road ?




Dawki - Muktapur Road ?




Amlarem - Dawki Road ?




Lama Borghat Road ?




Raliang - Sahsniang Road ?




Sutnga - Sumer Road ?




Nartiang - Barato Road ?


(b) Details of works, the names of the contractors doing the works and the amount paid to each contractor?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh [Minister of State, Public Works Department (Roads and Buildings)] replied :




Rs. 45, 498 (remaining length ).




Rs. Nil








Rs.1,14,396 (for the remaining length).














(b) -The required  particulars are placed  on the Table  of the House.


Mr. Speaker :- Question are over. Before we pass on to the  next item, I inform the House that I have received a notice for an adjournment motion signed  by Prof. M. N. Majaw, M. L. A., Shri H. E. Pohshna, M. L. A. and Shri F. K. Mawlot, M. L. A. The notice  runs as follows :-

Dated 2nd July, 1974.



The Hon'ble Speaker, Meghalaya Legislative Assembly, Shillong.


        Under the  provision of Rule 56 of the Rules of Procedure, we beg to submit the following adjournment motion that this House do now discuss the intense and widespread resentment of the students of Shillong culminating today in a massive procession now coming to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly to demand the  immediate withdrawal of Government's  decision to transfer the office of the Meghalaya  Board of School Education, from Tura to Shillong. The matter is a definite one. The widespread resentment of the students over the Government 's announcement. Further, we humbly submit that the matter is of urgent public importance as the procession of students is even now marching to the Assembly to present its grievances. Besides, the Government has announced its decision to shift the office of the Board mentioned above within the next few days. As such, we feel that this adjournment motion meets the requirements of rules. We therefore, request you allow it to be moved.

Yours faithfully,


Signed/- M. N. Majaw,

H. E. Pohshna,

F. K. Mawlot.

        Copy to the Chief Minister and Secretary.

What the Minister for Parliamentary Affairs  has to say ?

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Parliamentary Affairs ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in parliamentary democratic set up as of today, it is quite common, usual and normal for any persons or group  of persons  or sections or parties to demonstrate  by way of public  meetings, by way of processions and so on and so forth. Therefore, some section of students  having common interest  over certain matters  to come  and  demonstrate  today seem nothing unusual, not so very grave, of very extraordinary  or unique so as to warrant the postponement and stoppage of the business of this august  House. Sir, last year also during the  session  of the Assembly, the people  organised  a procession  not only from the town but also from the rural areas  on the question of prices of potato and they also demanded  that the Government  should take over the potato trade. On a latter occasion, a similar  motion was moved in which you yourself made a decision that it does  not warrant  an adjournment of the business  of the House. Sir, from the point of view of simple  common sense this august  House  and the elected  representatives of the people should not make this House just forum for discussing matters which can be done and which are being done in the State outside the House. Sir, we may quote the authorities of the Mr. M. N. Kaul  and Mr. S. L. Shakder at page 423  which is quite relevant here. Adjournment Motion will not be received if it is a matter in which there is no such an urgency that a motion or a resolution will be too late. Sir,  I think  the hon. Members will agree that they could have raised a half-an-hour discussion through a motion or a resolution. Sir, the present situation does not warrant  suspending of the business of the House. In this connection, I would like to refer to page 442 of practice and procedure of Parliamentary by M. N. Kaul and S. L. Shakdher in  which  there was a definite reference  to some sort of demonstrations and processions like this. Therefore, Sir, there is no need to elaborate on this point. Therefore, I would humbly submit that the business of the House may not be disturbed by the admissibility of this adjournment motion. Thank you Sir.

Ruling by the Speaker

Mr. Speaker :- There is no doubt that the proposed  adjournment motion seeks to discuss a definite matter- the definite matter being  the widespread  resentment of the students' over the Government's announcement  to locate the office of the Meghalaya  Board of School Education at Tura. The matter is definite and it bears sufficient public importance. Considering the widespread discontentment and resentment among  the students it can also be said that it is of resent occurrence  and apparently, satisfies nearly all the conditions laid down in Rule 57 of our  Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business. It should always be borne in mind that Adjournment Motion is an important instrument for the hon. Members in the House to focus attention of the Government, which is not open to them in the ordinary course, or to raise some discussion on matters of urgent public importance. The Business of the House is fixed in consultation with the Business Advisory  Committee and assumes a sacred character. It cannot be distributed except under very pressing  circumstances. The Speaker of Lok Sabha most correct observed  : ' The practice has been that nothing will be introduced extraneously in the order paper of the day unless the occasion is of such character that something very grave, something which affects the whole country (in this case the  whole State), its safety, its interest and all that is happening, and the House may pay its attention immediately to that. Then only an adjournment motion can be conceived. But an adjournment motion cannot be brought in an extraneous matter and cannot be introduced in the order paper unless the extent of the matter itself, its importance its gravity justifies it. The matter may be important but it may not be important  for the entire House to go out of the normal order of the  day". The present adjournment motion does not satisfy these conditions. The conditions regarding admissibility of adjournment motions are very  rigid because their admission interrupt the business of the House.  While the hon. Members have the right to bring any matter of urgent  public importance  for being discussed in the House, the House is also to see  that its normal business is not interrupted. I agree  with many Presiding Officers of different State Legislatures in this respect  including  the late Shri G. V. Mavlankar of the Lok Sabha, who had  rightly observed  that processions, strikes , hunger strikes are not subject matters fits for discussion through any adjournment motion. It is true that the Shillong Students' Union is taking out a procession but that does not mean that a grave situation has been created thereby. Last night at 10 p.m,. I received a letter from the General Secretary  of the Shillong Students' Union, which runs as follows :-

Office of the Shillong Students' Union, Shillong

No. SSU/IO-CS/5/74, dated 30th, June, 1974



The Speaker, 


Meghalaya Legislative Assembly,



Hon. Sir,

         The Shillong Students' Union will stage a procession on the 2nd of July, 1974 at 9. 30 a.m. starting from the Khasi National Durbar  Hall to the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly, to express our grave concern and dissatisfaction on the proposed shifting of the Meghalaya Board of School Education from Shillong to Tura. The procession will be by all means peaceful.

Sd/- Sanbor Nongrum.

General Secretary, Shillong Students Union


        Simply because the students are staging a procession in a democratic manner does not mean that it assumes  importance surpassing  those of the business of the House. The present adjournment motion seeks  also to discuss the location of  the Meghalaya  Board of School Education At Tura. It seeks to protest this. The crucial test is always as to whether the question proposed to be raised has arisen suddenly and has created an emergent situation of such a  magnitude that the House  needs set aside all the business  and take  up consideration of the matter forthwith. The urgency must be of such a nature that a matter really brooks no delay and should be discussed on the same day that notice has been given. I have doubt if this test is satisfied. It must be recalled that the Meghalaya Board of School Education was set up  under the Act  passed unanimously by this august  House. It is the duty of the Government to decide where  the office of the Board  should be located. It should be further recalled  that the Minister of State for Education told the House during the Winter Session last year  that the office of the Board will be located at Tura.  During the current Session also, the Minister of State for Education in his reply to an  unstarred  question, re-affirmed his earlier  statement. And no hon. Member came forward to register  his protest or with any notice for a half an hour discussion on reply  to this question.

        Yesterday, at 4-45 p.m. two of the top leaders of the Shillong Students' Union met me in my Chamber and requested me  to permit all their leaders  to submit a memorandum to the Chief Minister. It was agreed  that the number shall be below 10, and I agreed gladly to grant them permission. I hope the Chief Minister will receive them ?

Shri W. A. Sangma ( Chief Minister ) :- Yes.

Mr. Speaker :- Therefore, it is not a  matter for this House to discuss rather it is a matter to be discussed  with the Government  by the Shillong Students' Union, because the Act does not stipulate any particular plan for location of the office of the Board. If we fight among ourselves as to the location of the office whether it should be Tura, or Nongstoin, or  Jowai or Williamnagar or  Shillong the interest of the whole State  is at static. The Government has not said  that the  office of the Board  shall  be outside  the State. I do not believe  that an urgency to  arisen to discuss this matter. Taking into consideration all these facts, I am constrained  to disallow this adjournment motion.


    Let us pass on to item No.2  in today's list of business. Prof. M. N. Majaw to move that the Meghalaya Land  and Revenue  Regulation (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be taken into consideration.

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Speaker, Sir,  may I raise one important point regarding the present stage of the Bill ? As it is, the Bill has  not yet  come to the consideration stage, Sir. In this connection, I beg to point out the relevant portion of the Rules, I would like to point out first to the definition at page 2 of  the Rules.

Mr. Speaker :- Of the Rule ?

Shri H. Hadem :- Yes, Sir. Page  2 (1)  (L) it was stated there that the Secretary  of the Assembly which includes any person for the time being  performing  the  duties of the Secretary, shall  read out the  title of  the Bill after it is introduced. In this connection, I beg to submit that this particular Bill was brought before the House on the  28th June 1972 asking for leave  of the House to introduce it and  leave was granted  by the House. Again it was moved  for introduction. But it was not properly introduced  according  to Rule 72, Sir. The  Rule herein says "if  such motion  for introduction has been carried  the Secretary  shall read  out the title of the Bill thereupon, the Bill shall be deemed  to have been introduced "...........

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Hadem. I understand your  point. The announcement by the Secretary is only a formal matter. When the Speaker, has already  announced  before the  House that the Bill is introduced  it is deemed. to have been introduced.

Shri H. Hadem :- I do not have any intension  to argue with the Chair but anyhow, Sir,  because nobody at this stage had moved  that this particular Bill be suspended  according to the provision of the Act, otherwise .............

Mr. Speaker :- The Secretary  shall read out the title of the Bill when asked  or indicated by the Speaker. So Prof. Majaw to move.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the  Meghalaya  Land and  Revenue Regulation (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be taken into consideration.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved.

*Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Revenue ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to have a say  at this stage, i.e., at the stage  for leave to introduce the Bill. We have  not opposed  the introduction of this  Bill  with the consideration that we the members of this House would  have to hear from the member who moved this Bill as to the reasons for which  he sought to bring in the amendment  to this regulation. Sir, in principle, the mover of this amendment Bill, did not really  have  a definite or categorically opposition to the Land Regulation being applied in the State of Meghalaya or even in those areas to which the hon. Member had suggested  for certain procedure  or application.  Therefore,  because of that,  we did not at once oppose the introduction of the Bill with the consideration that perhaps  the House  may benefit from the reasons to be advanced by the hon. Member who moved this amendment. (At this stage the Deputy Speaker occupied  the Chair.) We have had a very long speech though Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the rules, it was drafted  only for a very  brief explanation. However,  we have had a very  long speech  explaining  in detail the merits and demerits  of the proposed  amendment  of the Land Regulation. However, I regret to say after hearing in full of the arguments and reasons advanced, we are convinced that actually there is no point for consideration of this Bill. That is why, Sir,  we oppose the consideration of the Bill at this stage for one thing. It is  quite wrong in the par of the mover of the amendment Bill to say that because this Regulation is on lands, therefore, all lands are to be  regulated by the Government. It is only on Government land wherever it is, that Government will apply this regulation to regulate its own land. Why should any Member grudge  if a  private  person also regulates  his own or the Government to regulate  its own land - how to manage  the land and deal with people who trespass into that land. This is really an attitude of Indian laws that have gone to the extreme and are sought to be introduced. In olden days, Government has  got arbitrary powers  and the Deputy Commissioners just issued the whip right and left without  any law. Now, India is a land of law with a definite and very strict Constitution. No power in India  can really  exercise  any authority  without the impact  of law duly passed by Parliament or by this august  House. Therefore, Sir, though the Government may have a piece of  land somewhere say 10 fit or 100 fit, it cannot act on the land  unless  there is a regulation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, during the last few  years, Government activities are increasing. There is a demand from the Members of this House that Government should take this land or that land for construction of roads, dispensaries, hospitals and schools. So Government  has to take these  lands and, therefore, they must  be regulated. Whether these lands are under the nokmaship  or doloiship or syiemship or sirdarship, wherever they are , Government mush have the  authority to manage these lands. If this House refuse  to give that  authority  to the Government, then this House has ceased  to function or discharge its duties . Therefore, Sir, I insist that this Government should  have this regulation on these lands. Therefore, it is a very strange after he ring nearly about one hour that there is no substance, no principle, no rhythm at all for the opposition to the introduction of this Land Regulation . Therefore, Sir, we definitely oppose this Amendment Bill. Even for consideration of this Bill by any hon. Member of this House  is completely  out of order- so to say, and out of sense to this proposed amendment. Well,  Sir, a soft corner is there always  shown by the hon. Member to the Instrument of Accession. We have come to a definite  rule in which  even our common sense tells us that the Instrument of Accession was a transitional document till the operation came into force and that was  accepted by those concerned. They accept that they  no longer exist any other virtues except by the Instrument of Accession issued by the District Council under the Sixth Schedule. It is wrong Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the part of the hon. Member to refer to the Supreme  Court's  ruling by saying that these Syiems are still independent  under the Instrument of Accession on those subjects. We have heard for the last 2 years that on every  issue have a reference  was made to the Instrument of Accession. Well, why those concerned are not raising it anymore ? They are  accepting the Instrument of Accession completely under the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution and then one hon. Member here is waiving  that paper. Well this is really very strange. We have heard it again and again, so, let us not listen to it anymore. Let him bring a new paper from the Supreme Court and then we will  listen. The other day , the hon. Member, Mr. Rowell Lyngdoh had moved an amendment to the Excise Act and in course of his observation he raised the question of 'courtesy' being shown to the District Council though Excise is exclusively the subject under the jurisdiction of the State. Well, we understood that point raised by the hon. Member that Government should consult  the Syiem, the Sirdars, the Dolois and the Nokmas and all concerned. But here, Sir, to consult the Sirdar or the Nokma on the administration of a particular area or anything concerned with Government land or  P. W. D.  land somewhere whether it is in Jowai or Khasi Hills is really very strange. The Doloi does not want to waste his time and I think  this suggestion stretches too far  even for a courtesy. It may annoy his interest. I may be annoyed also if I am to be consulted and any person may be annoyed, if has is to consult any body on what he should do with  his piece of land somewhere. Therefore,  in other words, Sir, we oppose the motion for taking  the Bill into consideration.

Shri H. Hadem :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to say a few words on this discussion at this stage. By bringing  this amendment to the House on a minor matter, I am afraid that we are dragging this House to a local problem of somebody. Sir, I do not think that we are  here only to find out the loop holes in the Act and that an exception is to be made. Our friends the hon. Members from Cantonment and from Laban always said that they want a uniform treatment. That is what we heard from that side. The other day Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, our friend from Nongtalang was saying that we have not been looked properly as far as administration is concern. He said something even in the representation in the Cabinet. And then sometimes he said about non-representation of Members from his groups in the planning Board and so on and so forth.  But Sir, this Amendment Bill, seeks to excludes certain  areas here  from the operation of the Land and Revenue  Regulation and it is really very strange to accept  it when the whole House had agreed  to have uniformity of  administration. Sir, we are  also watching  the activities  of  the Government should there  be any discrimination meted out to any body. I think  the whole House we be eager to look into that particular aspect. Sir, I  would  request the hon. Member atleast to refresh his memory that sometimes ago we talked about the so called uniformity in the Khasi  and Jaintia Hills District. All laws made by the said District Council Sir, were made to be implemented only in some portions of the United District and as a result of that there was separation and bifurcation of the District Council. Is the hon. Member trying to request the history again ? Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, yesterday we did not take part in the discussion  of Amendment  of the Excise Act which urged that Government should include the heads of the Elakas, the Syiems, Nokmas, and the Dolois in the terms any  person whether in Garo Hills of Jaintia Hills. I would request the hon. Member not to stress this point because he will have ample time to withdraw this Bill at this stage rather than cross a very dangerous line (Laughter). 

    Sir, this type of amendment, creates disparity between one district and another which I think lead to nowhere. Then Government  has to make separate provision for certain  territory  in Garo Hills, for territory in Khasi Hills and may be for certain territory of  the  erstwhile British  administrative  territory  in Khasi Hills or for the erstwhile Khasi States  in the Khasi Hills. Then there would be 5 Khasi States with separate provision in the Act. Sir, I think, now, since, the time of fighting for a Hill State we have fully agreed that when we achieved  the Hill State there will be rest and so by  implication, I mean to say when there is no  Hill State there will be no rest. Why should  we allow any unrest now to find place among us. (Laughter).

     (At this stage the Deputy Speaker, Sir, left the Chamber and the Chairman Shri P. G. Marbaniang  occupied the Chair.) So,  Sir, I would  request the hon. Member not to add  more fuel to the Sir. Because the other day our friends from Nongtalang is ventilating something of this grievances and the hon. Members from Laban and Cantonment are saying something about uniformity of treatment. So I take it that this a caution given by the hon. Member from Mawhati  through this amendment. I think  that we have said enough about it and I feel it will be our unpleasant duty to oppose the Bill. As we all here for unity I think the  hon. Member will be so good,  so kind so benevolent and so reasonable enough to withdraw the Amendment Bill and not to  pursue it and I hope that he will withdraw at this stage. With these few words, Sir, I am determined  that if the hon. Member-in-charge of the Bill will not withdraw  it, I will  vehemently oppose it.

*Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister-in-charge of Revenue) :- My intension  is to oppose the consideration of the Bill. Therefore,  the Bill should either be withdrawn or rejected  Mr. Chairman, Sir,  I would like that the mover who moved the amendment withdraw it now in the light of my replies and the reasons I gave or not, the motion be  put to vote.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Chairman,  I think, I have the right  of reply, of course, under the rules. I think the bone of contention is over two matters. The first  is this that by this Amendment I still  insist that this Regulation applies only to the Government land which I humbly submitted but not accepted. This Regulation does not apply only to Government lands but it would be extended to all other lands.

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Revenue) :- That argument, I have replied in one hour.

*Prof. M. N. Majaw :- (At this stage the Speaker occupied  the Chair).

        Mr. Speaker, Sir, I think, I have the right to reply to  the observation made by the  Minister -in-charge of Law.

Mr. Speaker :- Before you reply, I will make an observation. Once the Bill is introduced it is not advisable  to withdraw  it because the Bill has to pass through 3 stages.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- The idea of withdrawing is far away from my mind although it was jokingly proposed  by the hon. Member from Mynso-Raliang. There are  two or three salient points over while we have differed. One  of the points is the application of this Regulation. It is my contention that the Regulation applies not only to Government revenues lands but also to other lands including the raj land. This is one of the reasons why I have proposed  this amendment, Bill, Secondly,  Mr. Speaker, Sir, the remark made by the  Minister of  law that even the Elakas Chiefs  or Syiems have not in recent time spoken of the Instrument  of Accession. I would like  to refresh the memory of our  hon'ble Minister of law.

Mr. Speaker :- Prof. Majaw,  unluckily you were absent yesterday. Yesterday,  the hon. Member from your  group thought that the subjects of Excise should be in the hands of the District Councils which is in contravention to the Instrument of Accession,.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am not touching on that point but shall refuse the argument of the Minister of Law that the syiems have forgotten  the Instrument of Accession.  Only  in the month of January, they wrote to the Exercise Department  headed by the Minister himself with the signatures of all the Syiems  referring to this Instrument of Accession. So it is a matter that they themselves considered  vital. Further, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would  like to point out that the Regulation is good, but the point that I was differing  was that there was  no reason why the Government should  not consult the people on such a crucial  matter before  coming forward with this Regulation, in view of the fact that Government themselves had admitted the fact earlier that this Regulation had not been extended to the former Khasi States. I feel this is a matter of serious  concern for us. Thirdly, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to point out that nobody here is holding a brief for any Elakas Chiefs  as persons, but only because we feel that  the  mood of the people is such that we should preserve these traditional  tribal institutions, it is not because A,  B, or C is an incumbent in a particular post, it is because we should respect the traditional institutions that we are bringing  forward this amendment Bill. Finally, our land tenure system prevalent in this district  is unique in the world. The true type of socialism especially in the Raj land while in other areas they are trying to introduce  Socialism, here in our hills we have got a true socialism of the whole community and society. This type of land tenure system, where we have public and private lands, will be undermined by the universal application of the regulation to all areas in the  district. So, Mr. Speaker, Sir, I insist upon my Amendment and propose to the House the consideration of this Bill.

Mr. Speaker :- May I now put  the question before the House. The question is that the Meghalaya  Land and Revenue Regulation  (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be taken into consideration.

        Motion is carried.

        Now Prof. Majaw to move that the bill be passed.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that the Meghalaya  Land and Revenue Regulation (Amendment) Bill 1974 be passed.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Now I put the question before the House. The Question is that the Meghalaya Land and Revenue  Regulation (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be passed.

(Motion was lost, by voice voice.)

        Let us pass on the item No. 3. in today's  list of Business  Prof. Majaw  to move his Amendment Bill.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir,  I beg to move that the Meghalaya  Transfer  of Land (Regulation) (Amendment) Bill 1974 be taken into  consideration.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved.

*Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Law) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir,  so far as  this proposed Amendment Bill moved by the hon. Member is concerned, I mean the hon. Member from Mawhati, I have the same consideration and the same thought that it is not very necessary for consideration. I would thus at this stage, stand opposed to the  consideration of the proposed  Amendment. However,  a new question  has arisen  as we have  received  notice of further Amendment  by two other hon. Members  to the proposed  Amendment  Bill moved  by the  hon. Member from Mawhati. Well, it is really difficult that the two hon. Members of this House have made another proposal for  the amendment  to the amendment of Bill, Prof. Majaw. The  two  hon. Members  Shri  Choudhury  and Shri Joshi  will be coming forward with their views and we will hear first what their views are. Therefore,  Sir, in view of this,  we will not oppose the Bill at the consideration stage but we will first hear the two new Members. Then we will consider at the passing stage.

Mr. Speaker :- I put the  question before the House. The Question  is that the  Meghalaya Transfer of Land (Regulation) (Amendment) Bill,  1974 be taken in to consideration.

        (Motion was carried. In this case I have received  notice of the Amendment to the Bill which stands  in the names  of Shri  P. N. Choudhury and Shri  D. N. Joshi. Now either of them can move.

Shri P. N. Choudhury :- Mr. Speaker, Sir,  I beg to  move that the following be substituted  for clause 2 of the Bill, namely  "2. (1) In sub-section (4) of section 4 of the Meghalaya Transfer of Land (Regulation) Act, 1971, the word 'six' appearing in between  the words 'within'  and 'months'  shall be  substituted  by the word "three".

        (2) In the left hand margin again clause 2 the word "deletion" appearing at the beginning of the line shall be substituted by the word "Amendment".

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Now you can initiate the discussion.

Shri P. N. Choudhury :- While I am fully in agreement with the Member who moved  the Bill that the  tribal interest  in regard to land should  be safe guarded , I should point  out at the same time that nothing  should be done which might create harassment  to seller and buyer of land. By deletion of the word "six months ", both seller and buyer will be put in to great  disadvantage. We from experience  that,  the seller does not sell his land out of love  but to meet his financial  problems  or other needs when he finds no other  alternation. So Sir, this "six month"  time limit is also too long a time for disposal of a petition and it will put the seller in a very  adverse position if he cannot dispose of his land  at a time when he wants to dispose of it to get some money to meet his urgent financial problem. 

        This will also create great difficulty to the buyer who is in dire needs of roof over his head. Sir, six months' time is too long for disposal of a petition. This can be disposed  of within  a month. Taking all factors into considerations. I feel that  three months will be quite  reasonable  a time for disposal  of a case by an officer. A petition should not be kept pending  for more then three months. Minimum time limit for disposal of a petition should be fixed in the interest of both buyer and seeker I therefore proper that six months should be substituted  by three months, because  the more time we give, the more we put the buyer and the seller in a disadvantageous  position. That is why we have moved  this amendment.

Shri D. Joshi :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, herein the statement of objects and reasons given by my friend from Mawhati , it is written in sub-section (4) of Section 4 of the Meghalaya Transfer Land (Regulation)  Act, 1971 (Act of 1972) accords  sanction to any  application for the transfer of land from a tribal to a non-tribal, or from  a non-tribal  to another  non-tribal only on the grounds of no order being passed by the competent  authority upon such application within a period of six months. Sir, Meghalaya I believe is a welfare State and the Government is committed  to an efficient and clean administration. We want that in this age of automation and age of computers, an application to be disposed of should not take six months. It augurs not very well for a Government which is committed to an efficient,  and a clean administration by making an application linger for such a long time and puts the buyer and the seller to undue  harassment and it tends to give rise to corruption. Why should the Government which is committed  to efficiency is not efficient enough to dispose of an application quite expeditiously, without lingering for a period of six months. If at all due to certain administrative difficulties  sometime is to be given, it should not be more than three months for disposal of a case. Moreover, this Act and this particular amendment is meant  for disposal  of cases pertaining  to the sale of land from a tribal to a non-tribal and a non-tribal to another  non-tribal. It does not seek to cover the entire population of the State. It covers only a fraction of it. So why in a Welfare State, a section of the people should be made to suffer for the  inordinate delay from the side of the Government  and therefore, I urge upon the Government and the House to accept the amendment  proposed by me and my friend from Laban that the word "six" be substituted  by the word "three" for the convenience of the seller  and the purchaser and also for  ensuring  an efficient  and clean  administration on the side of the Government. Thank you, Sir.

Mr. Speaker :- Prof. M. N. Majaw to reply.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir,  I feel it difficult even to consider this amendment because it is contrary to the statement of objects and reasons of my Amendment Bill that I have introduced. My contention was that in the context  of today, when Government has deal to with people with various interest in files, and also when Government  is laboured or burdened  with thousands of files sometimes go astray. So it is far safer in order to protect the interest of the tribal people, to merely delete  sub-section 4 of Section 4. Which is far safer ? Either to delay or for  Government  to come forward with another amendment  to lengthen the period of time so as to cover all eventualities. Mr. Speaker, Sir, if we will shorten the period of time still further, it means every application will be granted within three  months. This is only a  hatching period  with Government  and it takes a long time  for a full grown  chicken to emerge and therefore, Mr. Speaker, Sir,  I humbly submit to the movers of this amendment  to my amendment Bill is concerned, I beg to differ with them and I cannot  accept their amendment  to my amendment Bill.

Mr. Speaker :- The question is that (1) In sub-section  (4) of section 4 of the Meghalaya Transfer of Land and (Regulation) Act, 1971, the word "six"  appearing in between the words  "within" and "months" shall be substituted by the word "three" and (2)  In the left hand margin against  clause (2) the word "Deletion" appearing  at the beginning of the line shall be substituted  by the word "Amendment".

(The motion was lost by voice votes)

Shri B. B. Lyngdoh (Minister, Law ) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in one way, I am very  happy throughout on both the proposed amendments, the amendment to the original Act and the amendment  to the proposed  amendment Bill. This shows that the Member in-charge of the Amendment Bill does not oppose the principal  Act. This is a very very  good gesture, a good understanding in this House, by sections all of our people, for a need to have a reasonable protection of our land.

        Sir, we  had passed this Land Transfer Act just over a year ago and at that stage, we had accepted this norm of 6 months taking into consideration, the machinery of the Government, the  procedures and processes to be going through and the House had accepted the period of  6 months. I was not enlightened by the hon. Member from Mawhati as to what made him change within a period of only one year. What changes have come into the State to warrant a change or amendment  from  six month to eternity. He has not cited one case or instance to justify this revolution from six month to eternity. Therefore, Sir, I  am not convinced at all with the proposed amendment as suggested by the hon. Member from Mawhati. At the same time, let  us assure ourselves that we have eyes to watch the march of time so as to consider any change in any law, even in a matter of procedure or in the substance, if there has developed a situation requiring change. We have operated over a year and I can say this much that neither the other two  hon. Members nor the hon. Members from Mawhati himself can say that there is something happening or are there such events or circumstances that would necessitate a change. Therefore, on this score, I would make a definite assurance that the Government will watch, and that if this period of 6 months  is found to be too long it may be reduced and if it is found to be too short, we may extend it. It is a matter which is not so very very difficult and if the  processing of these applications for transfer cannot be disposed of in 6 months, as the hon. Member had  apprehended, we might extend the period  to 7  or 8 months. There is  no difficulty because it does not really affect the principle.

        Now,  Sir, so far as the original amendment  is concerned, we  would be watching, and not only the Government would be watching but I would  also welcome the hon. Members to watch and see the operation of the 6 months' time limit; whether it is enough or not to process the applications. So far as things stand today, we feel that a six months period  is really the optimum period or quite a right  time that the Government machinery can reasonably dispose of those applications. But if it is found that the efficiency of the Government had decreased, we will have to increase the time and, on the other hand, if  the efficiency of the Government  has increased,  we will have to decrease the time (Laughter). Therefore, Sir, so far as the amendment of Shri. Choudhuri and Shri. Joshi is concerned I think it is quite out of place and unreasonable to say that the Government  can dispose  of those cases within 3 months. If it can be done in one  month it is alright. It may take only one week in your case.....(Laughter). Therefore, I can assure Mr. Joshi that if it takes beyond  3 months it will not (At this stage the Speaker, left the Chamber and Prof. P. G. Marbaniang  took the Chair.) affect him at all. Therefore, there is no need at all for the hon. Members from Laban and Mawprem  to bring this up. It is perhaps a friendly sport among the Members of the Opposition. But though the Speaker had ruled that there is no more question of withdrawal, we can, as the  Speaker, had allowed an unusual  procedure and in view of the assurance that we will increase or decrease according  to the proportionate efficiency, the hon.  Member from Mawhati may kindly withdraw his amendment Bill.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, the arguments of the Minister for Law are really quite powerful, half-persuasive and put forward with the ease, facility and oratory which only he is capable of doing as an advocate (Interruption). But, Mr. Chairman, Sir, may I point out that throughout all his observations he did not lay so much importance on the six months period. In fact, if he is quite prepared to shorten or extend it, then why not remove the  6 months and be silent on the time. But  my contention in moving this amendment Bill is that if, within the six months period anything happens or  the files are misplaced or something worse does happen -God forbid - then the law comes into effect exactly on the very minute that the six months are over. If the period is not so important and the Government efficiency is not such that it can dispose of these cases in one month or one week, then why not drop it. The matter is not really from 6 months to eternity. It means from 6 months to the time until a decision is taken by the Government and by removing sub-section (iv) of Section 4 it will be open to Government to take such time as it requires. May I inform the Minister - perhaps he has been misinformed in this - that this was passed in the year 1971 by the Provisional Assembly. It is now 2 years since this Bill was passed into an Act in 1971 and at that time many of us did not  have the privilege to be there but still by observing from outside we had looked at the way the Government had been operating and we find that due to various  reasons, the wheels of the Government  grind very slow and therein lies the danger. Even today we see the cases of land compensation in Jowai where lands acquired in 1948, of course by the earlier regime, are still pending. Even after 26 years these matters could not be settled and I am quite sure that this case of transfer of land which comes within the preview of this Act will take quite a long time six months will not be enough. But the Government has to think of its prestige although I know the heart of the Minister  is very much a favour of this Amendment Bill. But this is a matter of prestige; how can the Government  agree to an Amendment  Bill which has been proposed by the Opposition. May I also remind them that failure is the pillar of success. While we may fail  in the House,  to that extent  we will win the hearts  of our people outside the House. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, Sir, may I submit to the Government and to the entire House the adoption of this Amendment Bill.

Mr. Chairman :- Now I put the  main question before the House. The question is that the Meghalaya Transfer  of land  (Regulation ) (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be passed;.

(The motion was lost by  voice vote).

The Meghalaya Prevention of Begging (Amendment) Bill, 1974.

        Now I ask Prof. M. N. Majaw, the Member-in-charge to move that the Meghalaya Prevention of Begging (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be taken into consideration.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that the Meghalaya Prevention of Begging  (Amendment) Bill, 1974  be taken into consideration.

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State for Social Welfare) :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, on behalf of the Treasury Bench I rise to oppose the Amendment Bill as a whole. In fact,  I may be permitted to say that we are opposed even to the need for consideration of the Bill. But in view, of the ruling that was given by the Hon. Speaker, a short while ago I am now satisfied to say that I rise to oppose the Amendment Bill. In  opposing the Amendment Bill, Mr. Chairman, Sir, I would like to point out that under the existing Section 13  of the principal Act the  power to maintain or to create  or to establish any institutions or to certify any  institution as certified institution has been given to the State Government. Now, if we look at it superficially, it may appear that this provision of the Act is dictatory and not mandatory. However, Mr. Chairman, Sir, I would like to mention that unless the State Government maintain institution or certifies any other institutions as certified institution for  the purposes of this Act, we cannot even think of implementing or of enforcing  the provision of this Act. Now, by the proposed Amendment, the private Members, it seems wants to make it mandatory on the part  of the Government  to certify any institution as certified institution "unless " within  two years after this Act comes into force.". Now I am quoting  his words ' unless within 2 years after this Act comes into force." . The State  Government do not set up or maintain a certified institution "within 2 year after the Act comes into force" the words are not clear under the normal rule of interpretation. It would mean that 2 years from the coming into force of the principle Act. However,  the hon. Member from Mawhati may try to explain that these words meant two years from the date on which  the present Amendment Bill comes into force. In that event we would point out, Mr. Chairman, Sir, that under the existing Section the State Government have got  the power to certify institution as certified  institution, as such the present Amendment Bill is premature. In case, we accept the first interpretation, i.e., from the commencement of the Act, the principal Act, the Amendment Bill would become infructuous, as the present  principal Act was passed in the year 1964. Mr. Chairman, Sir,  the point I am trying to make here is that we  are opposed to the entire Amendment Bill on grounds (a) that it is  unnecessary, (b) that it is premature. When the principal  Act is notified Government will certainly create or establish  or maintain certified  institutions because unless that is done  we cannot even think of being able to implement or inforce the provision of the principal Act. I would also like to take this opportunity of reminding  the hon. Member from Mawhati  that the Act shall come into force on such date  as the Government may by notification appoint and that  has not yet been done and the Act has not yet been notified. The most important point I would like to make at  this stage, Mr. Chairman, Sir,  is that usually  Amendments are brought forward to any Act after the Act has come into force and as a result of which  some defects are notified and detected. But now since this Act has not even been notified not brought into operation, the Amendment Bill, Mr. Chairman, Sir, I repeat, is premature and unnecessary.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- In the reply to the  motion, the Hon'ble Minister of State, has not taken into account that this Act was notified  in Assam  after it was passed by the Assam Government.

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State for Social  Welfare) :- Mr.  Chairman, Sir, on a point of order, I would  state that we are not concerned with wheat  the other State in the country have done.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- We have adopted all these laws from Assam.  And the notification made then is still applicable to this State and it is a continuing process. The Law Department would still have to advise the Minister on this matter. It was implemented  in Assam; it was passed there and then we adopted it in Meghalaya Legislative Assembly. Therefore, Sir, it continues to be  in force because we have adopted this Act and as such, the question of refortifying this Act does not arise.

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of State for Social Welfare) :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, may I read out the relevant  sub-section of this Act. "When the Act comes into force in any  of the area in the State on such date as the Meghalaya may by a notification in the Official Gazette appoint on behalf of that area ".

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, my point  is that within this Act came into force in Assam and have adopted it is still continuing. As far as the premature nature of amendment bill is concerned. I cannot  accept the arguments of the Hon'ble Minister. However,  Mr. Chairman, Sir, may I point out that unless and until  a certified institution is opened or built or notified, until such time, the Act cannot  be implemented  to prevent the beggars in the Town of Shillong from begging in public places. We who travel every day, the pedestrians perhaps, come across  these  terrible beggars. But the  Minister who does not have  to walk because  he rides  in a car and is not a  passing through  the bazaars everyday may not  realize  how many beggars  come out to hold and pluck at our costs and the coat of people who happen to walk through the town and bazaar area. How many beggars are coming to this town can be well imagined than described. Therefore, if the Government is not going to do something to prevent these beggars we the citizens of this State will find much trouble in our daily activities and transaction in the town every day. That is the reason why we are trying  in this Assembly  today for the  acceptance of this amendment Bill. If it is defeated  in the House by the Government it would be a pillar of success for us outside with the people.

Mr. Chairman :- Now, I put the question before the House. The question is that the Meghalaya Prevention of Begging (Amendment) Bill, 1974, be taken into consideration.

(The motion was adopted).

        I now call upon Prof. Majaw to move the Bill for passing.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that the Meghalaya Prevention of Begging (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be passed.

Mr. Chairman :- Motion moved is that the Meghalaya Prevention Begging (Amendment) Bill, 1974 be passed.

(The motion was lost voice votes) .

        Let us now pass on to Item No. 5. I will call upon the Minister-in-charge of Supply  to continue with his reply to Motion No.4.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- I believe Mr. Chairman, Sir, my friends  is to continue  the discussion on Motion No. 4. He had the floor of the House  yesterday and I think he should be given time  to continue to day.

Mr. Chairman :- The discussion was closed and now the Minister-in-charge of Supply to continue with the reply. 

Shri S. D. D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Supply) :- Mr. Chairman, Sir, to continue with my reply which I have started  yesterday, I would like to state that the figures on the Consumers Price Index for December 1973, the Consumers Price Index in Shillong was 218 whereas the All India Figures was 228. On a average, the Shillong price  for 1973 from January  to December was about 10 to 11 points lower than the All India Figures. Therefore, the contention of the Members who have spoken of un-due rising prices is not proved by the facts. As a matter of fact, comparing  with prices in the neighboring States like Assam, as some of the Members have pointed out yesterday, that certain commodities, very important essential commodities were cheaper in Meghalaya than they were in Assam. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, Sir,  the normal  price of essential commodities because of no railway and other transport difficulties as such, the price in Gauhati in generally, is lower than the normal prices in Shillong. The normal  prices in Shillong are generally slightly higher than the prices in Gauhati. Because  of certain factors which I shall  mention including the efforts that the Government  did take in the  last few months that prices in Shillong were slightly lower in some cases than the prices in Gauhati and many other parts of the country. So far as iron  and steel materials are concerned, steps have been taken to secure adequate supply on this. However,  there is a general scarcity of these materials  throughout the whole country. I am referring  to the problem that existed  in the Steel Industry and the Coal Industry which affected  the Steel  Industry, therefore, if was difficult to get  those iron steel materials. The Government did take steps to maintain adequate supply  of corrugated  iron and steel for the  requirement of the State. The Government  in also not hesitating to take necessary action against any anti-social element if any specific case is detected. The Member from Pariong had made certain observations, and now I would like to reply to them.  The quantum of rice  issued  to the consumers  through  the Fair Price  Shops depends on the availability of stock which the respective Deputy Commissioner at the moment. Efforts  are made to maintain  issue of rice  at one kg per head per week. This  however, can be increased  in the winter months when the off-take in some parts of  the State  is low. But during lean months there is not much scope to issue over one kg. per head per week. This has to be supplemented  by issue of wheat  product. Every effort is being made to obtain more allotment from the Central Pool. Some Members have criticised about the F.C.I. and the question is as I said in the previous sessions, that the F.C I. has got sufficient  stock of food grains to meet our allotment. Efforts were made in last harvest season to procure and build a buffer stock. Procurement  was undertaken through the F C.I. in Garo Hills with a target of 2,000 tonnes. We could procure only about 250 tonnes of paddy. This is not satisfactory but whatever is available will be utilized. Instructions were issued to the Deputy Commissioner to ensure proper  distribution through Fair Price Shops. They are advised to do so with the advice of the Supply Advisory Boards and Vigilance Committee in each of the districts. The  hon. Member from Shillong Cantonment had raised the questions of quality  of commodities like mustard oil and other articles of food. Instructions being issued to Supply Inspectors through the Health Department to ensure  regular inspection and checks.

        Distribution of Vanaspati is not controlled by the Government. However, informal control over  distribution was maintained  by the manufacturer. Accordingly the manufacturers allotted  specific quota to the State every month and the distribution is supervised by the Deputy Commissioners. But we have  not received  any allocation for May and June, 1974 apparently due to the present crisis in the industry. Every step has been taken to stop smuggling outside the State.

        The Member has also raised the question of harassment by the checkers. Instructions are issued to  checkers not to harass  people. The retail price of open market rice in Meghalaya has not exceeded rupees 2.20 per kg. for ordinary rice and rupees 2.50 per kg for local rice. However,  super fine rice (Joha) is selling at Rs.4.00 to Rs.4.50 per kg. This is because  the supply  is very limited, Government  is aware that this variety  of rice  is taken only by the affluent  and sophisticated section of the society.

        Distribution of foodgrains at the local  level is done by the Deputy Commissioners. The Deputy Commissioners decide on the quantum of issue after taking into account  the availability of supply and other  factors  in a particular  areas or village. However, general  instructions will be issued  that scarcity  pockets are adequately supplied.

        It is  not a fact that not a single bundle of C.I. Sheet was allotted  to Jowai. In fact in 1972-73, 427 bundles and in 1973-74, 100 bundles of C.I. sheets were released for Jaintia Hills District. Whenever the State's indents are honoured by the manufacturers they will be proportionately distributed to the Districts.

        Regarding  salt, a consignment  of about 15,000 bags of salt  has arrived  in the State. The same  is being distributed through the Fair Price Shops to ensure  that this commodity is available throughout  the State at a reasonable price. It is expected that the price of salt will not exceed  50 paise per kg. in all parts of the State. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I may inform the House that after considerable efforts  and correspondences made  by the Government of Meghalaya in making salt available, this question is now being considered by the High  Powered Committee of the Government of India.  The previous  arrangement was that Meghalaya being in the  north eastern zone will be supplied through Calcutta. There had been some difficulty in getting salt from Calcutta and it was at a little higher rate. The traders had requested  the Government  of Meghalaya to get permission  for their  getting salt to be supplied directly from the west coast and this is now being taken up. But we are awaiting the decision of the Higher  Powered Committee of the Government of  India.

Shri H. R. Pohshna :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on a point of information, regarding  supply of C. I. sheets only 100  bundles  have  been issued for distribution to Jaintia Hills.

Shri S. D. D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Supply ) :- Whatever quota issued it was distributed to the District of Jaintia Hills. We are not  distributing to any  party either  A, B or C  whoever it is. But it  is distributed as I said, to the District, and we are making  more efforts to get more C. I. sheets. I have personally written a couple of letters to the Minister who can actually allotted 500 tonnes last time. But  we could not get the whole amount  of our requirement because  of a very short time limit given to us.

        Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, considering the very difficult situation that the country has just passed  through when there was  the general  strike by the North Eastern Area Railway workers, the  whole economic  condition of the country  was affected  by the railway strike. But we  find that  through the efforts that the Government have made, we were not practically affected by the railway strike. So also by the efforts made by the Government of India in keeping the wheels moving that we were able to bring in certain essential commodities even during the railway strike period.  The Government  of Meghalaya  has taken certain steps  in keeping  some stock and this was distributed during the strike period. Therefore, there was  no untoward situation  in our State as far as food grains were concerned. Therefore, I find it difficult  to understand the reasons for this motion at all. If it was concerned with the Government  of Assam  in which there were certain difficulties, then it would be quite  understandable as to what would be  their position. But in our State  we did not have much scarcity of food as in other parts of the country. But the  meal  difficulty is on of increase of prices that we were  not able to maintain. It is of course understandable that the prices have increased all over the country. But we cannot accept that we will maintain the prices in our State  lower than the manufacturers prices in other parts of the country. All we can do is to bring  in good understanding and co-operation between the Government of Meghalaya and the traders in bringing down prices and in procuring  commodities  in adequate quantities so that there should be no undue  rise of prices  as compared  to other parts of India. I am grateful to those Members who have recognized this difficulty and appreciated  the efforts made by the Government in this regard.

         Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I inform the House that there are certain difficulties with the food crops due  to attack  by some  pests on the crops in Garo Hills  and we have  written to the Government  of India  to help us in getting more food stuff  so that we can increase distribution through the Fair Price Shops. Normally, the requirement in Garo Hills is of the  order of 9,000 quintals per months but only a couple  of months ago the  D.C. Garo Hills has informed  his requirement  which was  of the order of 12 to 14,000 quintals and for this we have written to the Government  of India to increase  our quota. Scarcity areas  of Garo Hills have been supplied and will continued to be supplied through the present system of distribution through the Deputy Commissioners who will be operating in consultation with the Advisory Committees. All the block Development Officers also have  been instructed to see that  distribution is done properly.

        Some criticisms have been raised that rice at Tura does not reach the people. This is being looked into.

        Now I would like to quote some prices comparing Shillong  and Gauhati prices on 27th May, 1974 :-

        Price of rice in the open market at Shillong was Rs. 2.20 to Rs. 2.60 per Kg. but at Gauhati was about Rs.3.10 to Rs.4.00 per Kg Sugar in Shillong was Rs.4.25 to Rs.4.30 per Kg. whereas at Gauhati it was Rs.4.20 to Rs.4.30 per Kg. Mustard oil in Shillong was Rs.9.00 to Rs.9.50 per litre and at Gauhati it was Rs.8.50  to Rs.9.60  per litre. Salt in Shillong was Rs. 0.60 to Rs. 0.70 paise per Kg.  while at Gauhati it was Rs.0.50 to Rs.0.60 per Kg, in the open market. Now as I had informed  previously, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, and as the Members probably  know, the Government has only a certain balancing  factor that by assisting the traders in bringing  in more essential  commodities in the open market, prices are maintained. I would like to give a word of appreciation to the traders in Shillong, the Frontiers Chamber of Commerce who have  co-operated with us and are trying the best to see that the prices in Shillong are maintained  despite the difficulties of transport and railway strike and all. Inspite of all this things, prices  have been maintained. So with these words,  I would like to assure the Members  of the House, that since Meghalaya came into being, we have  making all efforts to tone up the Supply administration and to see that  essential commodities  are brought into the State in adequate quantity and to see that  procurement  are started  in our State. All the suggestions that have been made so far on the procurement of certain things within Khasi Hills are bring  looked into and that in future also this Government  is determined  to do it very best  to maintain supplies and to see that the border people are not affected. The fact that  we are continuing the transport  subsidy  scheme  inspite of the fact that  we are not  getting assistance from the Finance Commission of the Government of India, we are doing our level best to try to help the poorer section of our people affected in the border  areas. These are the efforts we are trying to make to see that  people are getting adequate supply and that the prices are reasonable. With these  words I  conclude my reply.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- I thought that the Supply Minister will be kind enough to throw light on the scarcity of paper for the  school going children, but he is completely silent on that, I want a categorical statement as to the position of paper and the effort done from  the Government  side to  ease  the situation but the Government  is completely silent on the abnormal rise of price in paper in the open market. I do not know why, when Government  who is in the procession  of a chilling plant and that only in Bhoi  area, it produced  20,000 litres of milk, but the prices of butter and ghee should go up. The Government  had not come out with any definite  assurance that the supply position is so far as C.I. sheets is concerned in Khasi Hills and the system of distribution would be improved  in all the 3 Districts  of Meghalaya......

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Minister-in-charge has already given assurance to see to the matter.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- He has not assured  that the supply of  sheet paper and the abundant supply of C.I. Sheets to cope with the demand of the Government servants who had ......

Shri E. Bareh :- Is paper falling under essential  commodities  ?

(Voices - No)

*Shri W. Syiemiong :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification, I just want to know  what action the Government has taken about the pilferage of weight and short weight of materials in the market, though this may not actually fall very much within the preview of the subject we talk about but it affects  the consumers and the public in general.

*Shri S. D. D. Nichols Roy (Minister, Supply) :- We do have a Department  of weights and Measures with a few staff. We will ask them to continue to inspect and check on the question  of short  weight of the essential commodities and materials. We would welcome the suggestions or any specific case that are brought forward  for our examination so that preventive action can be taken. But this is part of process of proving the honesty  of  the traders and the people concerned with supply and we recognised that it is a part of the process of the Government but not only the Government alone but of the society also to see that honest people are encouraged and those who are dishonest will be put out of business.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Let us come to Motion No.5 to be moved by Shri. L. Bareh.

Shri. L. Bareh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that this Assembly do now discuss about Government policy regarding distribution of the bone-meal to the cultivators.

Mr. Speaker :- Motion moved. Now you can initiate discussion.

Shri. L. Bareh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, our Government are fully aware of the conditions prevailing in the two districts of Jaintia Hills and Khasi Hills the condition of the soil is poor. As such, the use of fertilizers and bone-meal is absolutely necessary and this should be given the top most priority. As I have no experience especially in Khasi Hills, I will try to confine myself to the Jaintia Hills District only. The main occupation of the people of the Jaintia Hills is agriculture either Jhum cultivation or high land cultivation or wet cultivation, the major portion of the population is engaged in wet land cultivation but in connection with wet land cultivation we know that our people are very very poor, and we know also that bone-meal or fertilizers, are the back bone of our agriculturists. Sir, in connection with this, we have seen that our Government are deeply concerned with the process of procurement of bone-meal. We have seen last year that the distribution of bone-meals was of the order of 1000 Mts. and recently it has gone up to 1300 Mts. It appears from the figures that there was an increased demand for greater quantity of bone-meal, but how far it is true, I cannot say. But only very recently regarding the sale proceeds, there is an increase of about Rs.20 while the process of sale is taking place and is still going on. Suddenly there is an enhancement of rate in the sale.

        Now, Sir, I come to the process of distribution of bonemeal to the cultivators. In this respect, Sir, there is mass sentiment and mass suspicion about the decreases in weight of bone-meal. I even personally found that every bag of bone-meal issued by the Department is less in weight. Secondly, Sir, the quantity of bone-meals, is to be taken into account only by one man, that is, by the Secretary of the F.M.C. of every village. It may be about 500, 600 or 800 maunds of bone-meal distributed in every village and distribution of bone-meal is being done by one man. In this connection, Sir, the Secretary asks the D.A.O. after preparation of the list of bone-meal, but the Agriculture Authority has got no hand in the distribution. What he has got to do is only to issue certificate of distribution to the Secretary where the Secretary alone can do whatever he likes in consultation with the suppliers. So, in this respect, even the representatives have got no hand and no right to certify even on the body of the list of bone-meal submitted by some groups of persons. There are some areas in our village where they want to form a separate F.M.C. This was not allowed and was purposely delayed. There is no loss no gain, if the Government co-operation with the use of the metres. What I can see in this metres is only to diminish the quantity of bone-meal according to the Plan of one man. Lastly, Sir, I come to the untimely supply of bone-meal in this respect, recently we have seen that the bone-meal was supplied to the farmers in a very very short period of time before the preparation of seed sowing. When the farmers have completed everything needed for cultivation and when they are prepared for seed sowing, by that time the bone-meal was not available. Seed-sowing time is one of the vital factors on the part of farmers as they have to prepare the ground for sowing in a very right time. On the question of non-availability of bone-meal this time, there are certain handicaps on the progress of development of agriculture. With these few observations, I would like the Government to give serious thought over the matter in the interest of development of agriculture in our State so that the farmers will be able to produce more during the Fifth Five Year Plan. With these few words, Sir, I resume my seat.

Shri. D.D. Lapang :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is a fact that there are some areas in our State which are badly in need of the bone-meal and fertilizer for the increased yield of cultivation. But so far as my knowledge goes, the bone-meal is not a controlled commodity and Government has no control over it. It is being sold in the open market. What I understand is that the Government is helping the cultivators to have the bonemeal supplied to the farmers at subsidised rate and I understand that there are agencies who are entrusted with the work of supplying bonemeal to the cultivators. The hon. Member has expressed his grievances for Jowai. There are suppliers of bone meal in some areas like the Mawkaiew Co-operative Society, the Enowel Kaiang agency and something like that. But there are two agencies if I am not mistaken. But I fail to understand the question of entrusting the matter to one man in village. There are local committees not a one-man committee, and it is very clear that the Government does not have full control over this commodity. I am afraid that the whole blame cannot be put on the Government because bone-meal is sold in the open market. On that, I have collected some statistics. Last year, if I am not mistaken, about 1500 metric tonnes are being distributed by the Government according to the availability of funds, and this year, I understand about 1,800 metric tonnes are being distributed. There is an increase of 300 metric tonnes. What I understand is that Government is trying to do its best to see that the people are getting the bone-meal. However, it is to be realised, as expressed by the hon. Member, that there are some things to be rectified. But it is not clear as the Member has said that the Agriculture Department does not have a hand in the distribution of bone-meal. It simply certifies what the F.M.C. Secretary does. That of course should be looked into and I should express me congratulation to the Government that they have been trying to help the cultivators by giving the bone-meal at subsidised rate. If the people are demanding, it is in the fitness of things to suggest to the Government Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that the quota be increased so that the demand of the people can really be met so that even the low income group of the society will not be deprived of the right of taking the help of the Government.

Shri. H.E. Pohshna :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, while associating myself with the mover of the motion, I want to stress on two important points. Firstly, according to the present policy of the Government, the Government invited tenders for the supply of bone meal to the cultivators at subsidised rates. Therefore,  it is not very correct  to say that this is not a controlled  commodity. The prices  has been controlled  indirectly by the Government at the time of accepting  the tenders. Now in the reply of the Minister-in-charge of Agriculture  we find that  there are two  different rates  for the bone meal  that have been supplied  for to the  cultivators. This year  for 1533.84 quintals the rate  was 68.30 per quintal whereas  for 343.20 quintals the rate was 88.30 per quintals that means a difference  of Rs.20 Now, at the time of calling tenders are contractors  or the suppliers  have quoted  their rates. And I fully  agree  with the mover of the motion that due to the untimely supply of bone meal, the rate had to be changed.  That means  even the  very tender condition  has been violated  because the rate fixed was 60.30 per quintal whereas for the same quality the same  contractors have to supply at the rate of Rs.80.30 per quintal. So Sir, I would like to press upon the Government to see that these things be rectified so that the poor cultivators should not suffer. Secondly, the way that  the suppliers have been appointed. Since this bone meal is a matter  of life and  death to the cultivators I think the more the member of suppliers  the better. Therefore,  anybody  who has  got stock  in hand should be appointed  as dealer otherwise, the same thing will  be repeated  as in previous years even if the people say that we have got stock in hand they will not be  selected  as dealers. Therefore,  at the time of supplying, they say that  we are selling  at Rs.60.30 but  later on, they said  "no stock" of bone meal.  Therefore, they have to supply  at the rate of Rs.20 above the  rate which have been supplied to other cultivators. Therefore,  for the cultivators  to get  this supply of bone meal  at the rate of Rs.20 more than the other cultivators is a distressing thing. With these words, I thank you, Sir.

Shri E. Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, at the very  outset I would like to make it very  clear here as one of the hon. Members has said that bone meal is not a  controlled  commodity. Let us not  misunderstand that very fact. We only help the cultivators in subsidising the rate and we have no authority  to controlled the  price  of bone meal also. We use to  call for quotations from all those people who deal in bone meals, in January of every year and  we accept the lowest quotation. After we accept  the lowest quotation, we  also ask each and every supplier if they agree to supply at that rate. If they agree then we have to get  the bone meal from them and if they do not  agree  then we cannot force them to give us their bone meal, at that rate. Therefore, Government cannot controlled the prices of bone meal because if the dealers do now want to sell their bone meal at the rate we fixed then we cannot force them as we have no authority to do so.

        And about the enhancement of rate the mover and the hon. Member who have just spoken  made some remarks. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, when we call for a quotation in January last, we thought  that, 1500 quintals would be sufficient for the requirement of the Khasi Hills any Jaintia Hills Districts and we called for quotation and we got actually only that quantity. And the lowest rate quoted at that time was from the Assam Agro-Industries. Therefore, we accepted  this quotation. The  other quotation received was from Assam Hill Development Corporation, second from Assam Agro-Industries, third  from U Nolly Tariang, fourth from Mylliem Hydro, fifth from U. W. Gayang and sixth from Mawkaiew Service Co-operative Society, and all of them agreed to sell their stock at the rate quoted by Assam Agro Industries. All of them have a stock of only 1550 metric tonnes. We then thought that it would be sufficient for one year. So, we allotted  the quantity of Assam Hill Development Corporation 450 metric tonnes to Assam Agro Industries  450  metric tonnes  and then to U Nolly Tariang 300 metric tonnes, to Mylliem Hydro 210/metric tonnes, to W. Gayang 50 metric tonnes, to Mawkaiew Service Co-operatives Society 50 metric tonnes. Then we fined the rate per quintal at which this quantity  of 1550 metric tonnes should be sold. That means after we had subsidised the cost. Then in the meantime, this Mawkaiew Service Co-operative Society said that they will supply only 25 metric tonnes. So, there is a shortage of stock, and we could not  meet the demand of the public. Then Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, at that time, we have no other way because none of those dealers  have got a ready stock. Then U Nolly Tariang who was also one of the dealers  came forward  to offer us help by arranging  a new stock provided  we agree to take  the stock at a higher  rate than  the previous  stock. He said that  he can procure at an early date 300 metric tonnes. So we have  no other alternative but to accept the offer. The price he asked was  at the rate of Rs.88.30p per quintal and this also after subsidising the cost. This is because we cannot force anybody  to sell the bone meal at the lower rate. We told the cultivators that this is the rate and if they want to purchase it then purchase  it and if not then do not purchase it. We are not forcing anybody  but we only  help to reduce  the price by subsidising it. As the Government has not more stock at that time, whatever stock we have was already distributed. The hon. Member who moved  the motion also said  that there is short weight in the bone meal. While he said that I was surprised  to think that if a responsible person like him, who is also a public representative,  has found that there is a shortage in the weighing of bone meal, then I think it is his duty to take up the matter with the authority concerned or do something by which that dealer would be taken to task. But we  have not received any complain so far or any information of  that sort. Another point he raised  was that the business was conducted  by one man alone; and by that he meant the Secretary of the field Management Committee. I think  this is the practice which has been done for so many years in Jaintia Hills. The Agriculture  Department called for a list of actual cultivators who are in need of bone meal and the quantity  they need from the Field Management Committees. The  Agriculture Department checked those lists and after checking, the cultivators were allotted with bone meals and this is the practice for quite some time now and it has been done even today. He also  mentioned  that the representative has nothing to do  in this matter. I do not think a responsible representative should like to interfere with the function of the Field Management Committees in every village. It is the look-out of the Field Management Committees which are now in every village to see to their own welfare.

        Another point raised by the Mover was about untimely supply of bone meals. This is incorrect. We have, for the last two or three years, supply the cultivators with bone meals in time and nobody has ever complained  that he did not  receive the bone meal before the sowing season. We supplied bone meal right from the month of April which is the right time for the sowing season in Jaintia Hills. Therefore, Sir, I do not agree with the hon. Mover who said that  supply of bone meal is late or untimely, because  as I said, right from  the month of January every year we take action in the matter and we take keen interest to see all that bone meal is supplied  to the cultivators in time. There is another  remark  made by the hon. Member from Nongtalang,  where in he said that we should not deprive any dealers if they have got stock. Well, we never deprived any dealers who have got stock if they can give their quotation in time. Even for this Mawkaiew  Co-operation Society, since it has got 50 metric tonnes of bone meal we allotted  it to the dealership. So there is no point to be afraid of that, we will not consider any dealers who has got stock. For this, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, the rate  we accepted  in the beginning as per quotation is Rs.925 per metric tonnes  and for the additional  requirement  we accepted  at the rate of Rs.1,125 per metric tonne and the present  price of bone meal  is Rs.1,600 per metric tonnes. So I do not know  what will it be for the coming year. It may be double the price  that of the present, so also  the price  of fertilizers  from the first of this month had been double that of year's price. So these are the difficulties before us. But however, our Department is trying  its best to see and help the cultivators in supplying  the required  quantity of bone meal and fertilizers. With these  few words, I resume my seat.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Let us now come to Motion No. 6 to be moved by Shri Upstar Kharbuli. Since the  hon. Member is absent, let us pass on to Motion No. 7 to be moved by Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that this House do now discuss the recruitment, appointment and employment policy of the Government of Meghalaya.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Motion moved, now you can raise the discussion.

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in bringing  this Motion before the House, we have  got a lot to say regarding the policy adopted by the Government  in regard to recruitment, appointment  and employment. The question is very interesting and also it is a big question to which, in fact, on many occasions, we have referred in the general discussion of the budget  or in the  Cut Motion or on the other occasions also. Sir, I will speak only a few words as other hon. Members would like to take part in the discussion. Sir, the  policy  of recruitment, appointment and employment aims at building up the State itself in order to bring about the development and upliftment of the economic condition in  peace and prosperity of the people of the  State  and the Government should come forward with a very clear policy on recruitment, appointment and employment. This policy, according to me, does not mean only recruitment to the Departments concerned created  by the Government or the public works which are  directly under the  charge of the Government but it is also recruitment  to all the public sector works including recruitment to the armed forces and to private sectors concerned in collaboration with the Government, so that  it will meet the aims and objectives  of the Government to bring about development and progress and prosperity. Sir I will cites one example. Government has time and again promised and during the struggle for a separate State  of our own, if we try to refresh our memory, we will remember that we have promised  the people  that if we get a State of our own  everything will be at  the disposal  of our own people. The Legislature of the State, the Cabinet of the State, high and lower posts  in the offices employment in the offices of the Government  and the Government  will be headed by our own people. Even  to look after  the safety  and security  of  citizens  of State will be at the disposal of our own people. It was in fact. Sir, a demand  to see that  our land, our customs, our practice, our  usages  will looked  after by own  people. But, Sir, I will just refer to one example without  mentioning  names. The Government  servants are one. While struggling  for a Hill State, who have  sacrificed  a lot, both in helping  the people  to understand  and also who have  played  a very important  role as citizens  with the aim  that immediately after the  emergence of the State, we will look into the  administration ? Sir, there are  now hundreds of employees  who were employed  by the  Government of Assam  who have submitted  a petition to the Government a copy of which is also  here with me, that their hope is to get a chance to look after the administration of our new State. There are  hundreds I think, serving in Dispur in the service  of the Assam Government. We have  received  copies  of the petition to absorb them  and I may remind this  House that the Government replied some time  that they  will be absorbed  one after another. But, Sir, so far the  Government did not attend  to the prayer of those employees who are  sincerely  and honestly working  in Assam. The Council of Action  of the A. P. H. L. C in 1961 have issued  this pamphlet  written in Khasi. It is also written  in English. I will quote  the expression written in Khasi. (The hon. Member then read out the written passage in Khasi).

        Sir, I am not an expert  in translation (Voices :  When was that pamphlet issued ?) In 1961 and I am a party to a decision to give  employment  to the people. That is why I am bringing  this question. But we will not attend to this very manifesto.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Mr. Lyngdoh, is it not an election manifesto ?

Shri. H.S. Lyngdoh :- Yes,  it was  Sir. This was issued by the Council of Action which was  guided by the Ruling Party. So in English, it means somewhat  like this : The majority of the Assamese  people are trying  to make all the people of Assam  to speak Assamese and this Act is the beginning  to drive us to that. This means then that those people who are now serving in Assam, they have been driven down after the shifting of the capital from Shillong to Dispur they are the first  sufferers who have been forced  to learn Assamese. So, I  just want  to mention this one instance. Sir, on this particular question may I remind the Minister that it is the  policy of the Government to absorb all the tribal employees now serving under the Assam Government. If the Minister wants a few hundreds now serving in Assam could easily be absorbed  in Meghalaya by creating work for them here. They have submitted  a memorandum to the Government. Sir, that the Government could absorb some of them in the P. W. D. where there are many vacancies. Also they could be absorbed in the Civil Secretariat. Government may say that they are not from the same department. But we see that in cases of promotion  during the  current year a person from one department is transferred  to another or from one office to another. But why could not these poor people who have been the first sufferers of this Assamese State Languages now serving in Dispur be absorbed ? Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will not take the time of the House as there may be some  hon. Members who may like to take part in discussing this motion. Another thing, Sir, as we have discussed on another occasion regarding the policy of the Government. I would like  to say that the Government have failed in its attempt to give work to the educated  unemployed  youths. Over and above the policy statement on the schemes prepared  by the Government, there was a scheme from the Government of India,  i.e., the Half-a-million Jobs Programme. We have discussed  the other day the Government  policy on recruitment  and appointment and employment.  In this respect, Sir, the Government have failed. There is no sincere  attempt on the part of the Government to see to the needs of the people. In this Half-a-Million Jobs Programme, and allowance of one hundred rupees is given to the  educated  graduates to go from Shillong. These graduates, both boys and girls are sent to Nongpoh, Lyngam and other far off places in the interior with just one hundred  rupees. Sir, how can one live one hundred  rupees ? How can the  scheme be workable, or can a graduate from Shillong join for one hundred rupees ? How can a person live with one hundred  rupees when even at home here in Shillong he spends much more than that ? What about the rent  he has to pay for his residence in a place where he was appointed ? What about  food ? It may  not be sufficient even for pan or cigarettes. I want  to ask the Minister how much  they are spending in their leisure  time. May be hundred  and thousands of rupees but these young people are being sent to work with one hundred rupees ! So, Sir, this also does not  work and 80 per cent of  those candidates  so called employed  by the Government cannot join  because of this paltry sum of Rs.100. So, the Government  has failed. So I would request the Government  to look into this respect. The Government is expected  to attempt sincerely  and work in a way that would  benefit our own people  thereby  improving  our economic  condition and  I am sure progress, peace and tranquility will be there in the country. Sir, time and again, the Government have stated that they are very  much in favor of recruiting young tribal boys in the Police Department and I have also seen some girls in Police uniforms standing there. I think there are 5 of them employed in Police Department.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :- Are they also candidates ?

Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :- Yes, Sir, they are. Though the five have already joined but hundred and thousands of them are there in the State, but because of the policy of the Government which does not give proper notification and proper advertisement  the young tribal boys and girls do not get a chance to join the Police Force. Sir, there are many boys in my area who do not have work because of  lack of fertile land to cultivate. So they are moving and roaming about in the street and bazaars. So, gambling has increased because they have nothing better to do. Although, I do not favor gambling myself I know that  if a person has 25 paise he is likely to go there to try his luck. One man would ask another to join him with a  promise for a peg or more pegs of liquor.


         In this way, Sir,  they get drunk which may lead to quarrels or even murder. Sir, if at all the Government  will sincerely attempt in this employment  for development  of agriculture  and other public  works, it will be  welcomed. But why does not Government forward with a policy to employ, these young men in road construction or send them  for training  in various fields of activity like training how to cultivate  the land in a scientific manner, how to  use  fertilizers, how to use  scientific manure etc. ? Sir,  this is also  a part of  recruitment  and employment in their own way which will benefit them and for the benefit  of the State as a whole. The Government  can do this as a sort  of short term  recruitment. We cannot  just wait for the people  from the interior  to  come and be graduated  in Shillong or in other cities and then  give them  employment. We are very low in literacy but the Government has to  give jobs  or works to our illiterate people. In this respect,  the  Government has failed  to make a sincere attempt to do all these. Sir, in another  aspect of the matter, I would  cite just one example  to show the  policy of Government on recruitment, appointment and employment. The Government is now recruiting outsiders to key posts  in our State. Of course, we do not have our own people with the  necessary  experience. But why not take these outsiders on contract basis, and if they say that  this is an all-India Service, then we cannot  say much. But outsiders should not  be given direct  appointments. As I have stated earlier at the time of our struggle  for a Hills State our Leaders commitment was  that out own people will look after our State and that there would be Secretaries, Directors, etc. from our own  people. But, Sir, once  these outsiders are appointed against the key  posts in the Government it will take another  20 years for such posts  to be filled  up by our people. Of course, I do not  blame the outsiders; they must also get employment here or in their own State. I say that the distribution of responsibilities must be there and our people can look after our State in a better way. They will work not  only for  the sake of pay but also for their family, their State and their country. Sir, our  Government is not sincere enough and I will cite an example from the Sericulture Department. The Assam Government have asked  the whole lot of technical  and non-technical  personnel who are working in the Sericulture Department to go down to Gauhati to their own State. I do not know whether our Government will release  them or not. Of course, two or three persons have been sent for training but that is in the  normal programme and the Government  should  appoint  them there when they will pass  out the training. But who will man the  office  now if Assam employees are released ? Why not Government absorb those Government servants who are there - the tribal employees there at Dispur. The Government said that there is no room but there is plenty of room. The Government  is not sincere in filling up these posts. Another lapse of irregularity which is there in the employment policy of the Government is seen in nearly all the Department. There are many officers and assistants who have been working  there for the last  20 years but no promotion  or permanency  is being considered. I cannot understand the reasons why  these people who have served  for so many years  could not be confirmed. For example, some Sectional  Assistants have been recruited in the Public Work Department but the majority of them have been recruited on temporary basis like manual labourers who will be discharged  after six  months or so  after the plan schemes have been  completed. Now there are two categories of Government employees who have been subjection to such treatment  one category consist of those  who have been serving for  the last 15/20  years or so but have not yet been confirmed and the other category is for those who have served only for 6/7 years but have been confirmed.  This is highly  irregular on the part of the Government. As I said earlier the Sectional Assistants in the Public Works Department cannot devote  whole heatedly to their duty since they know that their  services  would be terminated by the Government in the near future. Therefore, I would  request the Government  to see that things are done in a proper way. Regarding  promotion, Sir, I will cite an example of discrimination in the Education Department that is the recent promotion of a  Deputy  Inspector of Schools in Garo Hills and in Shillong also where a junior  man was promoted  superseding the claim of a much senior person. Such anomaly is not only confined to this Department. I think, the  Government servants who are their  favorites and who supporters of the  Ruling Party  are getting  the promotions  superseding  even their seniors. How  can we get  sincere service from those Government  servants, the poor  Government  servants who have been denied  their legitimate right to get promotion ? Sir, with  these few words I hope the hon. Members will take part in this Motion which I have moved.

Shri Francis K. Mawlot :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir,   at the   first instance I would like to ventilate the grievances voiced by our unemployed youths  of the State, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I agree  with the mover of the motion that it is failure on the part of the Government to implement  the policies  that have been drawn up in hundred  of pages but, if we compare the policy  statement it comes  hardly  in to one  sentence. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir,  there are so many Central Government offices  here in Shillong, viz.,  the office of the Accountant General, the Office  of the Postmaster General, Survey of India, Census, etc. but how many of our local people are employed in these Central office ? If my knowledge does not fail me, there is a reservation of posts in these offices ranges  from 40 to 60 percent for the Scheduled Tribes and Scheduled Castes. In some offices reservation for Scheduled Tribes is 40 percent and in some offices it is 60 percent. But this Government has not taken any initiative to move the Central Government  for implementation of this reservation. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, had one Government taken up the matter with the Central Government, I think, by now  the  problem of unemployment  would not  have assumed  such a stupendous proportion.

        Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir,  we have also  District Selection Boards. Well according  to my observation I find that these District Selection Boards are functioning as stumbling blocks to solving the unemployment problem. For example, if one office needs one peon, the officers in consultation with the Director of Information and Public Relations will advertise the post which will take one month for receiving  applications when another  one or two months for concluding the examination, written as well as  personal interview. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, besides that the persons who would be selected from Shillong is posted  at Shella, Nongstoin or in the Bhoi  are. But a man from Shillong would not go to  Shella  or Nongstoin  simply because  with his meagre salary of Rs.80 or so he cannot afford  to shift  there  with his family. It is difficult for them to have their both ends meet and ultimately the appointment stands void. Sir, why I say that  the District Selection Board is a stumbling  block, is because of their policy in the matter of appointment. The Board also, discriminates against the right of the local people.

        Many applicants from Nongstoin area, Bhoi area or Shella etc., etc., because they are not known  to the members  of District  Selection Board were not appointed. Instead, they have favored  the applicant from  Shillong who was not willing to join  and therefore, the  post remained  vacant for years together. For example, for the post of one Lower  Division Assistant in the office of the Executive  Engineer, P. W. D. ( R. and B) , Nongstoin Division. 'This post  remained vacant  for the last  two years and till now that post has not been filled up. Why ? Because  the Executive Engineer of the Nongstoin  Division has to get  the approval  of the Selection Board before he advertise  for the post and this take such a long process. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, and it is a very sad state of affairs.

        I appreciate the Government for their very wise  policy i. e., to allow  our Garo friends 40 percent and our Khasi and Jaintia friends 40 percent, employment opportunity. Well, Sir, whether  this 40 percent  reservation meant for  the unemployed  Garo youths was implemented so far or to  what  extent the Government had succeeded to carry out its policy  on this ? Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir,  if we are not sincere in implementing our  own policies, if we are  not sincere  to our own  words and  to the  declared  policy, I am afraid we may get the blame  from all quarters, I am also afraid tat we are not doing justice to our own people. Therefore, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, my request to this Government is that it should approach the Central Government and demand of them the implementation of the reservation of posts for tribals in Central Government  Offices, giving a chance due to the scheduled tribes. Apart, from the local people,  we must see that the scheduled tribes  get priority. Thirdly, Sir, it is for the State Government to examine whether these  District Selection Boards are in any way helping the Government  to solve the unemployment problem or rather they act as a stumbling block to employment  potentialities. With these few words, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I again urge upon the Government to look into this matter very seriously, and also to carefully  examine the matter so that those policies can be properly implemented; that is to give employment to our  unemployed youths. Well, in many cases over and above the advertisement that was called, when the examination was held, a man who has  already  in service (in the State) was selected  on the  ground that he knows  better denying appointment to the new  applicant on grounds of his little knowledge.

        In many cases, examination and interviews  were not held. Secretly appointment is made of any person who was already serving in another  Department (with the State), thereby creating vacancy in a different  Department. This blocks the new entry; because when that vacant  post (so created) was to be filled up it could  be done in the same manner. I, suggest that Government  should allow the new applicants in the first place and those whose are already in service as  secondary.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to participate in this motion moved by my hon. friend from Pariong. and in a way,  I feel all of  us should be grateful to the hon. Member who had moved this  motion in the House, because it has given us an opportunity  to express our opinion on the functioning  of the Government offices on recruitment, employment  and efficiency. I hope,  the Members in the treasury benches  also would not be so shy in admitting  the lapses that they  themselves  have come across particularly, in months where no voting takes place. Now, it is a fact, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that no Government can function well, however excellent the Ministers may be, if the apparatus and machinery of the Government  cannot function properly. No matter how clever  a driver might be, he cannot drive a car, if it has only flat wheels or if it has no petrol or mobil oil. He cannot run the car however  expert  he might be. But still I would give them due credit. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I must say  that the functioning this Government  is held up because of the wrong recruitment policy, the wrong appointment policy and the wrong employment policy. One specific case which strikes my mind immediately is the failure of the Government  to absorb  our erstwhile friends, who are still our friends but are  now in the other State. At the time of the Hill State movement this friends bore every  share of the brunt of the attack and even joined hands in the movement. But today, Sir, they were shabbily  treated  under the scorching heat of Gauhati, to be  bitten by mosquitoes. It can better be imagined than described. Moreover, Sir, this Government has encouraged the temporary separation of husband  and wife.


        Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I do not see any reason why this Government could not have absorbed  all those persons, and why is it necessary to impose  a percentage for absorption. In other States in India there was bifurcation, but no percentage was laid down. The  former employees  of that State were automatically absorbed into the service of the State to which they belonged. Of course, here they have brought out that "brilliant" idea of the single file system. So they  say we do not need  so many employees, we need just a few and therefore, they have refused or rejected  to consider the very legitimate  and strong claims of  our tribal brethren now serving in the State  of Assam. But when we were struggling for a separate State of our own as the hon. Member from Pariong has rightly stated in many election manifestos of this Ruling Party, it was stated that one of the basic considerations for the creation of the State was for the Official Language Act passed in this very House by another Assembly and today, this Government has conveniently forgotten this cause root, this basic cause, which now our own brethren, our own flesh and blood are facing in Assam. The very same persons who were  fighting for  a separate State are today made victims of an earlier condition arguing  which we were  fighting  for a separate State. Now, as has been order issued by the Government of Assam for immediate  implementation of the Official Language Act and over 200 employees from our hills who are now in the Plains of Assam, will certainly become ignorant over night, and also unable to operate on the ains of Assam under the terms and conditions that have been imposed upon them by the Assam Government. Now,  there are  frequent  checks, frequent  reminders not allowing them to go out even for a cup of tea. They must  remain in office for the whole day. There is a kind of  persecution of our tribals brethren  who are now  working in Assam. I feel Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir,  that if the Government can call a meeting of representatives of various political parties  and various  political  affiliations in the State, we can show to the  Government  how all these  unfortunate  persons can be absorbed  here in our Government. They are even prepared to become peons, as I was  told by a few of them,  if they are  absorbed here, because they can be united with their wives and children who are dearer to them than the  plains of Assam. They would not mind, provided their salary  is protected, their seniority  is protected, working in any capacity under the Government of Meghalaya. They will be loyal to the State Government if they  are absorbed  here. But the State Government has failed  to absorb  them, and have been summarily allowed to rot in the plains  of Assam by this  callous Government. There are other  matters  also Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, which I would like to bring to your notice, with regard to the terms and conditions under which the  employees  of the Government are now serving. For example, their confirmation. Now there are hundreds of employees who have not yet been confirmed by this great Government of ours. I think some employees have put  in more than 20 years of service but they have not been confirmed. When they were taken over here by this Government they were already confirmed by the previous Government,  but when they joined  this Government they  become temporary. The other day we had a wonderful reply from the  Leader of  the House regarding interse- seniority  when he said  that the interse-seniority has not yet been determined, but it  will be determined  after the agreement is signed  between the Governments of Meghalaya and Assam. Does the Government realize  how many practical  difficulties  arise out of this question, by ignoring  interse-seniority. Suppose today, a man is appointed, superseding his seniors, then tomorrow when the interse-seniority  will be  determined, how can you rectify  matters which will be much more difficult at  that time ?

        It is better at least to fix the interse-seniority among the officers who are  already in Meghalaya, otherwise it will create a terrible problem in future. I  know of a few cases of such irregularities. As for example, the District Social Education Research Officer, who is a  gentlemen from the Mizo Hills, had been serving over the present  A. D. I. of Schools,  Khasi Hills, who is senior to him by two years. For two years the A. D. I.  remained in this embarrassing position. We have gathered  from the former  D.I., Khasi Hills also that his promotion to the post of Assistant Inspector of Schools was due  for the last two years. It was  assured by the Minister of State that he would promoted to the post of Assistant Inspector of School at Shillong. But now he has been sent to Jowai. The A. I. of School Khasi Hills,  two years junior to the D. I. of Schools. These are  the practical problem. How can they solved later on, when an embarrassing position has already  been created? This is a fact that such irregularities are occurring since they are on deputation. How long these persons will remain on deputation at the mercy  of the Government of Assam ? When  the Government of Meghalaya wants to give  promotion, the Assam Government opposes, because the services have not yet been bifurcated. Now in the Forest Department, there are some excellent officers who have been given Class I service by the U. P. S. C. and recommended for Indian  Forest Service by the Government of Meghalaya. But the Government of Assam did not give them clearance. They have not been recommended by the Government of Assam although they are  fully qualified, but they were  not  confirmed. As a result, there are many post remaining vacant. In our Forest Department we have got one officer who is carrying out treble duties because we are short of officers. There are other  examples,  namely, the  suspension of two Garo friends. Probably  the Leader of the House  is very  much aware of it since it concerns his home district. Nine months ago they  were suspended but uptil now, no reasons as to why they have been suspended were shown. The Government of Meghalaya accused  them but they  do not know what is  the accusation. Now, we have  the problem of the Public  Service Commission also. For employment  and recruitment of efficient staff we need efficient people in the Public Service Commission. If we  do not have efficient  persons in Government service  the whole machinery of the  Government will be crippled. We have got a classic  example  where a Khasi gentlemen was invited  as an expert  in Garo Language for the selection of Garo translators, while actually he did not know  even a single word of Garo. This gentlemen was asked  to select a Garo  Translator and this was admitted by the Leader of the House also.

        The P. H. E. Department has appointed so many types of persons, under Town and Country Planning schemes, from outside the State. May  I cite an example of their efficient performance from no less a paper than " Ka Ri Jong Nga " wherein it has been published that 22 lakhs has been spent for three gallons of water per day, which is hardly equivalent to two  buckets of water or so. Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, if I get even two lakhs I do not mind to supply two buckets of water every day to the Government  (Loud Laughter) .....................................It says here  that the  Government  spends Rs. 22 lakhs to get 3 gallons of water per day. I humbly submit Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, for 13 gallons for Rs, 22 lakhs is quite a sum. I am prepared to give this Government one bucket of water every day if they can give me even 2 lakhs of rupees, Mr. Mawlot here, a Member from Nongstoin is willing to accept  even Rs. 2,000. He will give one bucket of water.


        Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, what an example of efficiency. With  30 lakhs of rupees can we imagine Rs.30 lakhs for two buckets of water per day ? 6 gallons  of water  for 30 lakhs of rupees . Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, we will all become water carriers for this Government. It is here beautifully printed the great, noble efficiency of  the officers of this  Government. It is a nice case, a fitting case, it should be well, very  important Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. And it was published  by the Government of India also. Now Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have a few other matters also to discuss e.g., other matters  of "efficiency" , of appointing inefficiency people. What types of persons do get  to run the Education Department ? What advice do these people  give to the Minister when  they come up with their replies  ? Sir, we find that  are totally inefficient. This morning the Hon'ble Minister of State for Education declared  that the M.C.T.A. will not be recognized and that the Government does  not propose to recognize this association as it has already become a registered society, so according  to rules, they will not recognize this Association. There is however, a signed  agreement  between the Chief Minister and the Association. This is almost  a fit case for a Privilege Motion. Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am still with "efficiency". Further, on the selection of a site  for N.E.H.U.  because a  particular officer favored by the Minister, chose this particular site the Hon'ble Chief Minister said in this House  that this site is one of the four sites formally  proposed  by the University Site Selection Committee. As a matter of fact, it is  not. We know from the Members of the Committee that this site was not proposed by the Members of the Site  Selection Committee. The  sites of Mawkynroh and Mawtawar are not in the same area. But the Site Selection Committee did not propose  areas, it proposed  specific sites. The sites  proposed by the Committee did not include the site family selected, although a categorical statement was made by the Leader of  the House. We do not understand  how these things are done.

        Now, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the  question of appointment. This Government often says that we cannot  get our own people, we do not have qualified persons, so we have to bring them from outside. But  for example, in last few months, there was an interview for the selection  of Executive Engineers under the Public Health  Engineering Department, and two S. D. Os, our local S. D. Os, fine young gentleman, had applied. At the  time of applying they were  short of the requisite  5 years  experience only by two months. But at the time of their interview  they had more than the requisite. years of experience. One was the S. D. O. from Nongstoin and the other, the S. D. O. from Sonapahar. But these have been  rejected, they are our own people, yet they have not been selected.

(At this stage the Speaker took the Chair)

Mr. Speaker :- Prof. Majaw, you are  referring to the interviews conducted  by the Commission. This House  cannot discuss  anything  which refers to a matter conducted by any autonomous body.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Sir,  in the matter of selection of officers, why is it not possible  for this Government to do  what some sister States do. If they  find  a man to be efficient , they even make him the Head  of a Department  even if he is not an I. A. S. officer. This is being done. If you talk of the I. A. S. officers, of the quota that we receive  of 50 percent, I would ask this Government  if every year we are getting 50 percent quota of the  number of persons who passed ? I know  from the hon. Member from Jaiaw that he had to write series of letters until the  Government  agreed to accept our own people  who had passed  the I. A. S. The Ministers here  who are taking notes for their  replies  will please  answer if during the last 2 or 3 years  we are getting 50  percent or not of the I. A. S. officers who have passed out and if we are not, did Government  make any representation for that............

Mr. Speaker :- 50 percent  is not for Meghalaya alone, but this 50  percent is for the joint Assam and Meghalaya Cadre.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Yes.  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am aware of that. But this Government did not appoint some who had  applied. The Government did not consider their cases and they, I believe, had to be taken up by the hon. Member from Jaiaw, who has succeeded in one case and failed in the other. Government  is adamant  on this. They won't  accept our people. What efficiency can you expect from other Government servant, Mr. Speaker, Sir,  when the salaries are so small, so low. We have felt the pinch ourselves and we were happy to raise our own salaries. But there are the salaries of those now serving  in Government, or of those  who receive salaries ........................

Mr. Speaker :- This is an extraneous issue. Here the  motion is on  the recruitment  and employment  policy and not on salaries.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- But a man who is employed  gets a salary. Mr. Speaker, Sir, Part  of the employment is the salary, a man is employed for salary......................

Mr. Speaker :- By inference ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Yes, if the salary is not attractive, you may not get the nest persons. So part of the employment  policy should be linked up with salary. The question was asked whether the new pay scale of the U.G.C. would be applied in the State and Government have not yet  taken any decision on that.  As such, this State will lose many  good teachers and lecturers if the other States accept these U.G.C. pay scale. They would be going to the other States where the U.G.C. pay scale are accepted. The best teachers and professors will be tempted naturally to go to other States if they cannot  find employment here. One of the reasons, I know,  given by some bureaucrats is that, if they  implement the scales  of the U.G.C. then the  officers will get lower salaries than professors. But this is also pointless. We know that these Ministers get lower salaries than the Chief Secretary, but they are not inferior in rank or in prestige to the Chief Secretary. If we can implement the U.G.C. scales, the Central Government  is prepared to pay a share of 80 percent  and thus the Central Government will bear 80 percent of the salaries and the State will contribute  only 20 percent. Whereas, if you implement the scales of the State of Assam, you get no assistance from the Central Government. These are facts that have to be faced.

Mr. Speaker :- It is also a fact that whereas the colleges in Assam are affiliated to the State Universities, the colleges in Meghalaya  are affiliated to a Central University.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- You are helping me, Mr. Speaker, Sir,  thank you, (Laughter) for without the guidance from the Chair, we are sometimes lost.

Mr. Speaker :- That is my duty.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- In fact, I had mentioned this earlier on another occasion, how colleges are affiliated to the Central University and  how the scale of pay of a Central University  have not been implemented  in the State, nor have the pay scales of the U.G.C.  been implemented .

        With regard to unemployment, we have spoken a lot about it. But I feel that this division, with due respect to the Garo friends, of 40 :40 persons is not very fair-our Garo  friends  should not take me amiss, because  that 40 percent is not being implemented. Even they could not  implement 20 percent fully. 40 percent is there on paper only. But this  is not being implemented  not even 5 percent  is being implemented. So easily we can make  some adjustment to bring it down to 30 percent and thereby  help our Jaintia friends also. You cannot lump up the entire two districts of Khasi and Jaintia Hills to give 40 percent and another 40 percent to the Garos alone. This is not very fair. Let us give due allowance to our Jaintia friends also and see to it......

Mr. Speaker :- I think you  most also remember that it is very difficult  to differentiate  between a Jaintia and a Kynriam  simply because  one lives  at Jowai.

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am referring only to a  geographical  point of view. Persons coming from  that district  should also have a share  in this percentage, because  if we  have a full  fledged district naturally, we should have a place in employment. There should be a  rational  division  for all the  3 districts and to see to us that it is implemented. This is 40 percent is never implemented for our Garo friends. In order to improve the administration, I would suggest............

Mr. Speaker :- Can you substantiate  your argument that 40 per cent has never been implemented ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- In most if the answers we have received from various departments on the break up community wise and district wise, it shows  that the Government has not succeeded  in giving representation to the Garos in Government offices.

Mr. Speaker :- I think I am better in arithmetic because from all the questions received here, the wrong information that the House may have is about the existing staff. Whether this 40 percent reservation is meant for the new recruitment ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- I am talking of new recruitments because  we talked a lot about old recruitments. The position of our Garo friends is almost nil in Government today. In the new recruitment, there must be a rational division, to accommodate all the three districts. Now Mr. Speaker, Sir,  there are vacancies,  e.g.,  for Gram Sevaks, for  posts in the Agriculture Department; there are vacancies. Last year 8 trainees  passed  out from  the upgraded  Gram Sevaks School at Upper Shillong. All these  8 persons are still waiting for appointment although  vacancies still exist. Persons  are there trained by the Government, but no appointments were made.

        We have the half-a-million jobs programme, had referred earlier to cock and hens. But I would not introduce that subjects again because  it is almost a butt  for all kinds  of jokes. The matter of trucks  is a serious matter. Today in the supplementaries  to unstarred questions, we know that very few persons have received these trucks. The reasons being that the Governments is not prepared  to under-write  the entire  loan because the price of trucks has gone up. A number of persons have been meantime, as we have said yesterday, Government  wheels are moving too slowly, while  the price of trucks has shot  up tremendously. But the Government  is not prepared  to underwrite  these loans, at this new  price. They are  prepared to underwrite the old price. But the banks will not make up the difference. We have taken successful  candidates  selected by the Government to the banks, but the banks are quite unable to make up the difference. They want the Government to foot the entire bill. But the Government is not prepared to do so. I would request the Government to see to it that they  are prepared  to underwrite the entire  loan for those people who have  been selected.

        Further, Mr. Speaker, Sir, on unemployment, I would suggest that more State Transport Routes be opened as that will also partially solve the employment problem. There are many areas where roads are tolerably motorable e.g. you can drive  a bus to Umroi  as also a s far Raitong or Umsong, but there are no.......

Mr. Speaker :- Will the  small jeep owners and the mini bus owners not complain against the Government ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- The main thing to be considered  is that the  State Transport  Service are meant for the whole State. They can give more employment  to the people, while making  it convenient  for those  who wish  to travel up and down from the  remote corners of the State to the capital, and to other areas. Mr. Speaker, Sir,  I would suggest that more avenues for employment and more offices  be opened. We should have two or three wings of the Police  for our young  people trained  here within the State. Of course, the immediate question is "Where is the money ? How will we pay those people when we have  already  a deficit  budget ?"

        I have suggested  earlier that if Government is prepared  to nationalize  some of the trades which are conducted  by unscrupulous business man from outside the State, they will easily  get an adequate income. After deduction agency  fees, they will still get 3 or 4 crores worth of rupees as revenue if they nationalize certain major trades which are  almost monopolized by unscrupulous traders from outside the State. But  I think Government knows who butters its bread- how can they kill the goose  that lays  the golden eggs. In their heart of hearts they are not prepared ......

Mr. Speaker :- Are you aware of these  golden eggs ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- We have seen the  reflected  rays of the shinning gold, and that is  why Government is not prepared  to take  such  drastic steps.

Mr. Speaker :- What kind of trade would you suggest that the Government  should nationalize ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- Before I give the names of the trades, I would like to clarify my statement by the saying -I do  not intend  Government to run the whole trade, but the ownership of the trade should be taken  by Government e.g., potatoes. If  Government buys and sells  through its own agents,  then that margin of profit will come as revenue. If Government appoints an officer to sell potatoes, he would not care to sell 1 kg or 100 kg because his salary is fixed. But instead, the sale, should be given to the agents of the Government and they will get the commission. They know how much they realise, the more they sell  the more they will earn. But the  ownership of the trade may be taken by the Government.

Mr. Speaker :- Do you mean to say that potato is still in the hands of unscrupulous tradesman from outside the State  ?

Prof. M. N. Majaw :- At least  75 percent of the export. I am prepared  to prove it, Mr. Speaker, Sir. The export outside the State is 75 percent  and is controlled  by other people from outside the State. Then the case of brooms, for instance. The  grass meant for brooms  grows abundantly  in our State and is exported outside the  State in large numbers. But this export is conducted  by outsiders. During the  the broom season you will find hundred of people  from Bombay, Delhi and other places, sitting  at Mawlonghat Bazaar, controlling this business. They come  here for profit and  they are  taking their profits  to other States. I do not know what Government is going to do about this; what steps are being taken so that our people will derive more income. I will not go into the details of this matter, but I am just suggesting  how Government may get more revenue and give more employment  to our people. We had a case in those  Hills  near Khanapara where sand  was dug up and carried away by truck loads to Gauhati, destroying the forest in the area. If the Government had taken only Rs.2 per truck they would have gathered  lakhs by now. They allowed the entire Hills of Khanapara to be dug out  and carried  as sand to Dispur, for the  foundation of the capital. This was a great loss of revenue for us. So Mr. Speaker, Sir, with this few words, I would request  the other Members of the House to participate  in the motion, where there is no voting and they may speak freely and express  themselves about what they feel about this Government.

Mr. Speaker :-  Any other Members ?

Shri D. N. Joshi :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, while associating myself  with the mover of the motion, I have certain  observations to make. The first point is regarding the employment  policy  of the Government of Meghalaya. Just now I have heard from one of the Members that in the PHE Department itself three people were selected for maintaining the post of Executive Engineering. To my knowledge up till  now (interruption).....

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Joshi I have  ruled out the Commission has its own function and this House cannot discuss anything  which the  Commission has done or is being  done.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- I am now coming to the selection. These people have been selected  I have nothing  to say on the part of the  autonomous body,  but to my knowledge one of the person has not joined  as yet. So I would also like this Government to advertise again and give chance to the local youths who are also (interruption).

Mr. Speaker :- You will realize the problem. The Government  cannot appoint anybody  until a name  has been recommended by the Commission.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- The name is recommended  by the Commission but he has not joined, Sir. Now, the question of absorption of the people from the State  who are now languishing and rotting  in the hot climate of Dispur, who very  much wanted to come to their  own State to serve it, but facilities has not been yet created  for them to come here in Meghalaya. Only the other day in the question hour, Government  has come out with a statement of the number of employees serving in the Meghalaya  Government  Press. I found that  the people from  the State of Assam are also there who are very much  willing to go down to Gauhati. Only Government should come up with schemes to absort these people belonging  to this State, to replace those people of Assam who are willing  to go down. I do  not find  that Government  has done  anything uptil now. As regards Employment Exchange it appears to me, Sir, numerous complaints from the non-tribals students and the people who are unemployed  have come to me as  they have not  got employment for the simple reason that  they are  non-tribals. They are required to produce residential certificates and even on  the production of a residential certificate some of them  are denied  registration  in the Employment Exchange  in Shillong. Even after registration there are cases that for long three years they not been given any call. I know Government has a policy on giving employment to 20 percent of the non-tribals including Scheduled Caste who are in the minority, but to my knowledge, up till now Government  has not done any justice in giving employment to cover that 20 percent.

Mr. Speaker :- It is 15 percent .

Shri D. N. Joshi :- 15 percent to the general communities. I say 20 percent  including Scheduled Castes who belongs to the non-tribals. So I say justice has not been meted out to these people. Therefore doubts and misgivings has arisen in the minds of these people of the minority community here that this Government  is not doing justice to their part  in the matter of employment and recruitment and in order to dispel the doubts  from the minds of the non-tribals people here, I have stated during my Budget Speech for the creation of a Minority Cell to be placed under one Ministry so that the legitimate claims and aspirations of the people living in the  State belonging to the non-tribal community is met and doubts and misgivings from their minds is allayed and dispelled. Sir, I agree with the observation made by my friend from Mawhati that new avenues of employment should be created  here. There is no harm I feel if the Meghalaya State Road Transport Corporation extends its activities  to different routes in the interior say like in the Bhoi area and  the Umroi road also. The question of the mini buses owners and Jeep owners who ply on these routes does not arise because in the Shillong -Gauhati road of the Assam-Meghalaya Road Transport Corporation even there are tourists taxis and (interruption).

Mr. Speaker :-Your contention is that the State Government shall continue to be the only employer for all  time to come.

Shri D. N. Joshi :- It is the duty of the State Government to see in Government service and in my Service controlled by the Government or semi-Government agency or private firms, Government should see the employment policy  adopted by the Government as far practicable  be strictly followed.

Mr. Speaker :- Mr. Joshi you may continue tomorrow.


        The House stands adjourned  till 9. a. m. tomorrow the 3rd July 1974.

R. T. Rymbai

Dated Shillong.


The 2nd July, 1974.

Meghalaya Legislative Assembly.