Proceedings of the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly assembled at 9.A.M. on Tuesday, the 18th March, 1975 in the Assembly Chamber, Shillong

The Hon. Speaker in the Chair.

8 Ministers 3 Ministers of the State and 28 hon. Members.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

STARRED QUESTIONS.

(To which oral replies were given)

Mr. Speaker :- Let us the up Starred Question No. 2

Widening of Sonapahar Nongchram Road

Shri Pritington Sangma asked :- 

*2.     Will the Minister in charge of Public Work Department be pleased to state :-

(a)

Whether  the work of widening the Sonapahar Nongchram road is going on ?

(b)

If so the extent of progress?

(c)

The number of bridges still under construction ?

(d)

When will the construction be completed ?

    Shri P. Ripple Kyndiah Minister in charge of Public Works Department Road and Building etc. replied :- 

*2.(a)  -Yes.

(b)

-Satisfactory.

(c)

-None

(d)

-Does not arise.

Starred Question No.3 (Not Put Member being absent )

Mr. Speaker :-  Now let us pass on to Unstarred Question No. 43.

UNSTARRED QUESTIONS

(To which replies were laid on the table)

Wai Khyrwi Bridge.

Shri H. Enowell Pohshna asked :- 

43.

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

(a)

Whether it is a fact that the construction of the bridge over Wai Khyrwi is completed ?

(b)

If so, the amount spent for the bridge ?

(c)

Whether it is a fact that the contractor who constructed the bridge has inscribed his name in the bridge ?

Shri P. Ripple Kyndiah (Minister incharge of Public Work Department) replied :-

43.(a) 

-No. The construction of the bridge is in progress and it is expected to be completed within March, 1975.

(b)

-The amount spent so far is Rs.,1,23,490.

(c)

-No.

(d)

-Does not arise.

Sutnga State Dispensary Buildings.    

 Shri. Onward Leyswell Nongtdu asked :-

44.

Will the Minister in charge of Health be pleased to state-

(a)

Whether the Government is aware of the fact that the buildings of the Sutnga State Dispensary are in dilapidated condition ?

(b)

If so, when do the Government proposed to reconstruct the buildings ?

(c)

Whether the Government is aware of the fact that Sutnga State Dispensary has neither been electrified nor given water supply connection ?

(d)

If so, whether the Government propose to electrify and supply the building with water in 1975-1976 ?

Shri Sandford K. Marak Minister in charge of Health : replied :- 

44. (a)

-Yes.

(b)

-At present the buildings are maintained departmentally. It is proposed to reconstruct them when arrangement for transfer of the land and buildings to the P.W.D is completed. The Block Development Officer, Saipung-Darrang Development Block, Khliehriat and the Revenue Officer, Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council, Jowai have been requested to arrange regularisation of the area and land records.

(c) & 

(d)-Necessary arrangement for electrification and water supply to the buildings in question will be considered when reconstruction of the buildings are taken up by P.W.D.

New roads during the Fifth  Five years Plan

Shri Manindra Rava asked :-

45.    Will the Minister in charge of P.W.D. be pleased to state the number of new roads proposed to be taken up for construction (District-wise) during the Fifth Five Year Plan period in Meghalaya (with name of each) ?

Shri. P Ripple Kyndiah [Minister P.W.D. (R. & B)] replied :-

45.    There are 155 numbers. A list of the roads (District wise) is placed on the Table of the House.

Shri S.P. Swer :- Mr. Speaker Sir, whether land is made available to the P.W.D. for construction of these 155 roads?

Shri P. Ripple Kyndiah Minister, P.W.D. (R & B) :- Some land are available and some are not available.

Shri S. P Swer :-  Mr. Speaker,  Sir, is there any difficulty in getting land for construction of road in the District of Khasi Hills ?

Shri P. Ripple Kyndiah Minister  P.W.D. (R & B) :- Some time yes and sometime no.

Mr. Speaker :- Then Unstarred Question No. 46.

State Transport Bus from Shillong to Moheskhola.

Shri Kisto M. Roy Marbaniang asked :-

46.    Will the Minister in charge of Transport be pleased to state whether Government propose to ply Meghalaya State Transport Buses from Shillong upto Maheshkhola via Balat and Ranikor ?

Shri. Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) replied :-

46.    There is a proposal to ply M.S.T.U. Buses between Shillong and  Balat.

Shri Kisto Mohon Roy Marbaniang :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, may we know on which date do Government propose to ply these buses to Balat ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister, Transport) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, any firm date cannot  be stated as of today.

Shri S. P. Swer :- Mr. Speaker  Sir whether the Government has sufficient number of passenger buses to ply on these new roads ?

Mr. Speaker :-  That is a new question. Here it is only from Shillong to Maheshkhola via Balat and Ranikor. May we know from the Minister in charge who made the proposal ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister, Transport) :-  There is a public demand and  Government also is considering.

Shri Maham Singh :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, what is the difficulty in opening this road immediately ?

Shri Darwin D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) :- :- Due to non-availability of sufficient number of vehicles.

Shri Jackman Marak :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, how many buses are being considered for plying to Tura ?

Mr. Speaker :- That is a new question.

Special Scholarship to Tribal College Students.

Shri Onward Leyswell Nongtdu asked :- 

47.

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

(a)

Whether it is a fact that the Government has decided to grant special scholarships to tow tribal college students from the same family ?

(b)

Whether there is any yearly income limit fixed for a tribal family for the purpose of eligibility of special scholarships ?

(c)

If so, what is the limit ?

Shri Sandford K. Marak (Minister of Education) replied :- 

47.(a)

-There is no scholarship for college students of tribal community.

(b)

-Does not arise.

(d)

-Does not arise.

Rate of Scholarship for School Students

Shri Brojendro Sangma asked :-

48.

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

(a)

Whether it is a fact that the Government is still awarding scholarships to students as follows :-
(i) Primary Competitive Scholarship in Middle English Schools at the rate of Rs.5 per month ?
(ii) Middle English Competitive Scholarship in High English Schools at the rate of Rs. 12 per month ?
(iii) Tribal Scholarship in Middle English Schools at the rate of Rs.5 per month ?
(iv) Tribal Scholarship in High English Schools at the rate of Rs.12 per month ?

(b)

If so, whether Government intends increasing the rate of those scholarships and at what rate ?

Shri Peter Garnett Marbaniang (Minister of State,  Education) replied :-

48. (a)

(i) & (ii) - The number and value of School Scholarships (Primary Scholarship and Middle English Scholarships) have been raised with effect from 1974-75.
The value of each Primary Scholarship is Rs.7 per mensem and the value of middle English Scholarship is Rs.12 per mensem.
(iii) & (iv)- There is a scheme of special Pre-Matric Scholarships/Stipends to students belonging to Scheduled Tribes (Hills and Plains), Scheduled Castes and other Backward Classes.
The value of special scholarships in M.E stage (i.e., Class IV to VI) is Rs. 5 per mensem and in High School stage (i.e., Class VII to XI) is Rs. 7 per mensem.

(b)

The rates of competitive scholarships have already been raised. There is no proposal to raise the value of special scholarships.

Shri S. N. Koch :-  No. 48 (iii) Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether those other backward Classes are given any scholarship ?

Mr. Speaker :-  The answer is for other Backward class.

Shri S. N. Koch :- Sir there is a scheme but whether scholarship were given or not to the members of backward classes.

Shri P. G. Marbaniang Minister of State for Education :- Yes, Sir.

Mr. Speaker :- You mean Pre-Matric Scholarships ?

Shri S.N. Koch :- Yes, Sir.

Shri P. G. Marbaniang Minister of State for Education :- It depends upon merit-com-poverty in individuals cases.

Shri Maham Singh :- Whether this  scholarship is over and above the tribal scholarships ?

Mr. Speaker :- There is no such special scholarship from the Central Government excepting this one.

Piggery Schemes in Garo Hills

Shri Samarendra Sangma asked :-

49.

Will the Minister-in-charge of Animal Husbandry be pleased to state-

(a)

The villages to be covered by the Piggery Schemes in the Border Areas of Garo Hills ?

(b)

The number of families in each village who were granted pig units and other necessary assistance ?

(c)

The number of pigs so distributed which are still surviving ?

(d)

Whether the scheme is successful ?

(e)

The prevailing price of pork per Kg. in Khasi Hills, Garo Hills and Jaintia Hills ?

(f)

Whether it is a fact that some persons from Khasi Hills are engaged in trading pigs in Garo Hills ?

(g)

If so, the number of such traders ?

Shri Edwingson Bareh Minister Animal Husbandry and Veterinary replied :- 

49. (a)

-Rongra, Mohadev and Moheskhola.

(b)

-Rongra and Mohadev-216 families ; Moheshkhola-112 families.

(c)

-Distributed - 928.

(d)

-Yes.

(e)

-Khasi Hills-Rs.12.00 per kg., Garo Hills-0Rs.5.00 per kg., Jaintia Hills-Rs. 8.00 to Rs.10.00 per kg.

(f) & (g)

-There may be some persons, but as they are not engaged by Government, their number is not known.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, No. 49(c), may we know what is the fate of the other 50 ?

Mr. Speaker :- They are there .

Shri Edwingson Bareh (Minister, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary) :- Only 878 are surviving.

Shri Maham Singh :-  Mr. Speaker , Sir did they die a natural death.

Shri E. Bareh Minister, Animal Husbandry and Veterinary :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, I want notice for that question.

Smoking inside the State Transport Buses

Shri Kisto Mohon Roy Marbaniang asked :-

50.

Will the Minister for Transport be pleased to state-

(a)

Whether smoking inside the Meghalaya State Transport Buses is allowed ?

(b)

If not, whether Government is aware that passengers travelling by Meghalaya State Transport Buses on various routes smoke inside such buses causing much inconvenience to the female passengers and other non-smokers ?

(c)

What steps Government propose to take to stop this practice of smoking inside the buses ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) replied :-

50. (a)

-No, Sir.

(b)

-No, Sir.

(c)

-The "no-smoking" caution is displayed inside the buses and conductors have standing instructions in this regard.

Shri Kisto Mohan Roy Marbaniang :- Mr. Speaker Sir, No 50(c), may I know in what script the "No Smoking" poster was displayed inside the buses ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, in Roman script.

Shri Kisto Mohan Roy Marbaniang :-  In what language or what are the language displayed ?

Shri D.D. Pugh Minister of Transport :-  I require notice  Mr. Speaker Sir,

Shri S. N. Koch :- Whether this "No Smoking' poster is strictly followed inside the bus ?

Shri D. D. Pugh Minister of Transport :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, whether the hon. Member making a statement or asking the question ?

Mr. Speaker :- In fact he asked whether it is a fact that there are a number of smoker inside the bus ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) :-  That question has been replied to in (b).

Mr. Speaker :- It is difficult for a chain-smoker like me to follow.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, may we know when was Smoking Act adapted by this House ? Under what law and under what Act is this 'No Smoking' caution displayed inside the bus ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of Transport) :- I require notice.

Afforestation Schemes

Shri Onward Leyswell Nongtdu asked :- 

51.    Will the Minister in charge of Forest be pleased to state :-

  (a) 

The number of schemes which the Government proposes to take up during 1975-76 for afforestation ?

(b)

 Whether the Government proposes to afforest the jhumming spots in the State ?

  (c)

If so the schemes proposed to be taken up during 1975-76 ?

Shri Grohonsing A Marak Minister of Forests :-  replied

51.

(a) - Four
(b) - No
(c) - does not arise

Improvement of the standard of Education in the State.

Shri D. Dethwelson Lapang asked :- 

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

  (c)

Whether Government has taken any measure during 1972-73, 1973-74 and  1974-75 to improve the standard of education in the State ?

(b)

If so what are those ?

(c)

Whether any new course has been introduced in the Government institutions ?

(d)

If so what are these new courses and where have they been introduced ?

Shri Peter Garnett Marbaniang (Minister of Education) replied :-

52.(a)

-Yes.
(b) By liberal grant in aid to Aided colleges for better building for staff student for equipment and Library.
(c) Yes
(d) I. The following courses of studies had been introduced in Tura Government college during the period from 1972-73 to1974-75.:-
 (i)-Opening of B.Sc. Pass Course of studies in 5 elective subjects (Physics/Chemistry, Botany, Zoology and Mathematics.
(ii)-Opening of Honours course of studies in English and Philosophy in B.A. courses.
(iii)-Introduction of Geography as an elective subject in P. U Science Course.'
II. In Jowai Government College the following course of studies had been introduced from 1974-75(the earlier one is not known) :-
(i)-Opening of P. U. Science Course in 4 elective subjects (Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, and Biology).
(ii)-Opening of Honours course in B.A. in two subjects viz English and Economic

Development of Thadlaskein Lake

Shri Onward Leyswell Nongtdu asked :-

53.    Will the Minister in charge of Tourism be pleased to state :-

(a) Whether it is a fact that development of Thadlaskein Lake in Jaintia Hills is progressing?
(b) The amount so far spent for the purpose of improvement of the lake ?
(c) The works completed so far ?

Shri D. D. Pugh Minister of Tourism replied :-

53.(a) Yes

(b)

Rs. 25,950.81

(c)

1. Fencing of the lake.
2. Cleaning of the lake and jungle along the banks
3. Gates and signboard.
4. Construction of culverts.
5. Construction of cattle gate.
6. Repairing of the walls of the lake.
7. Dismantling of the old Rest House.
8. Construction of Chowkidars shed.
9. Construction of an approach road and lavatory at the lake.

Shri Grosswell Mylliemngap :- Mr. Speaker Sir, No 53.(a) may we know when was the work started ?

Shri D. D. Pugh (Minister of Tourism) :- Mr. Speaker Sir, I require notice for that.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :- No.55 (b) what is the total amount sanctioned for the whole work ?

Shri D. D Pugh (Minister of Tourism) :- It is Rs.57.000 for the Lake house and for other items I require notice.

Provincialisation of High Schools.

Shri Manindra Rava asked :-

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

Whether the Government has decided to provincialise some High Schools in the State?
If so the number of High Schools (district wise) proposed to be provincialised ?
When will the scheme take effect ?

Shri Peter Garnett Marbaniang Minister of State for Education replied :-

54. (a) - Yes.
(b) & (c)-Rongrenggirir High School in Simsanggiri Subdivision has been provincialised with effect from 1st February 1975 and the Jowai Government girl's High School was established with effect from the current academic Session, 1975.

Necessity of medical facilities in Borghat Sector.

Shri Lewis Bareh asked :-

55.    Will the Minister in charge of Health be pleased to state :-

(a) Whether the Government is aware of the fact that all the people inhabiting the Border areas of Rymbai Doloiship in Borghat Sector are badly in need of medical facilities from the  Primary Health Centres at Bataw?
(b) If so reasons for no reconstructing the dilapidated buildings of the said Primary Health Centre

Shri Sandford K. Marak Minister in charge of Health replied :-

55. (a)- Yes
(b) Administrative approval for reconstruction of Bataw sub Centre at an estimated cost of Rs. 1,21,200 has been accorded.

Shri Lewis Bareh :- When will construction of this building be started ?

Shri Sandford K. Marak Minister in charge of Health :- Mr. Speaker Sir, within the next financial year i.e. 1975-76.

Constitution of the Governing Body of Mendipathar College.

Shri Pritington Sangma asked :-

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

(a) Whether Constitution of the Governing Body of Mendipathar College is in accordance with the  Meghalaya Aided College rules and Regulation?
(b) The term of the Governing Body in non-Government Colleges in Meghalaya ?

Shri Peter Garnett Marbaniang (Minister of State in charge of Education) replied :-

56.(a) -Yes. The Governing body of the College was constituted in accordance with the Assam Aided College Management Rules 1965 which are being followed by Meghalaya.

(b)

-3 (three) years from the date of formation.

Shri Pritington Sangma :- May we know whether the Government has framed its own College Rules and Regulations?

Shri P.G Marbaniang (Minister of State for Education) :-  Yes Sir,

Calling Attention.

Mr. Speaker : - Let us pass on to the next item. Mr. Lapang.

Shri D. D. Lapang :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, I beg to cal the attention of the Minister District Council Affairs under the Rule 54 of the Rules of  Procedure and Conduct of Business in the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly to news item published in the Khasi Weekly "U Nongsain Hima" of 1st March 1975 under the caption "U JUDGE KA KHASI HILLS DISTRICT COUNCIL COURT U LA RESIGN". Sir, as it appears from what has been written in this paper the Government is responsible for this resignation of the Judge. May I therefore request the Minister in charge to make a statement on this.

Shri D.D. Pugh (Minister District Council Affairs) :- Mr. Speaker, Sir, from a careful perusal of the news report it would din the first instance appear that the judge under reference resigned for reasons which he has termed as 'personal grounds'. But in the second instance from reading of said news item a little further down it has been made to appear that the judge has resigned because of the Government fault. In this regard, Mr. Speaker Sir I would like to observe that it is indeed unfortunate that perhaps with the intention of shortening the news because of lack of space in the paper concerned the  paper has not reported the matter more fully and in greater details there by leaving much to the imagination of the readers. In passing Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would also like to observe that even in this brief news item there has been printing error. Now in the second column this is what we find "dei na ki liang sorkarlaya kaba long ka daw jong kane ka jingiehnoh kam jong u". Sir I am no aware of any 'sorkarlaya'. From this Mr. Speaker,  Sir, it well be seen that obviously some thing has been printed, something has been left out unprinted. The facts of the case Mr. Speaker Sir, are (a) on the 16th of January 1975 with the prior approval of the Governor. Shri L. Marbaniang was appointed as judge of the District Council Court by the Executive Committee of the Khasi Hills District Council. At a Later stage we caused a notification to be issued conferring upon Mr. Marbaniang the powers to try offended punishable with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years under the Indian Penal Code or any other law for the time being applicable to the Autonomous Khasi Hills District. The issue of the said notification  naturally and apparently has not satisfied the Executive Committee of the District Council and also perhaps the incumbent concerned  because the Executive Committee has requested Government to confer on.  Mr. Marbaniang the powers to try offences punishable with death. In requesting for conferment of greater  enhanced powers on the said judge the Executive Committee it seems has solely depended on two things qualification and experience. Shri L. Marbaniang having passed the L L. B Examination in the first class and having had about 8 years experience as a magistrate and he has been a member of the Bar Council for about 11 years. In advocating the case for conferment of enhanced powers the Executive Committee seems to have clean forgotten that all the previous incumbents of the post under reference were  law graduates of eminence and had been members of the Bar for equally long years, if not more. It also appears that Executive  committee had forgotten that neither Shri J. M Rodborne nor Shri B. L Laso who  had been appointed and function as judges had been conferred the powers to try offences punishable with death. The third thing that seems to have been forgotten is the fact that the case of Shri G. Lyngdoh is very different. Shri Lyngdoh stands or stood on a different footing for the simple reason that he had  already then been vested with the powers of a sessions judge before he was appointed as Judge of District Council Court in the United Khasi Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council. Mr. Speaker, Sir, the point I am trying to make here is that the Government has not done anything unusual; we have not done anything discriminatory not have we done anything humiliating to any one in connection with the matter. I would like to state that whatever may be the case, the matter is receiving the active consideration of the Government, and that during the pendency of a final decision being taken, the notification was issued to enable Mr. Marbaniang to function and try the long pending cases. I am sure Mr. Speaker Sir, that the House will appreciate the fact that the action of the Government was taken in the interest of the District Council, the District Council Court the litigant public and in the interest of administration of justice. And in fact I would say, in the interest of the incumbent himself for it stands to reason that if the notification has not been issued; he would not have been able to function. Therefore, Mr. Speaker Sir, we would have expected that the Executive Committee would not only appreciate the fact but would have also actually been grateful to the Government for the issue of the notification by which the necessary power have been conferred.

Shri Maham Singh :- May I have a word of clarification Mr. Speaker, Sir just some more words of clarification.

Mr. Speaker :-  Nobody has called your attention.

Shri Maham Singh :- Yes Sir, but there is only a point for clarification in that it seems that with regard to the conferment of powers on the judges appointed by the District Council there has been a little bit of discrimination by the Government as has been stated by the Minister.

Mr. Speaker :- I think you have started a debate on this. I think it is better for me to say a few words here. In the said news item there is nothing on the part of the Executive Committee of the District Council which it has clearly expressed blaming the Government. And from the point of view of the judge himself he has not said a words but of course it is only the comments made by the  said paper which really call the attention of the Minister to clarify the positions. In fact this house is not ready now to have a discussion on this item unless and until it comes in some other form.

Shri Maham Singh :-  Mr. Speaker  Sir, only a clarification.

Mr. Speaker :-  No. Because you have already passed a remark that there is a  discrimination, I will not allow a debate on the call attention.

Shri Maham Singh :-  Alright Sir, I will omit that word discrimination. Only I seek clarification with regard to this conferment of powers. The Government has conferred powers on the Magistrates of the Additional Deputy  Commissioner for trying cases of offences  punishable with death. Although they have no experience whatsoever- they have only two to three year's judicial experience and and this power has been conferred on them. I fail to understand.

Mr. Speaker :-  You can discuss it on the cut motion when you have the full right to speak on the administration of justice in the State but not in the call attention.

Shri Maham Singh :- Anyway  I have drawn the attention of the Minister (laughter)

Mr. Speaker :- Let us pass on to the next item.

Shri H. Hadem :- This particular rule does not allow any clarification and as such any clarification will amount to the discussion.

Mr. Speaker :-  That is exactly why I have closed the matter. Let us pass on to motion No.1 to be moved by Shri Lewis Bareh.

Motions

Shri Lewis Bareh :-  Mr. Speaker Sir I beg to move that this House do now discuss the  immediate need of constituting a civil subdivision with its headquarters at Khliehriat comprising the following administrative units :-

(1)

The Doloiship-Rymbai Sutnga Nongkhlieh Narpuh, Lakadong and Saipung Sirdarship;

(2)

All the villages of Pator Sumer and part of the village of Shangpung Doloiship; and

(3)

Norman Sohkumphor, Jalaphet and part of villages of Jowai Doloiship of all the villages of Tuber Lyngdoh Kmaishnong."

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

Shri Lewis Bareh :-  Mr. Speaker  Sir, in moving this motion for the creation of new civil subdivision in Jaintia Hills district, I would like to draw the attention of the Government to page 3 of the Governor's where it was clearly stated that the Government policy is to set up 4 new subdivision and 2 district in the State. That on the declared policy of the Government, Sir, I am fully convinced  that my humble motion deserves its due consideration. So I am compelled to move this motion in this august House through you Sir for the immediate setting up of a subdivision in those areas with the headquarter at Khliehriat.

Mr.  Speaker :-  What will be the name of the subdivision in case Government accepts ?

Shri Lewis Bareh :- Khliehriat subdivision, Sir, that approximate population if these areas is 70.000 to 72.000 and there are also 6 elected representative from these areas to the Jowai Autonomous District Council which bring the total number of elected persons to 14. The proposed areas of the civil subdivision are by the side of the National Highway that is the Shillong Jowai Badarpur Road and this National Highway is running through Khliehriat where it is proposed for the  location of the headquarters of the new subdivision. There are many link roads connected with the proposed headquarter at Khliehriat.

Mr. Speaker :-  Then indeed there is no need for a new subdivision as the  civil subdivision is actually meant for the proper supervision of development works. 

(Voices : It is over developed)

Shri Lewis Bareh :-  I am coming to that later on. Sir, this area also is easily reached even up to Saipung area which was just recently declared by our Government as a backward area. This area comprises as I have said the whole village of the Narpuh in the border area and the  village of Lakadong in the border area. But further more Sir the  people living in the Narpuh Doloiship and there are some villages inhibited even by the Mikir people which are regarded as the weakest  section  of community of the Jowai District. But up till now no Government facilities have been offered to these people. No L. P Schools and no foot path and no foot bridge has ever been constructed for the benefit of these people. So with this proposal of bringing the administration nearer to the people, I do hope that the necessary facilities may be given to this weakest section of the people. So, Sir, with these few words I move my motion.

*Shri S. N. Koch :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, I support the motion brought by the hon. Member, Shri Lewis Bareh. Of course I am very sorry that the area about which the hon. Member referred to is not very familiar to me (laughter).

        But according to the Mover of the motion a part of our State is comprising of international and inter State borders and generally from experience it is seen that the border areas whether they are international borders or inter State border are always neglected by the Government and this negligence on the part of the Government is also admitted by the Government itself. Sir I want to cite just an instance.

Mr. Speaker :-  In a motion, I would request the hon. Member to come forward with suggestions to strengthen the motion but not to take an opportunity to criticise the policy of the Government.

Shri S. N. Koch :-  Mr. Speaker Sir I am coming to the point not to criticise, but just to substantiate by just giving a picture before this House on the point just spoken by the previous Speaker that this certain portion of the State should be..................(interruption).

Shri Williamson A Sangma Chief Minister :-  You said that you are not familiar with the area, how could you discuss it ?

Mr. Speaker :-  Let us be clear about this. From the contention that the areas which are lying just across the international boundary should be given more facilities and perhaps there will be more motion for creating Civil Subdivisions. Then perhaps, in that case the War area get better administration. I am taking this from your own contention only.

Shri S. N. Koch :- But Sit I think I have only one contention. Anyway  Sir apart from the international borders, as I have said I mean that part of the area which is inter State area, I mean there are demands that certain parts of our State which originally formed part of this State were taken to Assam and we are demanding and perhaps a motion or a resolution is coming forward to discuss about that part i.e. Block I and II of Mikir Hills District. Now that part Block I and II are no under that grip of certain State naturally that other State will try to retain them and will not easily past with them in order to give to our State. Now to those people who with them in order to give to our State. Now to those people who come to our State we van do something and in my opinion if  we take the administrative unit nearer to the people that will be one factor which will attract these people to come over to us and moreover with whatever limited information I get there is another border in our State in which  there  are certain people who want to join us. They are the Mikir people and so far my information goes, they are demanding that.

Mr. Speaker :-  I think Mr. Koch your contention is too far since you have no knowledge about the areas. Any other members who want to take part in the discussion.

*Shri Upstar Kharbuli :-   Sir in supporting the motion, I would like to bring out one point. It has been the policy of the Government to decentralize administration as far as it will bring about a greater benefit to the  people of our State at large. Moreover, since we have seen that in the 2 Districts, the Garo Hills as well as the Khasi Hills Districts the creation of Simsaggrri Subdivision as well as the Nongstoin Subdivision with a view to bringing about decentralisation in the administrative machinery, I feel that Jaintia Hills also deserves to have a Civil Subdivision. This is a District by itself and I see that there is quite a reasonable ground for the Government to consider having another  Subdivision there, a Civil Subdivision. So, only from this angle I feel that the proposal contained in the motion brought forward by the hon. Member is such a matter which I feel that the Government should give due consideration. So, with these few words I resume my seat.

Mr. Speaker :-  Will the Chief Minister reply ?

Shri H. Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I want to take part in the discussion.

Mr. Speaker :- Alright.

*Shri H. Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would like to express my opinion that the motion brought by the hon. Member before the House is of course an unacceptable one. But Sir he had based the motion of the statement given by the Government that 4 new subdivision will be created during the next plan period. And these 4 new subdivision are not meant for a particular district only. These are for the whole State, Sir, and this State is at present comprising of the 3 district that is the Khasi Hills  Jaintia Hills and Garo Hills District. And as such, the argument advanced by the hon. Mover in this particular matter does not hold cent per cent good. Because actually previously the Jaintia Hills District was only one subdivision and that district was upgraded only recently. So I do not see that only because of 3 Members of the District Council from the District Council constituencies being 6 out of 60 will be a reason for creating any new Subdivision for that particular area. Because, Sir in delimitating the constituencies of the District Council as it appears to me, it was not based weather on population or on the area. And one of the hon. Member has just said that this area particularly is within an inter State border area. But he forgot to say that there is also another border area which is not only an Inter State but international border area. What I mean is that southern part, the ri war area east of Dawki Police Station and others. So, Sir,  though I consider at the beginning that this motion is a sound one but I do not see that this will particularly come for discussion of the House as a whole. This being the role of the Government to consider to give proper consideration to the most deserving areas within the 3 district for the 4 newly proposed subdivisions. Mr. Speaker Sir, I would like to point out also that probably in the next session if the Government will agree to the creation of these new Subdivisions for the areas proposed by the hon. Members at present then many other motions will also come forward for the creation of more new Sub-divisions for Jaintia Hills and then, again, somebody will come for the  western part and another for the eastern part. Then it will mean that the 4 new subdivision will be for Jaintia Hills alone. What about the other 2 District ? And Moreover according to the emotion the hon. Mover has demarcated the areas as follows :-

        The Doloiship of Rymbai Sutnga Nongkhlieh Narpuh Lakadong and Saipung Sirdarship.

      Of course in this part I had made the Administrative Unit in tact. But if we go to Number 2 all the villages of Pator Sumer part and parcel of Raliang Doloiship. Sir, I do not know whether they will be one of the ingredients for creating a new subdivision by simply extending those administrative units. This is also one of the points to be considered by the Government for the creation of a new subdivision for that part of the lower Saipung Doloiship and this is also very vague.

Mr. Speaker :-  These are parts of the villages in Jowai.

*Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Then for these other two villages Sohkumphor and Norman it sounds as if it is from North Pole. Actually there is no village by the name of Norman in that areas.

Shri L. Bareh :-  But it is the mistake of the office. Actually it is Lyrmai village in Saipung. It  is a printing mistake.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  As a matter of fact when there is such printing mistake the hon. Mover ought to have come forward by way of an amendment or modification or other wise. But this has not been done. So I do not see  and even you Sir will not see the justification of the proposal as put forward by the Mover of this motion. Secondly Sohkumphor is not a village in that area.

Mr. Speaker :- This is also a printing mistake .

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, coming to Jalaphet a part of the Jowai Doloiship and other villages like  Tuber Lyngdoh and Kmaishnong if the motion is taken as it is I meant under all the conditions  laid down in the rules for the motion this motion is understand which part of Jowai Doloiship the hon. Mover want to include in the said area. The hon. Mover with his good intention has brought the motion to this august House, and I do not think even if this House will accept the motion as it is, whether the Government can implement it or not.

Mr. Speaker :- Will this Doloiship be affected supposing Saipung Doloiship is split into three or four parts ?

Shri Lewis Bareh :-  So far I have consulted them that the Norman and Sohkumphor villages are nearer to Khliehriat but Tuber and Nongjoh are nearer to my constituency.

Shri Humphrey Hadem : -  Yes, Sir, I have consulted and the villages within the Tuber area are under Lakadong and Tuber but even now the people from this area are included in the block area.

Shri E. Bareh (Minister, Agriculture) :-  But what about Jowai ?

Mr. Speaker :-  So, in my opinion, the Chief Minister will reply.

Shri E. Bareh (Minister Agriculture) :- Has not completed.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am still on my legs. May I continue now. I do not agree with what the hon. Mover has already stated. The proposal to include villages of Pator Sumer and part of Shangpung village which is only a part of the village and not part of the Doloiship sounds impracticable. How can a single village be bifurcated from the whole group of villages. As such I doubt very much the sincerity of the reply given by the hon. Mover when the said that he has consulted that particular village. And moreover the village of Tuber Lyngdohship have not been named. I think the hon. Mover wants to move a specific motion. In that case he will have to mention specifically which villages are included in that particular, Lyngdohship. Moreover, may I clarify that we have got no records anywhere detailing all the villages within the Tuber Lyngdohship. As such the House has every right to know which are the villages which the hon. Mover has in mind to be under a particular Lyngdohship because we know that only Jowai Doloiship has the administrative unit within the Jaintia Hills District with one Sirdarship and one Lyngdohship. But Pator-Sumer is still within the Doloiship of Railing. So Sir, the area of the proposed Subdivision has not been mentioned and if I may suggest at this stage, you may name it as Hadem Subdivision (laughter). But it would be more practical if you would term it as Bareh Subdivision (laughter). I mean after the name of the mover Mr. Bareh is hailing from another part of the district. He should not bring in other parts of the Sub-division. There will be clashes of names of the Subdivisions.

Mr. Speaker :-  But at present there is also a village called Nongbareh.

Shri Humphrey Hadem :-  But Nongbareh is a village. But in this new subdivision they would term it as Bareh. So it would not clash with Nongbareh (laughter). So Sir I think at this stage I would rather request the hon. Member that if he has any proposal for the whole district, he will please at least have the courtesy of consultation with the representatives of the district of Jaintia Hills. Let us carefully discuss the matter because  it  may happen that if  he will move anything and I oppose it on the floor of the House, it looks awkward being from the same district. I do not want to take much time of the House and I would like to express that the motion as it stands seems to be not feasible and not acceptable by the House. With these few words I resume my seat.

Shri D. D. Lapang :-  Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would also like to participate in the discussion of the motion. At the first instance I would like to express my sincere appreciation to the mover of this motion which reveals that  as public leader and representative of the area., he is quite aware that his constituency is very much under developed and by bringing the administration closer to the people, he can develop the area. but the feasibility and practicability of the proposal or the ideas contained in the motion are being expressed by Mr. Hadem who knows better than what we know as he is hailing from the  same district is to be considered thoroughly. Mr. Speaker Sir, the hon. Mover Mr.  Lewis Bareh brought forward the scheme containing too many project under the scheme of a Civil subdivision and 3 Administrative Units which the Government had already made a commitment. As it  has been stated it would be wise on the part of the hon. Member being the leader of the area to have public involvement in this. As far as we can understand the mover of the motion has not had the occasion meeting his people not even meeting the leaders of that district. So it would be awkward if the leaders from the same district would have contradictory opinion on the floor of this august House on a common issue because creating of a Civil Subdivision or Administration Unit is a common interest not only of the Members of the Ruling Party but the member of the other side also. It is common interest of each and every one of the of us. If members from the other side will oppose the creation of a Civil subdivision or an Administrative unit he will cut his own finger. So Mr. Speaker Sir it would be sound and it would be  quite acceptable if the  hon. Member will bring forward a motion I most specific way or rather get the public involved in that so that the voice of the public will be there. Why I say this is because Ri Bhoi has already got its Civil Administrative Unit and we have made some decision regarding  the headquarters before we came up with a proposal for creation of Administrative Unit before the House. We have tried our level best to carry the masses behind us though I do not know how far  we  have been able to satisfy them. But the fact remains that we are trying our best which I believe is the only way to avoid  any controversial or misunderstanding. It  will be a very good gesture on the part of the hon. Mover to see that he carries the voice of the people instead of the people carrying his voice. As it has been stated there will be bifurcation or divisions of even a single village. I should say it is not a good sign if this schemes is accepted. I do no t know it may even go against the mover himself. If the hon. Member will keep on crying on certain acceptable an reasonable ground. Government will be bound to comply with the request because it is said that a child who cries more will get more. So if the members will cry more they will really get more. But the scheme should be feasible and reasonable. Mr. Speaker Sir I will not say more on this. The establishment  of the headquarter of the Administrative Unit is a very delicate question. One representative will say that the head quarts should be at such a place. He should also consider the sentiments of the people of others areas not only of his own area. So I say there is a loophole in this motion that there  will be most likely a difference of opinion on this issue, Mr. Speaker Sir I fully appreciate that the Government will consider the mater. I do not say that only the Ri Bhoi will get the Civil Sub-division, but I have only this point to make that the Government may please do justice to every part of Meghalaya because it is not meant for doing service to certain parts of the State only so that the administration will reach the masses. With these few words I resume my seat.

Shri O. L. Nongtdu :- Mr. Speaker Sir, while I took part on the Budget discussion, I have already had the occasion to  put forward a proposal for creation of Civil Subdivision in the eastern part of Jaintia Hills. But I may not able to agree with that present motion brought forward in this House. If the motion is taken as it is I can say it is based on political ground. It is only because I  may say that Tuber Lyngdoh Kmaishnong falls within the present Rymbai Constituency and that is why it is proposed that this particular area must also be taken within the  proposed Subdivision but actually Tuber Lyngdoh Kmaishnong is nearer to Jowai as it is only 10 miles from Jowai whereas it is about 15 miles from Khliehriat. So Sir the people will never agree to be taken to Khliehriat as their headquarter of the Subdivision. I actually feel that they will prefer to be nearer to Jowai which is a District Headquarter and also much nearer for them to go to. Sir, Khliehriat is not  central place. It is not only because it is on the main road from Jowai to Badarpur and that because it is  a Block headquarter that it can be proposed as head quarter for a Civil Subdivision. Sir it is not a place where people can go easily from different parts .So I feel that it is for the Government to decide as to whether this area deserves a Subdivision and also a places as its headquarters. If a Sub-division is to be created, ikt is for the Government to decide the headquarters for such a subdivision. 

Shri G. Mylliemngap :- Mr. Speaker Sir, the Government has spelt out its policy clearly in the Governor's Address that it is going to create some new subdivision and administrative units. But just because the Government has laid down its policy. I do not think that it is good to have a gold rush and catch hold at a floating straw without considering the facts involved in the creation of these new administrative units. It is good, as some of the hon. Members have stated, to bring the administration closer to the people but as the hon. Member form Sutnga has just stated if there is a grain of political aspiration in the demand for creation of these new administrative units then instead of bringing welfare to the people, it may bring bitterness to them and retardness to other developments. Mr. Speaker, Sir, creation of an administrative unit is an expensive affair; the Government has to spend a lot of money to maintain the administrative set-up to have investment of capital outlay, for construction of buildings and other facilities to the staff and other paraphernalia. It has to be justified by circumstances and by the hardships expressed by the people in certain parts of the existing administrative units. As the hon. Member from Sutnga has stated, Tuber Lyngdoh Kmaishnong is much nearer to Jowai than to Khliehriat , and if the new District of Jaintia Hills, which had been inaugurated about 2 years ago, is properly developed even city buses can serve the needs of those people staying in an area at a distance of about 10 or 15 miles. The hon. Member who moved the motion stated that Sohkymphor is very near to Khliehriat but I think I may not be wrong is saying that  Sohkymphor is not far from Jowai and that it is very near also to Shangpung. So, if there is a demand to have a separate subdivision at Khliehriat, I am afraid that there may also be a counter-demand to have separate subdivision at Shangpung or at Mawkaiew. Therefore, Mr.  Speaker, Sir, I think it is the duty of the Government to examine the available factors before deciding the creation of new administrative units not only in this part of the State but also in other parts as well because I feel that a lot of spade work has to be done before the Government decides to go ahead with such an important matter to meet the needs of the people.

Shri S. P. Swer :- Mr. Speaker  Sir, I would also like to participate in the discussion of this motion before the House. I think it need not be over emphasized on this fact because the Government has clearly laid down the policy and has gone to the extent to get the Sixth Finance Commission to agree on principle that the administration should be brought nearer and closer to the people. Sir if  I am not wrong I think I am the first man to move the Government for a new Civil Subdivision with the Headquarter at Cherrapunjee. So I used to claim to be the first man to set the ball rolling. This is not a bad idea. It is a good idea when the hon. Mover brought his motion for discussion inside the House. But from the speeches of the hon. Member who have participated to this discussion of the motion it appears that it is not a well thought motion as many  of the doloiship of the administrative units will have to be bifurcated if this Civil Subdivision is to be created. From that point of view it is not at all advisable for the Government to take this question into consideration because it will bring chaos in these compact and well demarcated administrative units. Sir what I feel is this that Jaintia Hills District is the only district which was upgraded from a Civil Subdivision and it is the smallest District in our State and I think to divide it into the more Civil  Subdivision, It will not be advisable for the Government to take such immediate  step. So Mr. Speaker Sir,  I do not dispute the possibility of creating a new subdivision in the District of Jaintia Hills provided it really meets the needs of the people of the  areas concerned. With these words I resume my seat.

Shri K. M. Roy Marbaniang :-  Mr. Speaker  Sir, I am really very glad that the hon. Member Shri Lewis Bareh has brought this motion to this House and on principle also the Government decided to create more Civil Subdivision and administrative units an more districts in the State. But Mr. Speaker Sir I do not also like to go into the merits of the demand at to whether the proposal made by my friend is feasible or practicable but as I have heard from another hon. friend belonging to the same area who has participated in this motion, it appears that the present motion as moved by the hon. friend is not  feasible. And secondly, Mr. Speaker, Sir, as my hon. friend from Cherrapunjee has also said that if you allow such motion to come up within the next few days which I feel is not correct.

Mr. Speaker :-  They may start demanding a new district outsides the House also (laughter).

Shri K. M. Roy Marbaniang :- It will be quite correct since the Government has come out  with a clear proposal that they will create more districts, move Civil Subdivisions and Administrative Units, to leave the decision with the Government. Because creating of new districts civil subdivision and administrative units is not simply.................

Mr. Speaker :- As I have already indicated that while creating more administrative units we cannot but respect the traditional administrative units like the Doloiship Syiemships Lyngdohship etc. As such it would be correct if my hon. friend, Mr. G. Mylliemngap come  forward with a motion for a separate District in Khyrim which is a pending proposal and this proposal is also more or less the same. I mean if we want only to discuss from that point of view then of course there will be no end. So the  consideration for creating a civil subdivision or a district should be left to the  Government.

Shri K. M. Roy Marbaniang :- I agree  entirely with you Sir, to this regard I  oppose the motion and I feel that we should leave this question entirely to the Government and it is  up to the Government to find out which is the suitable place and its feasibility practicability etc. With these few words I resume my seat.

Shri H. Enowell Pohshna :- Mr. Speaker, Sir I am really very grateful to those hon. Members who have apposed this motion because they have not opposed the principle of creating Districts and subdivision has been proposed by Government themselves and as such this particular Ruling Party who are jealous of it and are afraid lest Government agree to the demand. But as far as I am concerned I strongly support this motion on very very sound principles that it is the first motion which has been accepted by the Government in principle and they have also agreed to find out ways and means how to create four more new Civil Subdivisions. Secondly Sir, the areas which the hon. Mover has included in this motion are in principle accepted by the Government and the Minister who was previously a Member in charge of the Community Development Blocks has agreed that Tuber should not be tagged to Jowai Development Block whether people like it or not because Tuber is nearer to Khliehriat. Therefore Sir, I see that this motion is very fit case for the Government to consider very very seriously. Further Khliehriat is on the national highway and it has become a very important place in the south eastern part of the Jaintia Hills district, I think if the Government would adopt the same principle as they have done in the case of Nongpoh, Khliehriat should be considered a most suitable place for the new Subdivision of Jaintia Hills and Cherra for other subdivision of Khasi Hills. Any passerby from Gauhati to Shillong has to pass through Nongpoh. Similarly a man going to Silchar from Shillong has to pass through Khliehriat because Khliehriat is the right link and via media. Also the hon. member from Sutnga has to pass via Khliehriat even when be comes to  Shillong or Jowai. Therefore I do not see any reason why he has opposed this motion.

Mr. Speaker :-  He did no oppose the motion but he has suggested that there are some points which are impracticable. Some of the villages named in this particular motion are not practicable to be tagged in one subdivision. He has suggested those areas and it is up to the Government to find out a suitable area.

Shri H. E Pohshna :-  I think there is another important place and that is Sutnga. It is about five miles from Khliehriat and it is the historical place of the Jaintia Rajas. So it might be a good place for the headquarter of the Subdivision.

Mr. Speaker:-  I think the headquarter of Sutnga is the origin of the Sutnga Kings now known as the King of Nongspung and Nongkhlaw. We do not call Jowai Kings; we call them Sutnga Kings. Well the discussion is more or less academic in character.

Shri H. E. Pohshna :-  Even then  we have to defend our stand. Therefore I would request the Hon'ble Chief Minister will be the most impartial and independent person to decide on the question and if he tours in the entire Jaintia Hills District he will first agree that Khliehriat area is the best place for creating  subdivision and the Headquarter for that subdivision will also be at Khliehriat since it is the centre and most important place in the area.

Mr. Speaker :- Will the Chief Minister reply now ?

Shri W. A. Sangma Chief Minister :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, it is a fact that the Government as a matter of policy has decided to create 2 more district four more Subdivision and few more administrative Units. But I would request the hon. Members not to rush any proposal for the creation of new districts new subdivision or new administrative Units without careful consideration. I may confess Mr. Speaker  Sir, that I am not familiar with the areas which have been proposed to be included in the proposed new Subdivisions. I have however certain information with me regarding these areas. The areas which are proposed to form part of the new subdivision consist of about 150 villages with a population of about 40.000. Now I will make it very clear to the hon. Members through You Sir  that Government have not only for the sake of  policy made policy statements in this regard but we have taken all steps to implement those proposals and policies. We have already asked the Commissioner of divisions to instruct the Deputy Commissioners to send their proposals for the creation of new subdivisions an administrative Units in consultation with the District councils, M.L.A. M.Ps and M.D.Cs . Yet the hon. Mover of this motion it appears to me has not taken any opportunity even to discuss with his own colleague regarding this matter. Mr. Speaker, Sir, a number of speaker have also expressed their inability to accept this proposal. As I said earlier, it is not a well considered proposal. If we accept this proposal into  to our traditional administrative elakas  would have to be bifurcated. Our people are very sentimental regard this matter. They always like to adhere to heir traditional elakas Without taking their blessings and without their consent it will not be fair for any Member to come forward with a proposal which  will lead to bifurcation of traditional administrative elakas. In our instruction to the Deputy Commissioners we have asked them to collect all relevant data and to examine all the relevant factors like administrative units to to the communication, population and various other factors so that the benefits of setting up new districts, Subdivisions and administrative units go to the most deserving areas. The question of  rejecting or accepting this motion does not arise at this stage. But I would request the hon. Mover not to press hi motion since we have already through the Commissioner of Divisions instructed the Deputy  Commissioners of all district to send their proposals in this regards after due consideration of all the relevant factors also in consultation with the district councils as well as the M.L.A. M.Ps, M.D.Cs. I would also advise the hon. Mover to discuss this matter with his colleagues and other local leaders before the comes up  with such proposal. If that is done it will help the Government after such a proposal. If that is done it will help the Government after examining the report of the Deputy Commissioners to a come to correct decision. If however proposal comes from individuals hon. Members we connot do anything . Therefore anyone and  particularly the hon. Member who brought such a motion should bear in mind the Government will not be able to accept any proposal a in this regard without first eliciting the views of the people through their representative and district administration. So these are my guidelines to the hon. Members for further action on this particular matter. I do not want to take much time of the House. I do not think I have to give more replied to the hon.Member and particularly to the hon. Mover who has brought his motion because many of the hon. Members who  have participated have already noted that the proposal for creating new subdivision as suggested  by the Mover of the motion is not a well thought one. They have all emphasised the need of taking into account all factors relevant to the creation of a subdivision before we come to a decision. I would there fore advise the hon. Members and also my colleagues in this House to assist the Government in a proper way. With these words ,Sir, I resume my seat.

Mr. Speaker :- The discussion is closed. Now Motion No 2 to be moved by Mr. Rowell Lyngdoh. The hon.Member is absent .Then Motion No. 3 to be moved by Prof M. N. Majaw. The hon. Member is absent . No 4 to be moved by Mr. H. Hadem. The hon. Member is absent No5 to be moved by Mr Winstone Syiemiong. The Member is absent. No.6 to be moved by Mr. Y fuller Lyngdoh. Absent .Then No 7 to be moved by either Mr. Lewis Lyngdoh or Mr. H. E. Pohshna. who will moved the motion.?

Shri H. E. Pohshna :-  Mr. Speaker  Sir, I beg to move that this House do now  discuss the policy of the Government relating to the  allotment of works to contractors by the Public work department tin the State.

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

Shri H. E. Pohshna :-  Mr. Speaker Sir, since this motion comes under serial No 7 I am not yet prepared.

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

Shri H. E. Pohshna :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker Sir it appears there is also some confusion with the Ministers in  charge because he happen to be a new Minister and that is a consolation for me although I have come unprepared. Anyway Sir the Public  Works Department is a very very important department for the development of the State. The success of almost all Development schemes in the State depends mostly on the success of road communication. Although we cannot deny the fact that this Department whose progress of work is visible in the  State and whose performance is quite appreciable when compared with other Department of the Government, yet something is lacking there. That is with regard to allotment of works to the contractors. Why I say so is because there has been much talk about the allotment of works especially in Jaintia Hills District in which it is publicity learned that the people of that  area who do not belong to the Ruling Party will not be allotted any contract work and it was  so for the last three or four years.

        On the other hand, Sir, it appears that much money is involved for this Public Work Department. Whenever we go to the Executive Engineer and sometime even to the higher authorities but what they say is -Our hands are not free now. And sometime Sir, allotment of work is done at the Minister's level at the State level and it is also learned that even the comparative statements from the  contractors also go to some Ministers. Therefore I se there is much interference in this respect and much injustice had been done. Of course, Sir the Government may say why not cite particular instances. Well that is very very difficult for us to cite but it is a fact that everybody who gets a slip from the Chief Executive Members of the district councils or the Minister used to get the works while our  experienced contractors who have been working for years together are not getting any work. The papers and records of the department will show that the  class I and experienced contractors were not allotted work whereas Class IV or Class III or new contractors and  inexperienced ones used to get works very promptly during the last three or four years. Therefore, Sir while moving this motion about allotment of work, I also want to appeal to the Government to see that it is their policy that every body gets that opportunity since all have got equal rights in the State and that this distinction or discrimination should not be there. On the other hand Sir if there is discrimination in allotment of work it will affect the whole programme of the works. For example if a man is allotted work just because he gets  the favour of this particular department or of this man or that man in the department, and if the progress is not satisfactory, then whom to blame. We cannot blame the officers because they cannot do it since there are other people who indirectly allot the work. Sir I can  cite one example in the construction of Shangpung M.E. School building. The work was allotted to one class I  contractor. But even after three to four years he could not complete the buildings. No action was taken whatsoever for the last three or four years. But later on when the tender was cancelled and the work allotted to a Class III contractor he could complete the work within three months. In the case of construction of border roads and roads and roads in the  interior places why the roads are not even jeepable. It is because the selection of contractors has been based not on merit or qualification or efficiency but contracts were given on some other consideration like favouritism partiality and party basis. Therefore, I would request the Government and also the new Minister to see that in future there should not be such discrimination what so ever in allotting works to the contractors. Allotment of works should be made according to efficiency, quality and capacity of the contractors and also according to justice. With these few words I move this motion and request the Minister in charge of P.W.D. to look into the matter. Moreover I cannot be so cruel to him with many criticism being a new Minister. With these few words, I resume my seat.

Mr. Speaker :- Now Mr. Lewis Bareh.

Shri Lewis Bareh :- Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, in supporting the motion I am also trying to make a few observations and comments. Sir we are aware of the fact that the P.W.D. is one of the  most important departments in the State which is being entrusted with a large sum of money for the developmental works in the State. But in connection with the execution of the works  of this Department, there is no other agency, as spoken by the Mover of the motion except those registered contractors of different categories. But before the allotment of the works or before the starting of construction of any work, notices for calling tenders are hung only on prominent places and sometimes with a wide publication in the notice boards of the different departments. It appeared only to get more tenders for the works. The poor contractors, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am confining only to Jowai District the poor contractors accordingly submitted their tenders with the hope that they will be allotted some works. We know, Sir, that in submitting tenders, some specific expenditure of not less than 16 to 17 rupees for each tender has to be incurred and during the tender period, mostly experienced and old contractors are sure of getting the work during the time of submission of their tender. But at the time of allotment of works Sir, their names disappeared without any reason, and sometimes even with the low rate of the tender the old contractor and experienced contractor, was not allotted any work and even the reasons were not known to him why his name did not appear in the list of contractors for allotment of works. Then Sir, there was public resentment and condemnation that because he is not a man of the party in power, his tender was rejected. That is the only reason why he was changed and condemned by the other contractors who have got the work and even by contractors of Class III and Class IV. And sometimes, also, Sir, on  further scrutiny we have come to know that the works were only allotted to the family members, only to those contractors, and persons belonging to the party concerned who know how to get more work, how to get the monopoly in Public Works Department works by registering their own family members. After enquiry into the matter, we have found that there is also a monopoly of the P.W.D. works by a few persons of the party concerned and huge allotment of works concentrated on only one or two persons. That is the practice that has been followed even in the rural areas. No question of registration whether a Class I or a Class II contractor but even a Class IV contractor also who is a newly registered contractor, for unknown reasons finds his name immediately in the list. I know, Sir, that the Government will not accept these remarks and these charges. But I would like to urge upon the Government to go into the details and find out the actual State of affairs in the Department concerned and if it is possible to bring those at fault to book. With these few words, Sir, I support the motion.

Shri P. R. Kyndiah ( Minister,  P.W.D. ) : Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is very obvious that the motion as has been moved by the hon. Member from Nongtalang and Shri Lewis is based on their experiences in Jaintia Hills. (Interruption ).

Shri Francis K. Mawlot : Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, may we know whether the discussion is closed?

 (Voices - The Minister has already started replying )

Mr. Deputy Speaker : Because no other Member has got up to speak the Minister has stood up to reply.

Shri P. R. Kyndiah ( Minister,  P.W.D. ) : So I shall deal with the matter in the manner it deserves. In the first place, I do appreciate what the hon. Member from Nongtalang has said about being gentle and not cruel, and I do appreciate this sentiment but at the same time, it is my duty, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, to emphasize in clear terms that it is not the policy of the Government to be discriminatory in the allotment of works. Now, the charge that only those contractors who belong to the ruling party have been given works, I think is baseless because, Sir, I had the occasion to hear about this kind of kite-flying and hearsay as soon as I took over the assignment as Minister of Public Works Department and I was trying to verify as to the truth of such an allegation. So I can say it in clear terms that the allotment of works has not been done on a discriminatory basis. Now, perhaps, there might have been some loopholes here and there in which certain officers have not been able to do justice. Well, in such a cases, in specific instances, I would welcome any information so that this kind of discrepancies could be removed.

        Now, as you know very well, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, on the basis of allotment of work is competition by means of calling tenders. Of course, we had certain relaxations and concessions extended to the members of the Scheduled Tribes and perhaps backward classes but in our State this is clearly for Scheduled Tribe contractors. Now, we do have also some consideration for the local people and in fact, necessary instructions have been passed on to the Executive Engineers, to the S.D.Os and to the Superintending Engineers so that the local people could get preference. Of late we have even gone to the extent of going far in order to assure the interest of the work itself. Because, ultimately as rightly said by the Member from Nongtalang, we have to see that the work is efficiently done - this is very important, and it should be done in a short time as far as practicable. Now in this sphere also, we have gone far to the extent of discouraging cut-throat competitions. We know very well that there are contractors who in their bid to get the work, they will quote the rates very very low and we have experience that in such cases, it appears that the quality of works is very low. So, we are very very particular that the quality of work should be maintained. So, on this score we have issued instructions that in order to discourage cut-throat competitions which may jeopardize the efficiency of the execution of the work the Executive Engineers and the Superintending Engineers are not to accept tenders which are less that the 10 per cent value of the scheduled rates. So, you can realise Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that we are up and doing to do things which are right and correct. Now, it is unfortunate that a mention has been made that on a slip passed to the C.  E. M. or the Minister, works have been allotted. I do not know how far the member from Nongtalang can prove the charge, but this is very unfortunate. I would welcome that the charge is substantiated. I would say that the allegation  is baseless. Now, so far as allotment of work is concerned, this is done purely by the officers concerned. This is also the instruction given by the Government and there is no question of the Minister coming into the picture to allot works. Now, I think, as the matter has been clearly stated by me, the important thing is that we should be guided by the basic principles of efficiency of work and competition and special relaxation to the local contractors including Scheduled Tribes. So, this is the stand of the Government, and I think Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is nothing much to comment on the various points as mentioned by the Members, and I, therefore, resume my seat.

Mr. Deputy Speaker : Now, let us come to Motion No. 8 to be moved by Mr. Majaw. It seems Prof. Majaw is absent.

(Voices -Yes).

        Then let us come to Motion No. 9 to be moved by Shri H. Hadem.

Shri H. Hadem : Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that this Assembly do now discuss the necessity of constructing a new road diverting from the Myntdu bridge in the Shillong-Jowai Road to meet the Jowai-Garampani Road outside Jowai Town.

Mr. Deputy Speaker : Motion moved. Now you can raise a discussion.

*Shri H. Hadem :-  Sir in this connection, I would like to remind the House of the remark made by one of the hon. Members. Shri H. E. Pohshna from Nongtalang in 1972. While bringing to the notice of House one existing concrete bridge over the river Myntdu where by he termed it as the helicopter the Noah's Ark and this and that. Sir it is a fact that this new bridge, concrete bridge which we may term as Pucca bridge had been constructed about 3 or 4 years ago and we are given to understand that this bridge is meant for the new diversion from this particular point of the present road from Shillong to Jowai to meet the Garampani road just outside the Jowai Town. And Sir it is very very sorry to say that uptil now no action has been taken. Actually Sir I want to say that it is not the fault of the Government because this road actually does not belong to the State this is a National High way and as such I bring this motion only to remind the Government to pursue the matter. Let me bring to the notice of the House Sir the present alignment through which the existing road passing. There is another thing Sir. In this portion of the road there was a former another thing Sir. In that portion of the road there was a former gate which was now dismantled we could find that the road is so congested I mean both sides of the road even the area of the road has been encroached on both sides and many accidents also, Sir, have happened just in that particular area. The reason is that the road is so narrow and there may not be any more scope also for widening of the said road. And this being a National Highway, Sir it is improper that such a space will be provided for vehicular traffic. And with  this bridge now already  under construction and I think  the construction has already been completed and after the diversion is made right from this point to meet the Jowai Garampani road out side the town, the present filling station the general public and you know Sir that at present the State transport bus services are being run  from Gauhati to Silchar direct and 2 buses from Shillong to Silchar and again form one bus Shillong to Jowai, another bus from Shillong to Garampani and another  bus from Shillong to Haflong. These buses  are plying in the morning hours, Sir everyday and also other buses are coming up to  Shillong Such being the position Sir excluding the other traffic like private buses private carriers public carriers and other vehicles, You can easily imagine the heavy traffic plying all along this Shillong Jowai Garampani Road.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :-  Mr. Hadem what will be the length of the road ?

Shri H. Hadem :-  Sir the length may be more than 1 Km but less than 2 Kms. But I think this will be for the department concerned to find out. Any how what I want to bring home is that in the interest of public convenience and public safety Government should give topmost priority to this proposed diversion of the road. If this proposal for diversion of the road is implemented, Sir the first thing will be that the travelling public is general will be saved the trouble of entering into Jowai town unnecessarily. Secondly if this diversion is not made it will also disturb them for having unnecessarily to go there as the parking station is on the another side of the road. Moreover, it will endanger public safety and with the present situation  of this road which is just at the entrance to Jowai town it will be very risky and there maybe innumerable accidents in view of the increased population now within the town itself. Sir, I do not want to take any more time of the House I only hope that this motion will remind the Government of the necessarily of safeguarding public interest and public safety and that this new diversion be immediately constructed with these few words. I resume my seat.

Shri H. E. Pohshna :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, I strongly support the motion moved by the hon. Member form Mynso-Raliang. The bridge that has been pointer out by the  hon. Member who moved the motion was constructed on the permanent basis to replace the old one which was carried away by rain some five or six years ago. For the construction of this bridge how many lakhs and thousand of rupees have been spent? The Department will know it better. But Sir this bridge is lying there for years together and it by chance another flood will come and carry away the present bridge, there will be no other alternative for the people  but to go on foot. Moreover it does not look nice on the part of the Government to neglect it. It is on the most important route and it is also on the national high way. This bridge has been hanging all the time and it does not connect this side nor that side. I also have seen some children falling from the bridge because they were trying to put  some bamboo and they feel down from the bridge. Therefore Sir it is high time that the Government should complete construction this bridge. More over the necessity of the construction of an new road is very essential from the view point that the population of the Jowai town is growing faster and the traffic has increased by leaps and bounds on roads. It is high time that the Government should divert this road so that  the  trucks and other vehicles coming from Shillong. Gauhati Silchar and other places will not have to go  via Jowai town which is very very narrow and not safe for heavy traffic. I therefore strongly support the motion and request the Government to take up this matter from the coming financial year. With these few words, I resume my seat.

 Shri Hopingstone Lyngdoh :-  Mr. Deputy Speaker Sir, I also want to participate in the discussion of this motion. Sir, I also would like to impress upon the necessity of the construction of the bridge,  Sir the  present vehicular traffic on the Shillong Jowai road is on that old bridge. And Mr. Deputy Speaker Sir,  I very well remember that in 1966, when I was travelling along with the M.P.  of the Autonomous district of Assam that the moment we were to pass through this bridge heavy flood water come and half of the bridge was washed away and  hundreds of people who has to go across this bridge were stuck up.  The present road is under flood level and the bridge is of a semi permanent nature. And because of the fact that the bridge is of semi  permanent nature and under flood level the Government of Assam had made the survey of this bridge for a permanent route diversion and a new bridge has been constructed by Assam and was hanging there. So now it needs the attention of the Government to connect this bridge and to speed some money to get both the wings joined together. But now it has been the general opinion of the people that the present Government is not at all interested to construct the wings and connect this bridge and if it is in that  way it is better to declare clearly that this Government should make something like a moment and not a bridge. So the necessity of making diversion on his bridge is very essential. With these few words I also join hands in this motion with a view to drawing the attention of the  Government for completion of this very important portion of the road and bridge.

Shri P. R. Kyndiah (Minister of P .W. D.) :- Mr. Deputy Speaker Sir, I fully appreciate the concern and the anxiety expressed to the members on the need of the constructing a new road diverting from the  Myntdu bridge in the Shillong Jowai Road to meet the  Jowai Garampani Road out side  Jowai town. Government is very much anxious that the diversion could come to pass. In fact, there was a proposal to construct by pass starting from 38.8 furlong a little beyond the existing Myntdu river of mile 38.7 and joining the back of the National Highway 44. This is a National Highway. As you know there was already preliminary survey made. But as you know this road is a National Highway which comes under the control of the Government of India. We have pressed the matter but due to  paucity of fund, the Government of India has asked us not to tackle up the work for the time being. Therefore in so far as diversion is concerned, we are also very anxiously concerned. But we are pursuing this matter. There are matters which have been raised in a very strong manner by  Shri H. E. Pohshna. and Shri H. S Lyngdoh. These are matters which deserve immediate attention, that is pending any diversion to be made a  bridge  has to be made readable. In fact the construction of the approaches is very much in our mind and we have already prepared the estimates and these have been sent to the Government of India. Just at the moment we are waiting anxiously for the sanction of the Government of India. As soon as sanction is obtained I can assure the members of the House that the work will be taken up expeditiously. Since the mover of the emotion has clearly stated that this only intention is to remind the Government pursue the matter, I can only say Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir, that we are pursuing the matter very vigorously. Thank you.

Mr. Deputy Speaker :-  Motions Nos. 10 to 13.(Not moved members being absent)

ADJOURNMENT

        Let us come to the next item - Resolutions. Resolutions Nos. 1 to-4 (Not moved Members being absent) Since there is no more business to be transacted, the House stands adjourned till 9 a. m. on Wednesday, the 19th March, 1975.

R. T. RYMBAI
Dated Shillong Secretary,
The 18th March, 1975 Meghalaya Legislative Assembly,