The Tribune, Chandigarh, India

Saturday, May 27, 2000,
Chandigarh, India

THE TRIBUNE SPECIALS

50 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

TERCENTENARY CELEBRATIONS

M A I N N E W S

Terrorist-hit wait for jobs
From Varinder Walia
Tribune News Service

AMRITSAR, May 26 — It was a gruesome sight when Krishan Lal, a labourer of Chheharta, was shot dead by terrorists on April 25, 1991. He was the sole bread winner of the family.

However, with many hardships, the illiterate widow of Krishan Lal educated her minor son up to plus two standard with financial help from the Punjab Istri Relief Trust with a hope that he would get a job in the “priority category number one”. The poor family has been running from pillar to post to get Sanjiv a job, but in vain.

When veteran CPI leader Satya Pal Dang, who has been taking up the cases of terrorist victims, said Sanjiv Kumar had applied for job almost immediately after he became adult, his application continued to gather dust for more than two years. After many reminders the Public Grievances Officer (PGO) raised objection that his unmarried sister could have applied and got the job well in time.

The conclusion was drawn that the family did not need a job since it could not apply well in time.

This case was rejected though the Secretary, Relief and Rehabilitation, vide his letter dated April 20, 1999, held that Sanjiv Kumar was entitled for a job on priority number one basis. He also had directed the Deputy Commissioner to issue appointment letter after completing necessary formalities. Ironically, such orders could not be issued so far.

This is not an isolated case. As many as 123 such cases, including 64 in Amritsar, were rejected by the state government under one pretext or the other. Mr Dang and Mrs Laxmi Kanta Chawla, BJP MLA, have described the action of the state government as “inhuman”. They said most of the cases were rejected on the presumption that in case the application for job on “ priority basis” were late it should be presumed the family of the deceased could manage without a government job and hence such applications should not be entertained.

Mr Dang said in most of the cases were delayed by the authorities concerned. However, in certain cases delay was due to ignorance and illiteracy of the victims. In other cases, many families of terrorist victims migrated to other places after their “near and dear ones” were shot dead. Mrs Chawla had raised this case on the floor of the Assembly but the state has not come to the rescue of the victims so far.

Citing a number of cases, Mr Satya Pal Dang has alleged that the officials concerned have been interpreting the guidelines deliberately in a manner which should result in rejection of the applications of the victims.

Another ghastly incident took place on March 9, 1988 when both parents and living grandparent of Ravinder Mohan were shot dead by terrorists in Kot Khalsa (Amritsar). Three orphaned children survived. Ravinder Mohan — the eldest appeared in plus two examination in March 1988. He then applied for the job on compassionate basis in August 1998. His application was not diaried on the ground that it was not accompanied by death certificate of parents by the SDM’s concerned office. He applied for the same immediately. However, due to strike by government employees he got the death certificate late. His fresh application was diaried on December 1998. However, the authorities concerned rejected this “genuine case” too on the ground that it should have been made within six months. “Not on declaration of result but the date on which examination ended.”

Another victim Sarbjit Singh whose father Kasturi Lal (Gurdaspur) was shot dead on April 9, 1988, had first applied for a job in 1995 after attaining the age of 18 years. He was advised to apply on a prescribed form. He did that in 1996. Instead of giving job to the victim, the widow of the deceased got a letter to explain reasons as to why she did not apply immediately after the death of her husband.

The cases of Shamboo Nath, a resident of Ranike (Indo-Pakistan border) and Pawan Kumar were also rejected by the government on the ground that they had not applied within stipulated time.

The case of Kulwinder Singh, Rajan Dhall and many other victims who were denied jobs almost for similar reasons also fall in the same category.

Mr Dang alleged that callousness of the government was due to two reasons. One, lack of sympathy. The second reason seems to be that as plight of victims of terrorists is no more a live issue in the minds of public. Giving jobs to left-out has little vote catching value. Mr Dang threatened to launch an agitation if the government failed to come to the rescue of victims.