|
|
|
|
|
UP needs to overhaul its administration
Akhilesh Yadav had pedalled his cycle into controversy by proposing to gift his MLAs Rs 20 lakh car
each (editorial “A right about-turn, July 5). Where around 40 per cent of the 200 million people live in dire straits of poverty, the expected bounty was cruel. Hopes from Akhilesh have been pulverised. His i-pad figure was very much prevalent during the election hustings and the people considered him as a symbol of prosperity and change. Because Akhilesh was a foreign returned post-graduate, people were expecting a propitious dividend from his tenure as CM. He promised the moon to the people and delivered them naught. His predecessor plundered the state in as many ways. Be it the Taj corridor, the Ganga expressway, the MNREGA scheme, the NRHM scam, famous elephant statues at extravagantly built parks, public funds were used for quaint policies. It has been witnessed over the years that the successive chief ministers play political games on religious grounds in the heartland of UP. UP is a poor state where the poor can’t afford to meet two ends meet. Meals provided by the government are not worth eating. The bureaucrats have slipped governance into inertia. The PDS has many tributaries from where funds seep into officials pockets. The local satraps dine grandly on public welfare funds. Elections are mostly rigged by criminals and law and order situation is debilitating. Farmers have no financial assistance to cushion them during debt and the lack of basic irrigation facilities forces the peasants to take heavy loans from zamindars. Suicide rates in UP are jaw dropping. Famines are frequent. Officials use their discriminatory powers to satisfy their personal whims rather than to help the needy. UP needs a total overhaul with stringent implementation of public welfare policies. Some people with adequate rectitude quotient must take the onus to steer the sinking ship out of inadequacies. We must not bequeath UP into the hands of diabolic politicians and be vigilant to their misdeeds. KANISHKA
PATHAK, Jharkhand
|
|
|
Landmark judgment? Surely, the Supreme Court quashing criminal proceedings against Mayawati in disproportionate assets case is a landmark judgment, Does anyone care to notice that the focus in delivery of justice was on technicalities rather than finding the truth, punishing the guilty and serving justice? If not, then how did the Supreme Court forgot to ask how Mayawati’s declared assets of Rs one crore in 2003 went up to Rs 120 crore in 2012? Were her disproportionate assets built with Dalit donations when they do not even have a roof over their heads? BIDYUT KUMAR CHATTERJEE, Faridabad Curtailing freedom It is quite intriguing that the Shah Commission report is missing from the South Block (Kuldeep Nayar’s article “Where are Shah Commission files?” July 4). This report must be traced out in national interest as it is a dossier of common man’s resistance against an authoritarian regime. Nayar’s article symbolises cultural conscience, ethical commitment and boldness of convictions. The ruling elite tried to muffle and crush the dissent of political opinion with a heavy hand declaring Emergency in the country in June, 1975 and the Shah Commission report was a true testimony to the happenings. Dr RAJ BAHADUR YADAV, Fatehabad (Haryana) Unnecessary subsidies Subsidies are like crutches, just as the crutches help the physically handicapped and bodily infirm; likewise subsidies help the downtrodden and the poor. If a physically fit and healthy person uses crutches, his limbs are sure to get weakened. Similarly, if a financially sound person makes use of subsidies, then some day he may have to pay heavily. We observe in our daily life, a number of well off families have made it a habit to take benefit from whatever quarter it comes. All people getting food grains from the Public Distribution System (PDS) are not necessarily poor, but they do not hesitate to draw optimum benefit from the system. NIRMULA JAMWAL, Hamirpur (HP) Unqualified candidates The Haryana School Selection Board has opened flood gates of corruption by allowing unqualified candidates (without passing B Ed and HTET or STET) to compete for the post of post graduate teachers. It will increase the discretion of members of the selection board. Qualified candidates who do not offer bribe are likely to be rejected on flimsy grounds. It is an injustice to qualified candidates and lakhs of students. Politicians and members of the selection board are the only beneficiaries of this step. SURAJ BHAN MEHTA, Ambala Cantt
|
|||
|
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
