Nepotism or hard labour

The tirade of Arvind Kejriwal against Robert Vadra has boiled some controversial soup in the political cauldron. It is indeed questionable how the income of Vadra swelled at a precipitous rate in an iota of time. Is it ‘nepotism’ that made the magic a reality? Vadra’s brass to gold story is now in public domain.

No one bequeaths a bounty until and unless a propitious ulterior motif is served for him.  The roots of this “favouritism” can be traced to the Rajiv Gandhi period when he met Kushal Pal Singh Teotia, the founder of DLF, and discussed to start his business at the outer fringes of Delhi.

Why is the BJP reticent on this issue when the disclosure was made long back in time? And with Kejriwal not leaving any opportunity to target the vulnerable bug in daylight, the whole issue is again being given a colour of political motivation.

KANISHKA PATHAK, Dhanbad, Jharkhand

Practical flaws

The Punjab government is likely to enforce the new Rent Restriction Act, which will only be effective prospectively and shall not cover properties rented out earlier. This is not only surprising but will also lead to increased litigation. The new Act is discriminatory and seems to have been conceived without application of mind. The old Act was passed to give protection to migrants who came to East Punjab after Partition. After a lapse of 65 years, the concerned people have built residential, commercial and industrial property of their own.

In most cases, the original owners are living in wretched condition, living on footpath and work at the mercy of government inspectors. Their descendants are living and working from rented space. Cases filed in court drag on for decades and lead to further financial ruin.

Tenants and their family members who have constructed property elsewhere should be ejected in summary proceedings and rent at the current market rate should be charged from the date of such construction. Moreover, such protection should not be given to state corporations and other government offices, and other such private corporations. They are tenant grabbers, they did not migrate from Pakistan. They should be forced to pay the rent at market rate from the date of filling of rent petitions. They are unjustly reaping the benefit by misusing the procedure framed for migrants.

VIRENDER SHARMA, Chandigarh

ESM welfare

Air Marshal R S Bedi’s in his article “Discontent in armed forces” (September 10) has written that “Whatever the reasons for dissatisfaction — pay, pension, food, facilities or status — once the intensity of feelings reaches the critical stage, the consequences may be serious”.

You couldn’t be more thoughtful and relevant to the powers that be with regard to their inexplicable, biased and discriminatory mindset against the armed forces. This is the most unfortunate development since independence. The political executive must realise their constitutional responsibility and initiate appropriate action without delay to redress all the imbalances inflicted on the armed forces considering their service profile vis-a-vis that of bureaucrats.

Mere proximity to the political executive does not make the employees superior to other services of the union. Every service is meant for a specific nature of job, so all of them must be treated accordingly. Historical baggage being carried by the political executive and the bureaucrats must be reviewed for its relevance in the present day socio-politico and strategic scenario.

Commandant D S RAI (retd), Ludhiana