Them Iew Mawlong: HPC waiting for govt’s call

The Harijan Panchayat Committee (HPC) has said that they are waiting for the state government to call for a meeting to discuss the issue related to the relocation of the Sweepers’ Colony from Them Iew Mawlong.

“We are waiting for the government’s call,” HPC secretary Gurjit Singh said.

He however refused to indicate if the committee would submit its reply on the government’s proposal.

Meanwhile, Deputy Chief Minister Prestone Tynsong informed that the government would soon fix a meeting with the HPC to further sensitize them on the stand of the government and to also listen to their point of view on the matter.

“We are waiting for the return of the Deputy Chief Minister in-charge urban affairs as we want to convene a meeting with the HPC within this month,” he added.

Tynsong said that he is not aware if the HPC has sent any communication to urban affairs with regards to the reply to the government’s proposal.

On March 16, the state government set a deadline to the HPC for submitting its reply by April 10, with regards to the proposal for relocating of the Sweepers’ Colony from Them Iew Mawlong to the existing land of the Shillong Municipal Board (SMB).

The government had also turned down the request of the HPC to give another three months’ time to respond to the proposal.

The decision was also taken following an order of the Meghalaya High Court on February 16, asking the state government to immediately resolve the issue after the Assembly elections.

On September 29, last year the state government presented the blueprint to the HPC during a meeting, which indicated its decision to construct multi-storey flats at the existing official quarters of the Shillong Municipal Board (SMB) for relocation of the 342 families.

The state government had outrightly rejected the April 25,2022-proposal of the HPC that 200 square meters of land be provided to each of the 342 families within the European ward besides bearing the cost of construction of their homes.

Judiciary leaves details of roster system to executive, legislature

Staff Reporter

Shillong, April 4: The Meghalaya High Court today said how far back the roster system would be made applicable, these are policy matters that are best left to the legislature and the executive of the state.

In its order, the division bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee has dismissed a PIL filed by one Greneth M Sangma without going into the merits of the matter pertaining to the roster system for reserved seats in the State and said, “The Court may be called upon to look into the matter at a more appropriate stage.”

The Court said the judicial notice needs to be taken of the discussions pertaining to the roster in the new Assembly.

ALSO READ: Meghalaya Roster system row: ‘Allegation on promoting communalism baseless, erroneous’, says VPP

“However, it does not appear that any decision has yet been taken as to a cut-off date or the like or how far back the roster system would be made applicable. These are policy matters that are best left to the legislature and the executive and upon a firm stand being taken, it will be open to any citizen affected thereby to question the propriety thereof in accordance with law,” it said while adding that “As of now, and without a decision in such regard having been taken by the Assembly which is actively discussing the matter, the present petition should not be entertained.”

The Court also stated that this petition, apparently filed in the public interest, appears to be an attempt to muddy the already disturbed waters.

ALSO READ: Meghalaya CM says roster system in place as per HC order; VPP wants roster system on hold

The order said it was discovered in the year 2022, quite accidentally in course of a service matter before a Division Bench of this Court, that though the reservation policy had been in place in this State since its inception in January, 1972, there was no roster that had been prepared.

Accordingly, this Court took suo motu cognisance of such irregularity and required all appointments to be stayed till a roster was prepared.

Certain ancillary directions were also issued. A roster was prepared.

The Court noticed that a roster had been prepared and the matter was given a quietus without going into the veracity of the roster that was prepared and upon prima facie satisfaction that the roster adhered to the extent of reservation of about 85 per cent that is in vogue in the State, the order stated.