Editor,
The NEHU notification No.CDC/B.3/2011/Pt.I/-3117 dated 25th September, 2014 concerning implementation of semester system for bachelors degree programme from the academic session 2015-16 is indeed a matter of discussion. At the outset, the HYC should be commended for taking up the matter publicly. After all, the future of thousands of students is at stake and such structural changes cannot be a knee-jerk reaction. However, I do not subscribe to the concerns raised by the HYC in totality. As the matter is now in open discourse I would like to place some pointers.
Firstly, there is no doubt that the University has done a lot of thinking and deliberations as far as planning for the semester system is concerned. However, point 2(iii) of the notification is indeed baffling. As such, until and unless the rationale for the same is presented appropriately these questions and concerns (as raised by HYC and maybe others) will remain. One wonders why the failed/passed paper(s) should be appeared for improvement only on the 7th – 10th semesters and not during the regular semesters (3rd – 6th). Is it because the University is not confident of being able to declare the results on a semester time-bound manner?
Secondly, four years should be the maximum time frame for clearing the bachelors degree programme and not five. No doubt, the time frame means less leeway for the students, but on the contrary they will be on their toes as far as studies are concerned. Hence, it’s a win-win situation. This means a student can avail two chances for clearing a paper and one chance for improvement (in case the paper is already cleared). This should be open for writing during the regular semesters itself. For this the results must be declared on a semester time-bound manner. This implies a lot of work for the University and the colleges during the transition period of two years, but then, which transition period does not require a lot of work, they all do.
Thirdly, the advantages of the semester system far outweigh the limitations. Hence, if the HYC (and maybe others) are thinking of opposing it, I suggest they have a long and hard look into the matter before speaking up. NEHU is a public sector organization and as such public opinions are most welcome. However, let us not cut down the tree simply because of one dead branch. The issue raised by HYC is indeed a ‘dead branch’ and we should work for ways and means to nullify it. As such, let us wait for the report of the Committee that has already been set up to look into the matter and if the disagreement persists then dialogue can persist as well.
Yours etc,
Benjamin Lyngdoh
NEHU Campus
Shillong – 22
Clamping of vehicles by STP
Editor,
I would like to know from the S.P (traffic) East .Khasi.Hills under which section of the Motor Vehicle Act is clamping of vehicles parked in non parking places in Shillong enforced. Moreover, Rs. 500.for this penalty is not authorized by the MV Act as far as I know. The maximum fine is Rs.100.. The police cannot impose any amount according to their whims and fancies. Please see the traffic rules posted in your website and review this clamping activity and the fine amount collected. The MV act has to be enforced and not the local police rules. Also are the vehicles of Meghalaya police officers (IPS & MPS), the military and paramilitary forces, VIPs exempted from this clamping since they regularly park in no parking zones in Shillong since no action is taken when they break the law? Are they above the MV rules? Please be fair in enforcing the MV rules.
Yours etc.,
Harmit Ranhotra,
Via email