Editor,
Albert Marbaniang’s letter, “Leave the STP to do their job!” (ST Dec 29, 2014) seems to be a bundle of contradictions. Marbaniang states that the parking lot at Laitumkhrah is “dirty” and the ground floor is never used for this reason. He goes on to complain about the parking habits of people and concludes that most parents must be “unemployed because they come almost two hours early to pick up their children from school”. He concludes his arguments by saying that since there is a traffic jam in the evenings when parking is allowed on the main road, it would be chaotic if parking was allowed in the daytime.
May I point out to this worthy gentleman a few important facts which seem to have escaped his notice. First of all, people cannot just drive around commercial areas of Laitumkhrah without parking, if the need arises, just to make the lives of STP easier. The whole idea is absurd. All that the STP has really done is to run away from proper traffic management by effecting a blanket ban on parking. Isn’t it their job to see that people are parked in a proper manner, and to fine them if found wanting in this respect? Or are they just supposed to hang around in the Police Point and wave their hands unnecessarily in a Roundabout? And why is it that the same no-parking rules do not apply to local taxis who are always parked right under their noses on all sides of the Roundabout at Police Point? If the police do their job like they are supposed to do, we wouldn’t have to sit around complaining about parking habits of people! Secondly, the traffic jam in the evenings is NOT caused by roadside parking as Marbaniang believes, but by the bottlenecks at Fire Brigade and Dhankheti junctions. So let’s get these facts right first before we get around to congratulating STP for a job not done. People must have the right to park in proper designated areas inside commercial zones just like in every other town or city in India. One cannot expect small children or the sick and elderly people or even people in a hurry to traverse great distances (Jacob’s Ladder to Laitumkhrah market) just because STP arbitrarily decides to make their own jobs easier by denying citizens their rights!
Yours etc.,
Lewis Wahlang
Shillong – 14
Shillong Municipal Board – poor work culture
Editor,
I wish to draw the attention of the concerned authority through this column. I am an old retired person and a permanent resident of Shillong. At present I am running a small pan shop at Polo Bazar area to support my family. In January 2014 I had applied for a trading license to SMB for running my shop. Unfortunately, till date I have not received the same due to absolute reckless behavior by the one of the staff of SMB who happens to be in charge of Polo Bazar area. On enquiry it has been revealed that the junior most Upper Division Assistant (UDA) is the so called in charge of our locality who hardly comes to office. As a result, many people like me are being harassed on a daily basis. Many complaints were lodged earlier also against the same person, but strangely no action has been taken against him so far ! May I know, why? Who is protecting this person? SMB is a financially sick department and faces huge financial constraints. The staff are not getting their salaries for months. Who is responsible for this debacle? No one else, but the staff members like the UDA mentioned above!
I therefore urge the SMB authority and Minister in Charge, Municipal Affairs, to kindly to look into the matter and book the culprit for derailing a constitutional and legal process.
Yours’ etc
S. S. Chanda
Shillong- 1
MPSC blunders again
Editor
The Meghalaya Public Service Commission (MPSC) conducted a personal interview for the Engineering (Civil Engineer) students of Meghalaya during the second week of December 2014 for which the results were announced on December 19, 2014 on the internet. It is shocking to learn that most of the students who cleared the interview are those who completed their studies just recently (2013-2014) and who were not sponsored by the Government whereas the students who completed their studies since 2009-2012 were not selected. If the MPSC is fair and if the Government is keen to see the welfare of its sponsored engineers students it should have called the MPSC interview batch wise and year wise. Moreover, the age limit is an important factor too. If the Government is taking candidates who have done their engineering studies privately then why should it continue to sponsored students for pursuing Engineering studies? The personal interview conducted by MPSC is not fair at all. The personal interview is what clinched the deal so those who have no money or political strings will never get through. No wonder most of the youth today suffer from depression. Why blame the educated youth for becoming anti-social? I request that the result of the MPSC interview of the Engineers (Civil) declared recently be cancelled and new advertisement for the MPSC interview is to be rearranged fresh and to be intimated batch wise and year wise based on the seniority of the students. We call upon the Government to consider this as a serious matter.
Yours etc.,
Name withheld on request