Editor,
Illegal smuggling of cattle to Bangladesh via the state of Meghalaya has witnessed a depletion of cattle stock in the State. The healthy and fit cattle are smuggled away to Bangladesh while the less preferred and sickly ones are disposed off to the beef butchers and traders in Meghalaya. How is it possible that the needs of another nation are given priority? Cattle smuggling via the Indo-Bangladesh border is a violation of many statutes of the Indian Constitution and the Consumer Protection Act. It is alleged that the nexus between the illegal traders and the BSF (Border Security Force) favour such activities which happen in their area of jurisdiction. This daylight smuggling of cattle has brought the sale of beef in Meghalaya to a standstill as butchers they have resolved to stop buying cattle from the market at Khanapara which roughly 90 kms from Shillong. The Khasi Jaintia Butcher’s Welfare Association (KJBWA) has stopped buying the skinny, diseased cows which are butchered and sold in the Meghalaya beef markets at Rs 300 per kilogram. The main cause of such illegal trading and smuggling is because the local cattle traders accumulate more wealth through this activity than what they earn from their normal businesses. There is a saying that no one should get rich at the cost of someone else’s loss. Yet, this is happening in Meghalaya. The local traders have amassed wealth by disposing off the unhealthy cattle which is obviously illegal and atrocious. The beef consumers and butchers have become victims of this unfair trade practice.
In this case a fundamental right has been breached by the local cattle traders/smugglers where our right to consume healthy and fit beef is now beyond our reach. The Supreme Court of India through Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has recognized the right to healthy food as a fundamental right through Article 21 of the Constitution. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has directed the setting up of State Consumer Protection Councils and District Consumer Protection Forums under section 7 and 8 and sections 8A and 8B of the Act. This said, the State Government has to take necessary action to curb this illegal trade and smuggling which is carried out at the cost of the citizens of the state thereby affecting their consumer rights. It is a clear violation of the law and what is surprising is that the BSF is allegedly promoting this smuggling along with the local traders for their personal gain.
Another surprising fact is that a fitness certificate must be issued to certify healthy and fit cattle before they are sent to the slaughter house, yet unfit and weak cattle pass through this mechanism which obviously betrays the discrepancy in the system. The Indian Penal Code, 1860 under section 421 and 424 states that fraud/dishonesty and concealment of property is a crime. In this case cattle which are actively concealed by the traders are being sold at a lucrative price to Bangladesh while the local beef butchers are deprived of healthy cattle.
The State Government had repeatedly ordered that illegal smuggling of cattle to Bangladesh should stop. The Minister for Animal Husbandry and Veterinary had ordered strict inspection at various check gates which have to comply with such guidelines of the law and trade practice. But the situation needs better and more effective scrutiny to ensure that such trade does not happen at the cost of the consumers and beef butchers of Meghalaya. The law has to be effective enough to punish all those connected to this illegal trade/smuggling of cattle to Bangladesh. They must be booked and made to compensate for the harm caused to the public who are forced to consume unhealthy beef.
Yours etc.,
Ritre O Lyngdoh
BA.LLB (Hons)
National Law University & Judicial Academy,Assam}
Of pre-determined interviews
Editor,
An advertisement published in your news daily on the June 7, 2019 invited applications for the post of Asst Prof in the Department of Political Science, Sankardev College Shillong. As a candidate who had the necessary qualifications for the post I was happy to see this advertisement. Later I realized that the same post was advertised in the same news daily on October 11, 2017 for which I had applied and also faced the interview board on Nov 8, 2017. I have the habit of checking the time before I enter and exit an interview room to keep a record of my interview and how I could have fared. As far as the interview in this College is concerned, I clearly remember that when I entered the interview room it was 12.59 PM. I was given less than two minutes for a demonstration. I exited the interview room at 1.11 PM. The points to be noted about this interview are: (a) there were about 8 persons in the interview panel comprising the College Principal, the HOD, the GB President, the Subject Expert and other Professors (b) I was no given time to write a single word on the blackboard before the demonstration (c) three questions were asked by the Subject Expert which I was able to answer (d) when I could not answer the fourth questions the panel simply said, ‘that’s enough.’ I had to leave the interview room (e) besides the Subject Expert, others in the interview panel were mere observers who filled up the chairs with no interest in interviewing me.
I was not the only who was treated like that at the interview. In fact almost all applicants were not interviewed properly, except ‘one’ So, I realized the interview was predetermined and even sensed the ‘one’ would get the job. One or our friends told the ‘one’ that he would be selected based on the kind of interview this ‘one’ had. About a week later the ‘one’ informed me and others that he had got a call and that he was selected for the job. Later I came to know that the College had already sent the necessary documents to DHTE for its approval, but which I assume it did not approve, for reasons best known to the College. So now the questions arises (i ) why did the College ‘properly’ interview only ‘one’ candidate? (ii) what happened to those documents sent to DHTE? (iii) Whether the College has again pre-determined whom to select this time too, as it did in 2017?
The College must respond to the questions above if it does not want any information from
outside to come out in the public domain in order to clear the air. As a candidate who has appeared in the 2017 interview and in those of other colleges in Shillong and who will be submitting the application to Sankardev College once more, I place this letter in the public domain so that all applicants for the said post including me, will understand the rationale of the upcoming interview in this College. We all have the right to pose the above questions to the College and it must provide the information otherwise the present advertisement and interview to be conducted for the same will be no different from that which took place in 2017. Good Luck to all the applicants.
Yours etc.,
Name withheld on request.