SHILLONG: HS Shylla, former CEM of KHADC, in a letter to the Governor, RN Ravi, has urged him to intervene on behalf of the people of the state with regard to implementation of ILP.
In the letter, Shylla drew the governor’s attention to Section 2 of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills District (Application of Laws) Regulation, 1952, known as Regulation No. 5 of 1952 (Annexure-1), wherein the power has been vested upon the governor’s office to issue a notification with regard to any of the 225 laws which were selected and enumerated in the Schedule appended to Regulation No. 5 of 1952.
In this regard, he pointed out the case of Assam, in which the then Governor of Assam issued a notification bringing into force the Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 by the power vested on him under Section 2 of the Regulation No. 5 of 1952 to the entire area falling within the jurisdiction of the United Khasi-Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council (UKJHADC).
The Eastern Bengal and Assam Excise Act, 1910 is one of the laws in the Act included in the Schedule to the Regulation No. 5 of 1952, the letter added.
However, the notification was subsequently challenged in the High Court of Guwahati and Nagaland then, on the ground that paragraph 19 (1) (b) of the Sixth Schedule of the Constitution had ceased to operate when the district council was constituted, and as such the legislative power of the governor came to an end, likewise regulation No. 5 of 1952 also lapsed with the lapse of power of the governor to legislate.
The court accepted the petition and declared that the governor’s notification had no leg to stand upon and as such, there was no law to prohibit the appellants (Late Byrhien Kurkalang and others) to distil liquor in areas falling under the UKJHADC.
But the state government then appealed the matter to the Supreme Court, which was pleased to pass a nineteen-paragraph long judgment (Annexure-2) declaring that the regulation No. 5 of 1952 continues to operate as long as it remained in the statute book and that the governor’s notification was validly issued, it said.
In the case of Meghalaya in general and the two District Councils – the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council (KHADC) and Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council (JHADC) – are concerned, it would only require a notification to be issued by the governor in accordance with the ruling of the Supreme Court – “But the power conferred thereunder on the governor to bring into force the laws set out in the Schedule continued and would continue so long as the regulation remained on the statute book.” – for the ILP to be implemented in the state, especially in light of the fact that Meghalaya is exempted from the provisions of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) being one of the states where the Sixth Schedule is in force,” the letter said.
Shylla then mentioned that the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly, in its Special Session held on December 19, 2019, had unanimously adopted and passed a resolution expressing its desire to implement the Eastern Bengal Frontier Regulation, 1873 (ILP) in the state.
“The resolution speaks volumes of the fact that the people of Meghalaya together with all their MLAs stand united and are unanimous in their call for the urgent and unconditional implementation the Eastern Bengal Frontier Regulation, 1873 (ILP) in the State of Meghalaya,” he said.
Acknowledging certain ‘feeble and lame’ objections to the implementation of ILP in the state, he said that it is understood that the implementation of ILP in any state does not seek to prevent the entrance of people from other states into that state, in an attempt to isolate oneself from outside influences.
Rather, the implementation of ILP is to adopt measures and mechanism to assist the state machinery in regulating the unbridled flow of persons to the state leading to the unmitigated dilution of the state’s uniqueness in terms of culture, language, customs and so on, he added.
“Such a desire to preserve one’s own cultural roots, heritage and identity cannot be deemed to be parochial and primitive and/or alarmist. It is but a natural way of expressing one’s affection and affinity to what belongs to us, which also has the support and might of the Constitution as per provisions under Article 29,” Shylla explained.
Speaking about the exception of Garo Hills in the process, he said that it is unfortunate for the region to be placed in such a position at present.
The former KHADC CEM added, “However, the fact that the British government in India had consciously revoked the relevant laws pertaining to the implementation of ILP in Garo Hills in 1897 through the Repealing Act of 1897 needs to be taken into consideration”.
He reminded that Mukul Sangma, during his tenure as the chief minister of Meghalaya, had introduced the Meghalaya Residents Safety and Security Act of 2016 to address the need for separate legislation for the Garo Hills in lieu of ILP. Hence, there is no apparent ground in this regard to deny the KHADC and the JHADC what is by law and more importantly by virtue of the Constitution their right and privilege, he said.
With regard to the issue of Meghalaya being the thoroughfare of all Northeastern states, he said that it does not hold water as the National Highway connecting the various states in the Northeastern regions will not be disturbed by the implementation of the Regulation of 1873.
“The purpose of enacting the regulation No. 5 of 1952 had a very significant impact on the erstwhile 25 Khasi states being brought to mainstream India without the signing of the Instrument of Merger. As such it would not only be right but constitutionally proper that the Eastern Bengal Frontier Regulation, 1873 be implemented through the Section 2 of Regulation 5 of 1952 than through a notification to be issued by the President of India under Article 372 (2) as mentioned by the Chief Minister, Conrad K. Sangma on the floor of the House on December 19, 2019,” the letter said.
