Editor,
I am writing to express my concerns and to raise awareness about a recent decision by the State Government regarding the adoption of NCERT textbooks for the academic curriculum.
While the government’s intention to improve the quality of education is commendable, I find it disconcerting that the decision to modify NCERT textbooks comes without adequate consideration for the recent changes made by NCERT in its curriculum. It has come to my attention that NCERT has initiated a process of updating books for classes I and II, and is in the process of updating books for classes III to X. However, the State Government’s decision seems to overlook this critical aspect.
The concern arises from the possibility that after implementing the current NCERT curriculum, the state government may need to adapt to the new curriculum introduced by NCERT the following year. This could result in parents and students incurring additional expenses to purchase updated textbooks, leading to financial strain, particularly for low-income families.
Further, it is highlighted that the Education Department has not updated the Social Science books, which are crucial for competitive examinations. Instead of adopting the old social science books, the government could have considered using the existing NCERT books for this subject, supplementing them with a separate book that includes the geography of the state and information about freedom fighters.
This approach would have not only aligned with the national curriculum but also incorporated essential local content, providing a more comprehensive and balanced educational experience for the students.
In conclusion, while the government’s efforts to enhance the quality of education are appreciated, it is essential to consider the potential implications of decisions, especially regarding the synchronization of the state curriculum with national updates. I urge the concerned authorities to revisit and reassess the current plan to ensure a more sustainable and cost-effective educational framework for the benefit of both students and parents.
Yours etc.,
A Sarki
Shillong
Traffic chaos at Umiam Bridge due to overtaking
Editor,
The Umiam Bridge, a vital lifeline for Meghalaya, is currently undergoing much-needed repair works. Consequently, only one-way entry for vehicles has been enforced. So obviously, there are long queues of vehicles on both sides. Drivers must wait their turn, forming a long line of vehicles on either side of the bridge.
However, to one’s dismay, many cunning drivers brazenly overtake vehicles in line, leaving fellow commuters/tourists frustrated and worried about reaching their destinations on time. While rule-abiding drivers spend hours in the queue, (even I spent over two hours about a week ago), those violators breeze through in a matter of minutes.
This breach of traffic etiquette raises questions about the effectiveness of law enforcement in curbing such audacious acts. What one feels is that instead of concentrating solely on the bridge, police presence should extend along the vehicle lines. Authorities concerned must take stricter action against the cunning drivers who violate the rules of the road.
It is imperative that the STP also put up signboards — “No overtaking” along the road. The fair and orderly flow of traffic should be ensured. It is fervently hoped that the traffic department will address this issue with seriousness without further delay.
Yours etc.,
Salil Gewali,
Shillong
Hit and run law unjustified
Editor,
The Modi Government has withheld the hit and run law and the drivers had withdrawn the strike as they await further discussion with the Government.
As per the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, a trucker or driver involved in hit-and-run cases can face up to 10 years in prison and a fine of up to Rs 7 lakh. This is the change in the law that has met with strong criticism from the truckers. and they had received moral support from the general public also as the demand is genuine
As it is well known, this law is one which was passed in the absence of many Opposition members after they were disqualified. As per the earlier law, if the driver was found guilty then he would face punishment of imprisonment of up to two years – of course, only if it was not a case of intentional homicide. The previous punishment was according to the British-era Indian Penal Code which was recently replaced by Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita.
Àccording to the heavy vehicle drivers, the new changes in the law are completely anti-driver, as paying such a high amount is not at all possible for a person in their profession and imprisonment of 10 years is basically ending their entire life.
The immediate ripple effect of this strike was visible at the petrol stations in the cities where long queues were seen since people were insecure about fuel shortage due to the protest. The Union Home Secretary has called an urgent meeting with the representatives of the truck owners’ unions so that the situation does not go out of hand and as the general elections will be held after 3-4 months, the Government cannot take such a strong decision which may go against the Government.
The new law will come into effect from April 2024. Now, what is a hit-and-run case? If a person flees the scene after a hit-and-run accident then he will face the repercussions mentioned above. As per drivers, even if a two-wheeler rider hits a heavy vehicle due to his own fault, then the crowd gathers at the accident scene and attacks the truck driver without any second thought. This could sometimes lead to the death of the drivers and hence, the driver either abandons his vehicle and flees or surrenders himself at a nearby police station. However, the new law directly imposes stricter penalties for drivers which has caught the truck owners in a pickle. The government has cited a rise in hit-and-run cases in the country, which result in about 50,000 deaths a year on an average. Although the Government’s reasons are justifiable, whenever a new law is introduced, the authorities must study the potential consequences in advance. Democratically, a draft bill demands a discussion in both the Houses of Parliament before passing it as a law. However, the government is passing laws as per its own will by exercising its power of being the majority in Parliament. Members of the Opposition are expected to be part of these discussions, however, the Speaker through mass expulsion has already eliminated most of its hurdles. Only when the ruling party members were left in the House, including the Speaker, did the Union Home Minister replace the British-era Indian Penal Code with the Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita. There was neither any discussion nor anyone’s views on the matter as the majority of the Opposition was already nullified. It will soon become clear whether the Government listens to the truckers or not. However, if the government fails to handle the situation sensibly then it could lead to a serious dilemma. Any law before being implemented must be discussed publicly and opinions of experts should be considered while drafting any Bill. There is no meaning in conducting blind experiments just to erase the remnants of the past. It is understandable that the British-era names of roads, historical sites and buildings are changed but when it comes to changing the law, the potential consequences must be discussed from all angles.
Finally, the Government should conduct negotiations with the representatives of the truckers; union and there should not be unnecessarily hindrance in reaching an amicable solution as the country cannot bear such a strike which has wide range impacts on the national economy.
Yours etc.,
Yash Pal Ralhan,
Via email