Editor,
Through this column I would like to draw the attention of the law enforcers and the authorities concerned on what is going on at the ground level when it comes to the functioning of the local Dorbars. As many writers through this newspaper have expressed their views on the history, role and functions of the traditional Dorbar system in modern times and also about the legal ramifications on its existence, I am appalled at the lack of clear instructions from the government on how the dorbar should function especially when it comes to collection of money from the public.
I visited a friends place at at Nongrimmaw locality in Laitumkhrah and roughly at about 7.45pm there was an announcement made on the locality PA system saying there will be collection of monthly fees from all the residents of Nongrimmaw and registration of tenants and shopkeepers for the year 2024-25 on Saturday at the Dorbar Hall.” The announcement was made for about 20 minutes both in Khasi and English. This prompted me to ask my friend what was this collection all about? She told me that it started a year back and all residents were asked to make monthly payment where house owners are to pay Rs 50 and tenants Rs 30. The registration fees for new tenants was Rs 50. It is further learnt that this collection was meant for civic maintenance of the locality that was taken up by the Dorbar Shnong whereas the locality was under the administration of the Shillong Municipal Board for maintenance of civic amenities to which household taxes are levied by the Board. I was also told that those who do not pay the fees do not get any assistance from the locality. I was also told that those who don’t pay the stated fees would be penalised in that no announcement would be made over the PA system if someone from their family passes away. So I asked my friend who installed the PA system and was told that it came through the local MDC scheme.
Since this topic on Dorbars is interesting, more so after reading several articles on its role and functioning in this newspaper, I then asked if the money was collected by the Dorbar Shnong of Laitumkhrah to which she replied in the negative. The money was apparently collected by the Dorbar Dong and collected by the Rangbah Dong and his men there. I wonder under which authority of the law is the Rangbah Dong allowed to make a public announcement on the PA system for collection of money from the residents? Is this not broad daylight extortion? People’s voices are suppressed so they cannot even voice their concern only because of the Rangbah Shnong’s diktat. It seems those who refuse to pay are not given any assistance or certificate wherein even fees for certificates are collected separately it seems. And the amount to be paid for sale and purchase of land there is hefty.
We read so much about the Dorbar Shnong and that they do not have the mandate of law to issue diktats to residents according to their whim and fancies. And here we have localities in the heart of the capital making public announcements on illegal collections and no one dares to take any action. Nor does the police take suo-moto cognisance in such cases. Does the district administration endorse such collections to happen under its nose? Citizens of Laitumkhrah are paying their household tax to the SMB and simultaneously are also being forced to pay to the Dorbar Dong? Since when has the Syiem of Hima Mylliem issued a Sanad to the Rangbah Dong or Dorbar Dong? And why is the Rangbah Shnong of Laitumkhrah silent on this issue?
The district administration on several occasions issued advisories on illegal collection of money by non-registered organisations. Are the Dorbars not required to obtain permission from the district administration to collect money from the public? Are the Dorbar Shnong above the law? How are even such announcements allowed on the PA system of the locality? Is this not an open endorsement to extortion? Who will bell the cat?
Yours etc,
Ibalamon K.naior
Shillong 1
Don’t bulldoze justice
Editor,
How can an authorised structure, a home of a person, be demolished by the administration to punish an accused or a convict? It is said that a person is innocent until proven guilty. So, no punitive action should be taken against an accused until the person is proven guilty. Now, what if the person is a convict? Even in this case, the executive cannot add more punishment to what was given by the judiciary. Moreover, can a wife be punished for the crime committed by her husband? Should the administration destroy the future of innocent children by destroying their homes if their father is a criminal? Rather, it is the duty of the state to protect the innocent family members of a convict.
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court told the Government that it could not punish an accused or a convict by demolishing their property without serving a prior show-cause notice and giving the affected party 15 days to challenge the order. The apex court clarified that the directions would not apply to unauthorised structures in public places such as “roads, streets, footpaths, abutting railway lines or any river body or water bodies and also to cases where there is an order for demolition made by a court of law”.
This means the Supreme Court zeroes in on the demolition of houses that are not unauthorised structures. Therefore, the judgement has rightly put a break on the executive to act where judges are supposed to do. However, it would have been better if there was a total ban on such demolition instead of restricting it by attaching some strings.
Justice Gavai rightly said, “If a citizen’s house is demolished merely because he is an accused or even for that matter a convict, that too without following the due process as prescribed by law… it will be totally unconstitutional… The executive cannot become a judge and decide that a person accused is guilty and, therefore, punish him by demolishing his residential/ commercial property/ properties. Such an act of the executive would be transgressing its limits.”
Now, those who have lost their homes because of such a transgression should be given fair compensation. It will indeed be a mockery of justice if the executive blurs the line of the separation of power and assumes the role of the judiciary for the sake of instant justice.
The Supreme Court has rightly said that a bulldozer demolishing a building made a “chilling sight” and it is a “lawless state of affairs”. There should not be any leeway for such actions.
An innocent family member of an accused or a convict should not be deprived of her or his right to shelter, which is a fundamental right and a part of Article 21 (life and personal liberty) of the Constitution of India.
Yours etc.,
Sujit De,
Kolkata