news details |
|
|
| Mr Omar, three viable alternatives are available | | Durbar Move | | Neha
Jammu, Apr 21: Chief Minister Omar Abdullah did a right thing by acknowledging that the shifting of the Durbar (Civil Secretariat) between Jammu and Kashmir twice every year is "wastage of money". "Do I think the 'Durbar move' (shifting of capital) is a waste of money? Yes I do. Is there an alternative? I haven't seen a viable alternative suggested," Omar on Thursday wrote on the micro-blogging site twitter.com. In response to a tweet from his follower, Omar also said the Durbar move practice was "escapist". "I agree. We run away when people need us most and (they) face the most difficulty. The Durbar move is escapist," he wrote.
Omar Abdullah deserves appreciation for what he wrote about the over 140-year-old practice of Durbar move. It was started in 1872, when Dogra Maharaja Ranbir Singh was ruling the State. He started this practice to neutralize the baneful influence of the conspiratorial activities indulged in by the British Indian Government with a view to inciting the Kashmiri Muslims against the Dogra rule which, for example, was not allowing the canny imperialists to construct military roads between Kashmir and the frontier areas such as Gilgit. Their objective was to check the activities of the Russians who had been seeking to cultivate the local chiefs and establish their foothold in Afghanistan. It is wrong to say that the practice of shifting the Durbar between Kashmir and Jammu was started by the Maharaja to escape the extreme weather conditions in Jammu during summers and in Srinagar during winters. Those who say so are blissfully ignorant about the history of Durbar move.
All well-meaning persons would agree with Omar Abdullah when he candidly says that the practice of Durbar move not only causes huge financial loss to the exchequer every year but also adds to the difficulties of the people. But one cannot disagree with him when he says that "I haven't seen a viable alternative suggested". Three viable alternatives are available.
One: Let us look back to find what was the position before 1949. The State of Jammu and Kashmir did not exist before March 1846. It was only in March that year that the State of Jammu and Kashmir came into being. The State was founded by the Dogra ruler, Maharaja Gulab Singh, after the conclusion of Treaty of Amritsar between him and the British Indian Government. Gulab Singh bought Kashmir from the British paying Rs 75 lakh. It was Kashmir that was merged with the Jammu Kingdom and not the vice-versa. The permanent capital of the Dogra Kingdom was Jammu. The British left India in 1947. It would have been better had the authorities stopped the practice of Durbar move immediately after the end of the British rule and returned to the pre-1872 political arrangement under which Jammu, the seat and center of Dogra civilization, was the capital of the Dogra Kingdom. Let's rectify the mistake and declare Jammu as the only capital of the State. Even otherwise, Jammu needs to be made the permanent capital considering its location and historical, strategic and political importance. So, making Jammu the permanent capital of the State is one viable alternative.
Two: The State consists of three disparate regions - Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. There is no love lost between Jammu and Kashmir and between the latter and Ladakh. In fact, there exists historical antagonism between Jammu and Kashmir and between the latter and Ladakh. In other words, there exists inter-regional animosity and bitterness of extreme nature between the regions. It's an unnatural wedlock; the emergence of Jammu and Kashmir State is the result of a quirk of history. Let's end this inter-regional animosity by trifurcating the State into Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh States with each region having its own capital. Such a division would not involve any expenditure, as the required infrastructure is available in all the three regions. So, trifurcation of the State is another viable alternative.
Three: Let's keep all the records pertaining to Jammu province in the Civil Secretariat building, Jammu, and all the records pertaining to Kashmir be shifted to the Civil Secretariat building, Srinagar. As for the records pertaining to Ladakh, let's ask the people of the trans-Himalayan region if they would want the records pertaining to their region to be kept and maintained in the Jammu Civil Secretariat or Srinagar Civil Secretariat. It should be left to their choice. As for the existing staff, including Commissioners/Secretaries, half of them should stay put in Jammu on a permanent basis and the remaining half should be sent back to Srinagar where they would stay put on a permanent basis. We may have to appoint some Commissioner/Secretaries and this can be done very easily. It would not cost us much. And, as for the Ministers, they can shuttle between Jammu and Kashmir as and when required, subject to the condition that certain percentage of Ministers would always be available at the civil secretariat Jammu and Civil Secretariat Srinagar. The Cabinet Ministers could be at one place only at the time of Cabinet meetings.
Will Omar Abdullah consider these three alternatives and choose one before the Durbar moves to Srinagar? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
