House okays six demands amounting to Rs. 1165, 04, 21, 000

IMPHAL, July 6: Along with presenting six demands for Discussion and Voting on Demands for Grants, 2015-16 by Chief Minister O Ibobi Singh who also holds the portfolio of Finance

IMPHAL, July 6: Along with presenting six demands for Discussion and Voting on Demands for Grants, 2015-16 by Chief Minister O Ibobi Singh who also holds the portfolio of Finance during the seventh sitting of the 11th Session of the 10th Manipur Legislative Assembly today, Members of the House unanimously passed the six demands after having threadbare discussion.

The total amount of the six demands passed by the House is Rs. 1165,04,21,000.

The demands are Demand No 6 `“ Rs. 10,43,90, 000 for Transport; Demand No 8 `“ Rs. 639,99,63,000 for Public Works Department; Demand No 21 `“ Rs. 87,29,01,000 for Commerce and Industries; Demand No 28 `“ Rs. 17,65,00,000 for State Excise; Demand No 29 `“ Rs. 4,00,66,000 for Sales Tax, other Taxes/Duties on Commodities and Services and Demand No 30 `“ Rs. 405,66,01,000 for Planning.

While putting up the demands for passing in the House, opposition MLAs L Ibomcha Singh, Th Shyamkumar Singh and Dr I Ibohalbi Singh raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut. MLA Karam Shyam Singh also gave observation on PWD during the House session.

On Demand No 6 `“ Transport, MLA L Ibomcha Singh along with MLA Th Shyamkumar raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on failure to install traffic signal system in the urban areas of Imphal; failure to utilise JnNURM Bus for the last several years; failure to collect transfer fees from the organized sellers/agents of pre used cars by the organized sellers and failure to follow/implement specific Motor Vehicles Rules and regulations/guidelines.

On Demand No 8 `“ Public Works Department, the two MLAs also raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on failure to maintain the IVRS in Manipur; failure to take up the widening of the approach road to Sadu Chiru Waterfall from Leimaram Lamkhai at NH-150; failure to construct sufficient numbers of RCC culverts across Imphal-Mayang Imphal Road resulting in submersion of western side of Mayang-Imphal Road under water after light rain; delay in processing files for obtaining AA/Technical sanction etc; failure to provide sufficient fund for Khagempalli Road; failure to maintain/repair Major Districts Roads (MDR) and Other District Roads (ODR) and failure to stop awarding of works before tender processes are completed.

MLA Dr I Ibohalbi also took part in taking up the Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut.

While discussing Demand No 21- Commerce and Industries, MLA Dr I Ibohalbi Singh and MLA Th Shyamkumar Singh raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on absence of initiative for strengthening industrial energy in Manipur and failure to organize awareness/training programmes for unemployed youths of the state especially in small scale industries.

MLA Th Shyamkumar Singh while discussing Demand No 28 `“ State Excise raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on failure to lift liquor prohibition to generate income of the state.

On Demand No 29 `“ Sale Tax, other Taxes/Duties on commodities and services, MLA L Ibomcha Singh raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on failure to streamline tax collecting structure and need for proper monitoring; failure to check evasion of taxes; need to widen tax base at par with neighbouring states and need to introduce double point entry system in levying VAT or Sales Tax to check tax evasion.

Whereas on Demand No 30 `“ Planning, MLA Dr I Ibohalbi Singh raised Motion for Disapproval of Policy Cut on failure of involvement of village level, block level, district level organs in the planning process.

However, the cut motions raised by the four MLAs were later withdrawn after the Chief Minister, Commerce and Industries Minister Govindas Konthoujam and PWD Minister Dr Kh Ratankumar Singh gave clear clarifications.

As the House gave consent to the withdrawal of the cut motions by the MLAs, the six demands amounting to Rs 1165, 04, 21, 000 were unanimously passed during the session.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/house-okays-six-demands-amounting-to-rs-1165-04-21-000/

RIMS Controversy

The recent advertisement calling for candidacy to the important post of Director of the Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, RIMS, is once again poised to kick up an unseemly controversy.

The recent advertisement calling for candidacy to the important post of Director of the Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, RIMS, is once again poised to kick up an unseemly controversy. For reasons that are flimsy at best, the age of superannuation of the Director`™s post has been lowered to 62 years, professedly `as per existing RR`, without any prior notice, putting many senior professors of this prestigious medical institute and health service provider out of the competition unceremoniously. The superannuation age had earlier been raised to 65 years from 62 years by the 42nd meeting of the Executive Council of the RIMS held on August 5, 2011, at the Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi. This was in keeping with similar raises in the superannuation age for the Directors of AIIMS, PGIMER Chandigarh, NEGRIHMS Shillong and JIMPER, thus bringing the norms of the RIMS on the matter at a par with other medical institutes under the administrative control of Ministry of Health & Family Welfare. This decision of 2011 was ratified and confirmed in the next sitting of the RIMS Executive Council a year later on August 22, 2012. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare had also in a notification dated May 3, 2012, clearly stated its approval that the term of office of the Director of the RIMS shall be `five years or till the incumbent attains the age of 65, whichever is earlier`. It is despite all these developments over a span of nearly four years that the advertisement for the RIMS Director`™s post released by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare on June 24, 2015, without bothering to extend any credible explanation, reverted the superannuation age to the previous 62 years.

Clearly this rather unusual decision calls for an explanation by the ministry`™s concerned authorities. The vaguely implied reason in its advertisement is, though the superannuation age had been raised to 65 years, no recruitment rules, RR, for this change in age ceiling had been framed yet, therefore the resort to the earlier ceiling of 62 years for which an RR does exist. If this indeed is the explanation for the age lowering, it must be said the logic is not tenable. The decision to raise the age ceiling was taken in August 2011, therefore there can be no excuse that a new RR had not been framed for the post as yet. In any case, framing one should hardly have been of any difficulty and could have been achieved in a matter of a week or two. This is especially so in consideration of the fact that the Director`™s posts of several other matching medical institutes in the country under the same ministry, including the AIIMS and NEGRIHMS had also been given such a raise of superannuation age, and RRs for the new 65 year age ceiling for these other institutes would be available for the RIMS to adopt or else model its own RR on.

In the name of fair play, and so as to dispel all doubts and suspicions that there are vested interests trying to take undue advantage, the ministry must put the matter on hold for the time being by withdrawing its advertisement of June 24. A new advertisement can be released after the issue has been put to rest conclusively and to the satisfaction of all parties and stakeholders. As it is, the RIMS has been in the throes of several image battering traumatic experiences in the wake of several unsavoury controversies descending on it in the last few years. Surely the health ministry would not like to add one more distressful episode to the list of the RIMS`™ already overflowing cup of woes. If it does push ahead with the unexplained lowered superannuation age in the recruitment of the next Director of the RIMS, in all likelihood the prestigious institute would be dragged into yet another wasteful and image eroding court battle. Our suggestion to the ministry therefore is for it to either explain its seeming arbitrary decision convincingly to the public, or else if it is unable to do this, delay the appointment a little until this emerging potential controversy is defused. This will save the RIMS another nasty blow to its reputation.

Leader Writer: Pradip Phanjoubam

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/rims-controversy/

Mother-son duo survive knife attack

IMPHAL, July 6: A woman and her minor son survived an alleged attack by a person wielding a knife over financial matters although both suffered multiple stab injuries. The incident

IMPHAL, July 6: A woman and her minor son survived an alleged attack by a person wielding a knife over financial matters although both suffered multiple stab injuries.

The incident of alleged attack occurred yesterday around 8 pm at the woman`™s home at Awang Sekami, according to family members.

While the mother-son duo has been admitted at the Raj Medicity for treatment, the attacker who was assaulted by a mob has also been admitted at the RIMS.

The woman has been identified as Khwairakpam (o) Kunjalata, 44, wife of Kh Brajakumar of Awang Sekmai Khunou Leikai and her son is identified as Kh Albert, 14.

The accused perpetrator has been identified as Sanabam Bishworjit from Langmeidong now staying at Kanglatombi Santipur.

Family members of the victims said Kunjalata had earlier given Rs 2.90 lakhs to Bishworjit in connection to some business after borrowing the sum from a local `marup`™.

Kunjalata had demanded the sum yesterday stating that the people conducting the `marup`™ were asking for the amount, however, Bishwajit asked to wait till night time.

As appointed, Bishworjit arrived around 8:04 pm to their home, family members said.

And after asking for a glass of water and then the way to the toilet, he gave just Rs 6400 to Kunjalata and when the latter asked for the remaining amount, he took out two knifes from his back and attacked Albert and then Kunjalata.

Due to the sudden attack, Kunjalata shouted for help gathering her neighbours who also attacked Bishworjit.

Bishworjit was admitted to RIMS following the incident, while the two were rushed to Rajmedicity.

Kunjalat suffered multiple knife injuries on her head and right hand, while Albert was suffered on his head, chest and left hand, however, both are said to be out of danger.

Meanwhile, Kunjalata claimed that Bishworjit tried to kill them taking advantage of the fact that there was no man in the house.

Read more / Original news source: http://kanglaonline.com/2015/07/motherson-duo-survive-knife-attack/