Issues PWD, SMC, UEED, ERA, etc. need to address
ARJIMAND HUSSAIN TALIB
A sensitive look at Srinagar city today makes you sad. Despite a lot of hoopla about making it green, clean and ‘developed’, it doesn’t get any better, it seems. Worse, it is losing its pristine aesthetic charm quite fast. Some of its grand historical landmarks are degrading. Some have been totally lost. Others have simply disappeared.
Srinagar’s ‘Venice of the East’ sobriquet seems little too far fetched today. The city lives mostly with the landmarks of the Maharaja and Bakhshi eras. It is true that the raging conflict has taken its toll on investment and existing landscape, but that cannot be an infinite excuse.
Shabby roads, bad drainage system, no traffic signal system, poor traffic management, lack of trees, poor sewerage and solid waste management system - all reflect poorly on this city. The reason the city is so dusty or muddy is that its soily patches are not grassed.
It is not that some good things are not happening with Srinagar. The problem is that they are too little in comparison with what is going wrong. Today, if compared with other cities of its stature in poor countries in Africa and Asia, this city looks shabby, rather primitive. That is what I can say, at least, after having traveled across some three dozen countries in these continents over the last few years.
At its soul, Srinagar has a special distinction: despite being one of the world’s oldest surviving cities, it retains a traditional touch. Not many cities in the world have been able to retain their organic character due to the onslaught of modern architecture. Srinagar retains that character, by and large. Things are going wrong somewhere else.
Let us begin with some good things first. The Mufti government’s initiative of beautifying the banks of the River Jhelum from the Zero Bridge up to Maisuma seems to be the best and a well executed project the city has seen in decades. Looking at the work engineers have done, it looks something to feel proud about. J&K Bank’s development of the dilapidated Iqbal Park and Badam Wari are some other good examples. We must replicate this model of development and commercial use of public spaces in other places as well.
Similarly, maintenance of Eidgah in Srinagar, renovation of Aali Masjid, fencing of Malkhah graveyard, development of Nigeen Club, Children’s Park at Hazuribagh and the under-construction Zanana Park near Rajbagh are some other good things that have happened to the city.
Lately, the introduction of Kashmiri architecture – thanks to INTACH’s heritage and cultural crusade in Kashmir – to our new buildings also gets 100 out of 100. The Sangarmal Shopping Mall and the new Tourist Reception Centre are surely two landmarks which look very native, yet modern too.
When it comes to Kashmirisation of the Ganta Ghar at Lal Chowk – though much belated – it could have been better planned. Its Kashmiri look is good, but the manner Lal Chowk’s ‘beautification’ is being executed is cynical. It chocked a commercial space.
If the idea was beautification, why didn’t we plant Chinars there? Is there anything as beautiful in the city as the Residency Road ahead of the Polo View straddled with Chinars?
Lately, we are getting fond of using our knowledge of Computer-Aided Designing (CAD) in creating good architectures. But our own imagination and the artificial intelligence of our computers are missing an important point: that is the greenery.
Our native trees – poplars, willows, deodars etc – are almost extinct from our public spaces in Srinagar now. And what is creeping in is the rather non-native ‘cypress’ tree, which has become a darling of our engineering departments. The recent cypress tree plantation on the Bypass Road is a disaster.
When it comes to landscaping and tree plantation, PWD and R&B departments’ performance is dismal. There are many questions. Why isn’t there a dedicated maintenance wing for creating and maintaining tree cover in the city, which is professionally trained and managed? Why don’t we have a green cover under the Jehangir Chowk flyover? Why trees on other roads, barring the Airport Road, don’t grow and provide wide cover? Why does the Landscape Division of R&B trim trees, and make them never to come out of their cost-intensive steel cages?
The logic that trees are a public safety hazard in times of strong winds is outlandish. Trees have similar characteristics in every part of the world, but they don’t just merit to be cut. That is criminal. The city Bypass Road, Ali Jan Road, Soura-Pandach 90-feet Road, etc. need a tree cover badly.
Srinagar needs better road planning. The Rambagh-Exhibition Crossing fly-over, billed to ease traffic on the Airport Road, is going to be a logistical nightmare for at least a decade to come. Given our dismal project execution record – like the Hyderpora Bypass flyover example – it looks improbable that it will be done in time. The traffic mess it is going to create will disrupt Srinagar’s life badly.
Even as some disruption is inevitable, a project almost loses its utility if it throws life out of gear for long periods. Our project planning requires some cost-benefit auditing today, which must factor in lives lost in accidents, time loss in commutation and the financial loss which vehicles incur.
An alternative road along the Flood Channel from Tengpora Bypass to Jawahar Nagar and exploring another bridge near the Convent School could be given a thought. Other Srinagar roads also need attention.
A coordination mechanism – which is in-built in the administrative system - between various departments like UEED, Water Works Department, Power Department, ERA, PWD, SMC, etc. is long overdue. Without it our public utilities suffer badly. Investments often go down the drain.
A time has come when we also need to introduce a law on Floor Space Index (FSI) for Srinagar, and, may be, for other towns and cities of the state. The time of horizontal luxury for us is over.
We all know that horizontal expansion of buildings in the city is eating up green spaces at an alarming rate. Worse, they are consuming our flood plains too. The military garrisons, illegally occupying prime land in the city have to go too. Srinagar’s Master Plan 2000-2021 clearly identifies the Tattoo Ground and the Haft Chinar garrisons to be shifted to other locations. It is sad that despite having been given alternative land else, Army continues to hold these massive spaces. Government needs to act on these now.
Introduction of law on Floor Space Index will ease pressure on our lands. It is true that not all of our lands in Srinagar are fit for vertically expanded buildings due to high water table, but we do have elevated lands.
Srinagar’s solid waste management continues to be a disaster. Now that we couldn’t get an anticipated Asian Development Bank (ADB) loan for developing a proper solid waste management facility, we must look for alternatives. Srinagar deserves to be brought out from its primitiveness now.
(The columnist is Online Editor with Greater Kashmir/Kashmir Uzma. Email:arjimand@greaterkashmir.com)
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Kashmir’s Politics of Reservation
http://www.greaterkashmir.com/today/full_story.asp?Date=11_4_2010&ItemID=25&cat=17
What Inter-District Recruitment Bill (Amendment April 2010) means to Kashmir
Arjimand Hussain Talib
The cloud of confusion and suspense over the bill banning inter district recruitment is over. The battle lines are clearer today. So is whose heart lies where in the state’s power politics. The bill in its amended form – quietly decided by a handful of Congress and NC leaders - appears a recipe for political disaster for the state. Firstly, it is patently unjust for the state’s Muslims, particularly from the Kashmir Valley. Secondly, it is due to divide communities and groups on newer geographical lines. J&K’s political monolith and Muslim culture will stand defeated.
To understand this issue better, it is important not to see this bill in isolation. We need to go to the genesis of India’s reservation politics and the manner its introduction in J&K systematically divided this Muslim-majority state on linguistic, ethnic, caste and geographical lines. Deep divisions now manifest even at district, tehsil, village and mohalla levels. Lack of inter-district mobility is bound to create island mentalities of petty interests. This politics of engineered divisions needs to be questioned now.
As per the amended bill, the people with ‘Scheduled Castes’ (SC) status – who comprise of certain Hindu social groups in Jammu - will have eight percent reservation in all the state’s districts. Although there are no SCs in the 10 districts of Kashmir Valley, yet they will enjoy reservation here.
This is a classic case of the Congress, the BJP and the Panthers Party consolidating their vote banks in Hindu-dominated Jammu areas at the expense of Muslims here. It is sad National Conference became a party to this scheme. The problem is that this bill does not only mean a disadvantage to the state’s Muslims, it also raises serious questions on the very idea of reservation as applied to J&K state.
The fact is that caste is an institutionalized social order in the Hindu religion. According to ancient Hindu scriptures, such as ‘Manu Smriti’, caste is Varnasrama Dharma, which translates to "offices given according to class or occupation". Islam’s idea of universality, as we know, does not differentiate human race based on any such differences. Reservation, as such, is an anti-thesis to Islamic principles of human equality and equal opportunities. As such, it should never have been applied to J&K state in the first instance.
Ever since 1947, India’s judiciary has been averse to some aspects of reservation, which it saw in contravention to the principle of equal rights as enshrined in the India’s constitution. Supreme Court of India held that caste cannot be the sole criterion for determining whether a person is backward within the meaning of article 15 and 16. Jawaharlal Nehru, the then PM of India, brought in the First Amendment Act in 1951 which read “Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.” The same was applied to J&K state.
The government of India-appointed First Backward Classes Commission (Kakasaheb Kelekar Commission) in 1953 listed 2399 castes as ‘Socially and Educationally Backward Classes’ in India. Subsequently, in 1956, New Delhi asked J&K government to appoint its own committee to do the same job. The result was startling. The committee reserved 30 percent avenues in education and government jobs for SCs and STs from Hindu community in the state. The then J&K government under a Government Order (GO) took to another extreme: it reserved 50 percent vacancies for Muslims of Kashmir, 40 percent for Jammu Hindus and 10 percent for Kashmiri Pandits. But the decision was intrinsically flawed: it was done on communal lines, which was antithetical to India’s Constitution.
The Supreme Court of India subsequently struck down this GO when a Kashmiri Pandit Triloki Nath Tiku filed a petition before it in Triloki Nath Tiku vs State of J&K AIR (1969) case.
Based on 1967 Gajendragadkar Commissions recommendations (formed on New Delhi’s advice), J&K government in 1969 formed the Backward Classes Committee headed by Justice J N Wazir. On Wazir Committee’s advice, J&K government framed the J&K Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (Reservation Rules) 1970, which provided for 8 per cent reservations for SCs and 42 per cent for backward classes, including 2 per cent reserved for Ladakh District.
As the Supreme Court disapproved with this reservation norm, J&K government again constituted a committee with Justice Dr. A. S. Anand as its chairman in September 1976. Justice Anand’s report in September 1977 recommended a new reservation structure: Scheduled Castes – 8 %, Gujjar and Bakerwal - 4%, Other Social Castes - 2%, District Leh - 2%, District Kargil - 2%, other Backward Areas - 20%, Areas near the Actual Line of Control - 3%, Children of Freedom Fighters - 2%, Children of Permanent Residents Defence Personnel - 3%, Candidates Possessing Outstanding Proficiency in Sports - 3%.
This atrocious system of reservation was followed by recommendations of the Mandal Commission in 1980. Surprisingly, the commission in its report identified 63 castes/communities as ‘Socially and Educationally Backward Classes’ (SEBC) in J&K state and recommended 27% reservation for them. Since the OBC reservation in its recommendations was based on caste rather than socio-economic conditions, the same got applied to J&K as well.
In year 2000, the Indra Shawney v Union of India case resulted in something interesting. Supreme Court ruled that in order to declare any section of society as OBC or SEBC there has to be a full fledged committee report which would ascertain the average backwardness in terms of education and social mobility of that community.
Some states have done something more interesting. For example, West Bengal introduced the ‘Creamy layer exclusion’ system – meaning once a person gets the benefit of quota, subsequent generation of the immediate family will not get benefit. It also employs ‘Economic basis of exclusion’ – meaning only those families having an income of less than 4.5 lakhs per annum would be brought under the quota.
In this backdrop J&K state stands at a crossroads today. It has to make a choice: either to live with this slide or take a longer term vision for its future based on inclusiveness, meritocracy and competitiveness. One of the reasons that the state’s governance remains in a shambles is that reservation-based official machinery is dogged by mediocrity. Although this system is a handy tool of maintaining political order and conflict management, it also underlines how precarious our political situation is.
At the end of the day, we are again confronted with the same question – can we afford to live so many divisions? What about a common future of the state based on equal opportunities?
Feedback at arjimand@greaterkashmir.com
What Inter-District Recruitment Bill (Amendment April 2010) means to Kashmir
Arjimand Hussain Talib
The cloud of confusion and suspense over the bill banning inter district recruitment is over. The battle lines are clearer today. So is whose heart lies where in the state’s power politics. The bill in its amended form – quietly decided by a handful of Congress and NC leaders - appears a recipe for political disaster for the state. Firstly, it is patently unjust for the state’s Muslims, particularly from the Kashmir Valley. Secondly, it is due to divide communities and groups on newer geographical lines. J&K’s political monolith and Muslim culture will stand defeated.
To understand this issue better, it is important not to see this bill in isolation. We need to go to the genesis of India’s reservation politics and the manner its introduction in J&K systematically divided this Muslim-majority state on linguistic, ethnic, caste and geographical lines. Deep divisions now manifest even at district, tehsil, village and mohalla levels. Lack of inter-district mobility is bound to create island mentalities of petty interests. This politics of engineered divisions needs to be questioned now.
As per the amended bill, the people with ‘Scheduled Castes’ (SC) status – who comprise of certain Hindu social groups in Jammu - will have eight percent reservation in all the state’s districts. Although there are no SCs in the 10 districts of Kashmir Valley, yet they will enjoy reservation here.
This is a classic case of the Congress, the BJP and the Panthers Party consolidating their vote banks in Hindu-dominated Jammu areas at the expense of Muslims here. It is sad National Conference became a party to this scheme. The problem is that this bill does not only mean a disadvantage to the state’s Muslims, it also raises serious questions on the very idea of reservation as applied to J&K state.
The fact is that caste is an institutionalized social order in the Hindu religion. According to ancient Hindu scriptures, such as ‘Manu Smriti’, caste is Varnasrama Dharma, which translates to "offices given according to class or occupation". Islam’s idea of universality, as we know, does not differentiate human race based on any such differences. Reservation, as such, is an anti-thesis to Islamic principles of human equality and equal opportunities. As such, it should never have been applied to J&K state in the first instance.
Ever since 1947, India’s judiciary has been averse to some aspects of reservation, which it saw in contravention to the principle of equal rights as enshrined in the India’s constitution. Supreme Court of India held that caste cannot be the sole criterion for determining whether a person is backward within the meaning of article 15 and 16. Jawaharlal Nehru, the then PM of India, brought in the First Amendment Act in 1951 which read “Nothing in this article or in clause (2) of article 29 shall prevent the State from making any special provision for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes.” The same was applied to J&K state.
The government of India-appointed First Backward Classes Commission (Kakasaheb Kelekar Commission) in 1953 listed 2399 castes as ‘Socially and Educationally Backward Classes’ in India. Subsequently, in 1956, New Delhi asked J&K government to appoint its own committee to do the same job. The result was startling. The committee reserved 30 percent avenues in education and government jobs for SCs and STs from Hindu community in the state. The then J&K government under a Government Order (GO) took to another extreme: it reserved 50 percent vacancies for Muslims of Kashmir, 40 percent for Jammu Hindus and 10 percent for Kashmiri Pandits. But the decision was intrinsically flawed: it was done on communal lines, which was antithetical to India’s Constitution.
The Supreme Court of India subsequently struck down this GO when a Kashmiri Pandit Triloki Nath Tiku filed a petition before it in Triloki Nath Tiku vs State of J&K AIR (1969) case.
Based on 1967 Gajendragadkar Commissions recommendations (formed on New Delhi’s advice), J&K government in 1969 formed the Backward Classes Committee headed by Justice J N Wazir. On Wazir Committee’s advice, J&K government framed the J&K Scheduled Castes and Backward Classes (Reservation Rules) 1970, which provided for 8 per cent reservations for SCs and 42 per cent for backward classes, including 2 per cent reserved for Ladakh District.
As the Supreme Court disapproved with this reservation norm, J&K government again constituted a committee with Justice Dr. A. S. Anand as its chairman in September 1976. Justice Anand’s report in September 1977 recommended a new reservation structure: Scheduled Castes – 8 %, Gujjar and Bakerwal - 4%, Other Social Castes - 2%, District Leh - 2%, District Kargil - 2%, other Backward Areas - 20%, Areas near the Actual Line of Control - 3%, Children of Freedom Fighters - 2%, Children of Permanent Residents Defence Personnel - 3%, Candidates Possessing Outstanding Proficiency in Sports - 3%.
This atrocious system of reservation was followed by recommendations of the Mandal Commission in 1980. Surprisingly, the commission in its report identified 63 castes/communities as ‘Socially and Educationally Backward Classes’ (SEBC) in J&K state and recommended 27% reservation for them. Since the OBC reservation in its recommendations was based on caste rather than socio-economic conditions, the same got applied to J&K as well.
In year 2000, the Indra Shawney v Union of India case resulted in something interesting. Supreme Court ruled that in order to declare any section of society as OBC or SEBC there has to be a full fledged committee report which would ascertain the average backwardness in terms of education and social mobility of that community.
Some states have done something more interesting. For example, West Bengal introduced the ‘Creamy layer exclusion’ system – meaning once a person gets the benefit of quota, subsequent generation of the immediate family will not get benefit. It also employs ‘Economic basis of exclusion’ – meaning only those families having an income of less than 4.5 lakhs per annum would be brought under the quota.
In this backdrop J&K state stands at a crossroads today. It has to make a choice: either to live with this slide or take a longer term vision for its future based on inclusiveness, meritocracy and competitiveness. One of the reasons that the state’s governance remains in a shambles is that reservation-based official machinery is dogged by mediocrity. Although this system is a handy tool of maintaining political order and conflict management, it also underlines how precarious our political situation is.
At the end of the day, we are again confronted with the same question – can we afford to live so many divisions? What about a common future of the state based on equal opportunities?
Feedback at arjimand@greaterkashmir.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)