People's Democracy

(Weekly Organ of the Communist Party of India (Marxist)


No. 32

August 08, 2010



Subodh Kant Sahay Misleading People


THROUGH a statement issued from Ranchi on August 4, the Jharkhand state committee of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) has criticised the union minister Subodh Kant Sahay for the misleading the people of the state.


The CPI(M) statement, issued by its state secretary J S Majumdar, pointed to the media reports quoting the union minister of state, Subodh Kant Sahayís contention that on July 30, 2010, the union cabinet has already taken a decision on certain amendments to the Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act 2001. Reportedly, the amendment would be for including 50 percent reservation for women and dereserving the deputy chairperson posts in the three tier panchayats. The CPI(M) has described the ministerís contention as misleading and meant for cheap publicity.


The CPI(M) has pointed out that it was the Shibu Soren government that on April 13, 2010 passed an ordinance amending the Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act 2001, notified the same in extraordinary gazette on April 15, 2010 and enforced the amended act on the same day. The amendment includes a provision for 50 per cent reservation for women.


During the Babulal Marandiís government in Jharkhand in October 2003, the then Jharkhand assembly had passed an amendment to the Jharkhand Panchayat Raj Act 2001 dereserving the posts of Upmukhiyas, Uppramukhs and Upadhyakhs of three tier panchayats. It was then notified in an extraordinary gazette. Why again was such an amendment brought in the ordinance of April 13 2010 is unclear and the state administration owes an explanation to the people.


As per the constitution of India, it is a statutory requirement that, as it is now presidentís rule in Jharkhand, the Jharkhand governmentís April 13 ordinance has to be routinely adopted by the parliament before October 13. The copy of the Jharkhand ordinance was already circulated among the members of the parliament in early July. The union cabinet had nothing to decide on these amendments in its July 30 meeting, as wrongly made out by Subodh Kant Sahay.




The CPI(M) has dubbed the Congress partyís poser of protest against the governor is a cover-up exercise and aimed to mislead the people on the partyís proxy government in Jharkhand. By its own public admission on July 15, the future of Jharkhand is being decided at the Congress partyís headquarters in Delhi. The Congress in Jharkhand is vocal against the Maoist threats to its leaders them, but is silent about the continuing murder of CPI(M) cadres in West Bengal by the Maoists whom one union cabinet minister is patronising.




ON August 3, the CPI(M)ís Jharkhand state secretary, J S Majumdar, wrote to the chief election commissioner (CEC) of India once again, demanding to that he take suo moto notice and cognisance of wide media report naming persons and details of monetary deals for the Rajya Sabha election in Jharkhand, to hold an inquiry by an appropriate agency and to punish the bribe takers and givers. If a CBI inquiry could be held on the defence deal after the Tehelka sting operation, why an inquiry could not be held on a sting operation on the election deal, he wrote. It is the responsibility of the Election Commission of India to ensure free and fair poll, he pointed out in the letter.

In this regard, Majumdar referred to his earlier correspondence, between him and the Election Commission since June 8, 2010, on the alleged corruption in Rajya Sabha election.


Majumdar also said the concerned political parties owe an explanation to the people of Jharkhand about the conduct of their named MLAs, failing which it would be construed that such deals had had their partiesí concurrence.


The CPI(M) has been demanding dissolution of the state assembly and conduct of early assembly elections as the major political parties could not form a government. The CPI(M) says it is imperative in order to avoid corrupt deals and horse trading. At least now, the governor should recommend for dissolution of the assembly and holding of early election in Jharkhand. Unfortunately, it recalled, the statutory resolution on imposition of presidentís rule in Jharkhand was passed in the parliament without discussion. (INN)