The see-saw game of discrimination between the Jammu region and the State Government is as old as the independence of India. The common factor of this melodrama is that neither Jammu region has been able to support its claim of discrimination with non-violent mass uprising nor has the Government been able to provide conclusive and decisive proof of it maintaining parity among the regions and sub-regions of the State in terms of plan allocations and other developmental enterprises. In this game of accusations and counter accusation, Jammu leadership of whatever hue it may be, become the laughing stock. How strange that Jammu regional leadership cannot forge unity on a common issue of allocation of funds to the region on the basis of justice and equity. They are unable to rise above party politics and personal likes and dislikes and speak in unison in favour of the people of the region. After all we have the democratically elected Government in the State. Agreed that numerically the valley sends more MLAs to the assembly than Jammu region does but population alone cannot be the only criterion for vast gaps in allocations. Economic, educational and physical backwardness have to be the main criteria for allocating funds for development.
Whenever hard pressed in the past on the issue of discrimination, the Government, at the end of the day, comes out with statistics which show that there is no discrimination. The data provided by the Government is placed on the table of the house. With this the opposition is silenced even if takes some time tor their murmur to subside. Nobody challenges the statistics with dependable counter statement. This is possible only when thorough research and study are conducted on the issue item by item and over a long period of time. No researcher has so far produced any credible record in this connection.
Here we have the official data of the Planning and Development Department about the additional funds released under District Sector during 2012-13 and 2013-14 (ending January). It reveals that during these two years, districts of Kashmir valley received a total of Rs 1429.26 lakh additional funds while as merely an amount of Rs 446.96 lakh was provided under the head “additional” to the districts of Jammu region. Plan funds are allocated to districts on the basis of various parameters. These could be like geographical area, population of the district, level of backwardness/availability of infrastructure in the district, requirement as assessed and projected by the line departments/District Development Commissioners etc. Two points need to be elucidated in this context. One is that these parameters will admit variation in results obtained and that will naturally have bearing on the amount of funds allocated. The second point is have the additional allocations been made on the basis of settled criterion or is it arbitrary. Now in terms of area, Ladakh is the largest district and in terms of backwardness Ladakh, Kargil, Poonch, Rajouri, Doda, Kishtwar, Reasi, Ramban and Kupwara are among the backward districts. Obviously these districts should have been favoured with more allocations whether normal or additional. Incidentally except Kargil and Ladakh, all the other above mentioned five districts fall in the category of backward districts of Jammu region. The question, therefore, arises why during 2012-13 financial year the districts of Kashmir valley were provided Rs 1047.82 lakh additional funds while as Jammu region’s districts received only Rs 334.22 lakh additional funds. It is one third of what Kashmir valley received. What justification is there for the Government providing no additional allocations to Rajouri, Kishtwar, Doda, Kathua and Samba districts, all falling in Jammu region whereas substantial additional allocations were made to all districts except Kupwara in Kashmir region.
We have full district-wise details of these allocations provided by the Planning and Development Department. Comparative study brings us to the conclusion that either parameters for allocation were not strictly adhere to or were intentionally ignored. Government’s approach was unfair, which in simpler terminology means discrimination.
It is the responsibility of political leadership of Jammu to take up this issue with the Government. It is irrespective of party affiliations and this is an issue that concerns the people of the State and of Jammu region, whom we do not divide on the basis of party politics. Instead of trying to bring the onus to the doorsteps of the Government, hold Jammu political leadership responsible for allowing the Government to adopt discriminative policy towards Jammu region.
Trending Now
E-Paper
Follow our WhatsApp channel