Dimapur, Jan 2 (MExN): The three Dimapur Municipal Councilors who recently expressed displeasure over change of tenure of DMC toll and fee lease contract appeals to Dimapur Deputy Commissioner, to immediately intervene and stop collection of toll tax before expiry of the specified period. The three councilors – in reaction to a new item (The Morung Express, January 1 edition) where DMC chief Tovihoto Ayemi ‘rubbished’ the disgruntlement that tenure for lease contract was changed from financial year (April 1 to March 31) into calendar year (January 1 to December 31) – pointed out that three months more remains and for double enhancement of taxes in all entry gates in the name of DMC till the State Government approves the same.
The three members, H Hokivi Chishi (ward 19) Ghoikhu Kits (ward 20) and T Vikheho Zhimo (ward 17) in a rejoinder strongly reaffirmed their stand that changing the contract tenure three months before expiry of the specified period, even though the Leasees (contractors) have paid for one full year, is “absolutely cheating the innocent public under the pretext of board meeting and the decision taken is illegal and unprocedural (sic)”. Justifying their stand, the fol1owing queries were put to the DMC Chairperson: Whether or not distribution of toll and fee before the expiry of specified period three months has legal right; can the “pretext of board meeting without agenda and arbitrary decision” suppress the legal rights and procedures; for any establishment, institution, Government, civic body, or any office, financial matters assume highest importance. So, whether or not the issue was put up in the agenda of the board meeting held December 22; If it was not in the agenda, why was it discussed and why was resolution/decision passed; what is mandatory to change the tenure into calendar year etc.
According to the Government of India policy, any financial transaction is conducted under the financial year which is officially declared and recognized as April 1 to March31. So how can this financial year be changed into calendar year, the councilors asked questioning if any meeting was convened with the leasees concerned. If meeting was held, why the entire board was not intimated or informed “since this matter concerns the welfare of the entire DMC and not any individual person” or “is it that only the Chairperson alone is empowered or authorized to take decision with the leasees/ allottees?”
The rejoinder stated that whether leasees agree or not, no leasee is appointed as permanent and no board meeting or arbitrary decision under the pretext of board meetings can bypass legal rights and procedures. Further, the DMC had collected allotment fees from the allottees for construction of a multi-storied marketing complex surrounding the Durga Mandir. “But instead of constructing the proposed complex, the project has now been diverted towards construction of a parking zone. Under what circumstances or condition can this be done when the allotees have paid the allotment fees in compliance with all the terms and conditions. Is this not cheating the innocent public under the pretext of board meeting?” the councilors wondered.
It also mentioned that toll and fee have been doubled in all the entry gates. For enhancement of taxes, the normal procedure is that DMC has to request the State Government through the DC, Dimapur, who forwards the proposal to the Administrative Cell of the Home Department, which has direct control over municipalities and town councils. Only when the cell approves/endorses the proposal and forwards back through the DC, then only can the DMC enforce the new tax rate.
“Without this, no such order/decision can come into force. We would also like to remind that if the procedures are allowed to be bypassed or practiced illegally under the pretext of board meeting that too without agenda and without the approval of the State Government, then even in the future, the authorities concerned would be unable to control such unprocedural and illegal practices which would be highly detrimental to the well-being of the society” the rejoinder added.
