Chandigarh: Senior Shiromani Akali Dal (SAD) leader Bikram Singh Majithia on Thursday condemned the dictatorial decision of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) led central government to weaken Punjab’s hold on Chandigarh by abolishing the 60:40 ratio vis a vis recruitment of senior medical officers in the UT health department.
Reacting to a notice by the Health department in which the recruitment rules have been changed, Mr Bikram Majithia said “the UT administration has taken upon itself to change the rules for recruitment to deny deputation rights to Punjab government officers in the union territory”.
Terming this decision as discriminatory, Mr Majithia said “Chandigarh was carved out from the villages of Punjab. Moreover the union ministry of Home Affairs had issued a memorandum on November 4, 1966 that all posts in the UT be filled as per 60:40 ratios between Punjab and Haryana respectively”.
He said this was done so that the status of Chandigarh as the prospective capital of Punjab was not disturbed keeping in mind that the current administrative arrangements were only of a temporary nature till the transfer of Chandigarh to Punjab actually materialized.
Terming the entire move as a deliberate attempt to weaken Punjab’s inalienable right over Chandigarh, Mr Majitha said “earlier also an AGMUT cadre was created to transfer all IAS and police officers from the Union territories of Delhi, Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Daman and Diu, Lakshadweep and Dadra and Nagar Haveli”.
He said now this move had been extended to the Health department with recruitment rules changed for recruitment of senior most doctors including the Principal Medical Officer, Medical Superintendent, Senior Medical Officer, District Family Welfare Officer, Dental Surgeon, Planning Officer and Nursing Superintendent.
Demanding that the health department notification be withdrawn immediately, Mr Majithia also asked Punjab BJP president Sunil Jakhar to clear his stand on the issue. “Mr Jakhar should tell whether he thinks Chandigarh is a part of Punjab or not and if so whether he will demand revocation of the notification on change in service rules”.