Farmers have total ownership of their cattle
The current tragedy of this country is those who are not domain experts have begun to give expert opinions on every issue. Those who do not even have primary knowledge of science speak about science, politicians talk about economics and street rowdies speak about dharma and culture with clubs in their hands.
RBI is the best example of how politicians with no economic knowledge have messed with the country’s systems and damaged it to a large extent. Supreme Court gives out contradicting verdicts because anti-constitutional elements decide who should disseminate justice.
Saffron-flaunting men like Yogi who do not have any experience in farming or cattle rearing, are deciding on who the cattle should be sold to, and how one would take care of them. As a result of this, dairy farming has collapsed in the rural areas and schools are turning into cow shelters.
The result of priestly class’s conspiracy to take dairy farming into their own hands by turning it into a dharmic task than an economic option, is showing on the country’s psyche. The Yogi government has been creating baseless schemes to protect the cows such as cow ambulance, cow shelters in schools, cow protection forces manned by goondas, etc.
Cattle rearing is on a downhill in Uttar Pradesh owing to the government taking away the rights of farmers who cared for these cattle. They are getting transported to slaughter houses on the sly. The cattle that are found on the streets are being tethered at schools and hospitals.
Uttar Pradesh government is basically concerned about cattle on the street instead of caring for people and their welfare. All agrarian aspects are linked to one another. Since cattle rearing and agriculture went hand in hand owing to dependency on tilling, the animals were domesticized.
The cattle waste was the best fertilizer for the land. The dung, the urine everything enriched the nutrients in the land. The returns from this could help farmers balance their maintenance costs. Now with cultivable land being less, cattle have less utility for such purposes any more since most of the agricultural activity happens based on machines and automobiles.
Just the way as the farmers were part of agriculture, even the beef consumers contributed their bit to complete the food chain and keep the economy going. The cattle that have outlived their time and utility are being given up for beef consumers.
This serves two purposes. One would be the expenses part would come down where the cattle was to be cared for even when there are no definite returns, and the second was an economical benefit that involved selling them. This money would be used to buy new cattle, and the business would grow further expanding the scope of farming.
More than this, those who worship cows are not too keen on rearing them or taking care of them. The farmers who rear cattle worship them annually as part of their paying respect to the animals that help their lives.
Cattle, to farmers, are like currency. If there are two extra cattle, the money one gets by selling them would be used for a marriage or house maintenance or anything else that would serve the purpose for the moment. This is a constant economic activity. Dairy farming is turning upside down with priestly class claiming this activity is more of a devotion than of economic one.
The farmers who were at the forefront had to move back, owing to the goondas of Sangh Parivar who took the centre stage. The Gau Rakshaks now decide who the cattle would be sold to, even beyond its owner. The act brought about by the government against selling the cattle is more like second round of demonetization.
Ironically, no one has to take care of these cattle that had gone beyond utility. They would have turned into food and provided nourishment to the society. This would have ensured nutrition to the poor.
Owing to this government policy, the poor are deprived of nutritious food. And the farmers lost the income they’d get by selling the aged cattle. All these expenses are now on the government now. The money that could have been spent for people, schools and public health and other supporting systems had to be used for creating facilities for the cattle and failed even in that.
Many cattle died owing to bad maintenance in Gaushalas which turned profitable to others, but not to the poor farmer who took care of the cattle. Dairy farming thus suffered a huge blow.
The government needs to wake up now at least and encourage beef consumption and provide impetus to dairy farming. Cattle should be declared the property of farmers who rear them, in clear and loud messaging. The money that’s being spent on Gaushala should be used for improvement of schools and hospitals. This way, both the farmers and cattle would be spared.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Justice Nagarathna calls for creation of judicial reforms commission to reduce pendency in courts
Bengaluru (PTI): Justice B V Nagarathna of the Supreme Court on Saturday called for the creation of a judicial reforms commission to reduce mounting pendency in the courts, saying systemic incentives across stakeholders were contributing to delays in justice delivery.
She was speaking at the Supreme Court Bar Association's (SCBA) first National Conference on the theme "Reimagining judicial governance: strengthening institutions for democratic justice" here.
Nagarathna, who was part of the panel session addressing "From Pendency to Prompt Justice: Rethinking Justice Delivery in Indian Courts," said, this reforms commission must have membership not only from the judiciary of the Supreme Court, the High Court, as well as the District judiciary, but also have members from the Bar, Attorney General, Solicitor General, and also certain members representing the Bar at the institutional level, such as the Bar President, and from the government side to enable an inter-institutional dialogue on reducing pendency.
She reflected that, from the point of view of various stakeholders, a litigant gains from the status quo, to proceed to prolong proceedings.
ALSO READ: A political legacy, but no win yet: Padmaja Venugopal''s new fight in Thrissur
"A lawyer or an advocate loves adjournments and postponement because he/she benefits from per appearance and extended timelines. A government department reduces bureaucratic risk by appealing rather than accepting defeat.
"A judge, and particularly a trial judge, is always acting with caution because he/she is confronted with appellate reversal, and therefore he/she prefers procedural caution rather than having an aggressive docket control. Each of these decisions is individually rational, but how does it help the system? It is only leading to systemic delay," she added.
In order to break this equilibrium, Justice Nagarathna said that what is required is institutional interventions through a judicial commission to reduce pendency, rather than merely exhorting better conduct from judges, adherence to procedural timelines, asking advocates not to seek adjournments, urging the government to reduce litigation, or expecting courts to function round the clock and judges not to take leave.
On pendency, the judge questioned the inclusion of defective filings in court statistics, suggesting that such cases should not be counted until they are procedurally ready for hearing.
She also underlined the role of the government as the "largest generator of litigation", noting that officials tend to file appeals to avoid scrutiny, even in cases where disputes could be settled earlier. This, she said, results in cases travelling through multiple judicial levels unnecessarily.
"The government publicly expresses concern about judicial backlog, while simultaneously feeding that backlog through relentless litigation," she observed.
Justice Nagarathna further claimed judicial capacity is constrained by inadequate public investment, including delays in appointment of judges, lack of infrastructure and insufficient use of technology.
Among the measures suggested, she called for improved case management, curbs on unnecessary adjournments, adoption of technology, prioritisation of cases, promotion of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms, and creation of specialised benches.
She also urged advocates to adhere to professional and ethical standards, litigants to avoid frivolous appeals, and the government to adopt a practical litigation policy and ensure timely funding and appointments in the judiciary.
