NREGA secretary of Yankhum Village, Tsenthungo Kikon, has refuted to a news item which appeared in a local daily on June 16 on the heading “ChankaVillage refutes news item” issued by Nkhum Kikon, chairman, Chanka village.
According to a press statement issued by the NREGA secretary, the boundary between Yankhum and Chanka village had already been settled with the erection of a stone pillar by the land owner of Mekokla village in presence of the Lotha Hoho, district GBs Association and Area GBs on March 20, 2006, and corresponding to it, the DBs court judiciously tracked the case and settled on January 29 this year.
Questioning the chairman of Chanka village at which point of time Yankhum village forcibly erected boundary pillars against the will of Chanka village, the NREGA secretary, said the speculative finger pointing against Yankhum village of forcibly erecting the boundary pillars could actually termed as a grave crime in the eye of the law as it was bereft of any substantial evidence in its contention for which it would accept the verdict in true spirit and also desist from indulging in mudslinging against Yankhum village.
It said the notification of claims and objections issued by then Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, B. Tawang Konyak, inviting neighbouring villages to raise objections within 30 days on January 25, 2007, has unambiguously mentioned only neighbouring villages which included Mekokla, Akuk Old and New, Tssori Old and Litchu Yan but even after expiry of the stipulated period, none of the villages filed any objection and subsequently the DC scrupulously examined and confirmed all relevant papers/documents submitted by Yankhum village as per the criteria laid down by the government.
The statement also mentioned that the DC after verifying the matter had processed the file and kept the papers for recommendation to the commissioner but during the ensuing period he was transferred for which the files were handed over to his reliever, A. Woben Lotha, the then Deputy commissioner, therefore, the accusative statement of Chanka village that B. Tawang Konyak, the then DC did not forward any recommendation but kept the matter closed was a blatant lie which tried to tarnish the good office of Deputy Commissioner.
Mentioning that the former DC, A. Woben Lotha, meticulously verified all relevant files and documents from the concerned branch as per criteria laid down by the government for recognition and de-recognition of a new village, the release also said that Woben Lotha had forwarded the same to the Commissioner, Nagaland, for onward submission to the Government for necessary action for which a copy of DC’s recommendation to the Commissioner, Nagaland would be endorsed only to the concerned village (Yankhum) and not necessarily to the entire neighbouring villages or to all villages in Nagaland.
Further, the release added that leveling of unsubstantiated charged against the then DC’s action as ‘something behind the screen’ was an audacious indulgence of “assassinating someone’s character.”
Meanwhile, in regard to obtaining ‘No Objection Certificate’ from Tssori Old and Litchu Yan by bypassing of nearest Chanka village, the two villages have been included as neighbouring villages as per the claims and objections notice invited by the then DC Wokha and also added that No Objection Certificate (NOC) has been obtained from all concerned villages in the earlier part of 2004, prior to the approval of Chanka village.
It further said the Deputy Commissioner, Wokha, would not simply and blindly recommend a new village without fulfilling all the requisite documents along with certificates obtained from the concerned neighbouring villages and departments as per the criteria laid done by the Government.
NREGA secretary, was also of the view that instead of spreading litany of uncorroborated propagandas, the chairman of Chanka village should take a look into the valid documents and certificates registered in their respective departments and if not satisfied should approach the land owners for necessary information to settle the unwarranted boundary dispute.