Trials and tribulations
IT is good that the recent plainspeaking by the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India has galvanised the system to focus on the plight of those who have been at the receiving end of delayed justice.

Recycled commitments
WHEN was the last time the ruling party at the Centre proposed the introduction of a Bill on a subject not discussed before?

Jackboot justice
ALTHOUGH Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is, generally speaking, only reaping what he has sown in the polity, economy and judiciary of his country, one cannot help feeling distressed at his plight as a citizen.

INDIA, USA AND THE CTBT
Right time to take a decision
by Inder Malhotra
AFTER its rejection by the US Senate, the CTBT ought not to have been a problem between America and India. But, unfortunately, that is not how things work in international affairs, especially where the sole superpower is engaged in a single-minded pursuit of an objective.

Israeli-Syrian discord: a role for India
by Dharmvir Gehlaut
ALTHOUGH India and Syria have shared close ties in the past, the 1990s have seen India entering into a new alliance with Israel.

Pioneer of higher technical education
A DOYEN of civil engineering, Prof Rajinder Nath Dogra, a former Chief Engineer of Capitol Project, and founder-Director of the IIT, New Delhi, who died in Chandigarh on November 27 at the age of 91, was a pioneer of higher technical education, a technocrat par excellence besides being an enlightened personality.

A holy deadlock
by D. K. Mukerjee
“DISPLAY your wife’s photograph into life size in your office. You won’t make the mistake that Clinton did” was a catchy advertisement inserted in a newspaper by the owner of some photo studio claiming to possess the latest technology. This was read out to me by my better half one fine morning. I explained that this could never be implemented in government-run offices where the yearly calendars with the figure of the head of the democratically elected political master are invariably displayed.

75 Years Ago

December 9, 1924
Round Table Conference
A LONDON cable to The Bengalee says that “it is stated in the Sunday press that an idea which attracts Lord Birkenhead very much is concerned with the calling of a conference to explore the possibilities of agreement on the Indian constitutional changes”.

Trials and tribulations

IT is good that the recent plainspeaking by the Prime Minister and the Chief Justice of India has galvanised the system to focus on the plight of those who have been at the receiving end of delayed justice. In fact, it is the Chief Justice, Mr Justice A.S.Anand, himself who has highlighted the plight of an accused charged with murder, who has been in the custody of the West Bengal police for the past 37 years! Implicit in this revelation is a strong criticism of the government. The alarming thing is that such long incarceration is nothing exceptional. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of such delays which all but defeat the purpose of dispensing justice. The Chief Justice of India has also cited the cases of a small boy who was in custody for long for allegedly stealing three packets of cigarettes, just because there was no one to bail him out, and that of some persons who were arrested for gambling and a sum of one rupee and 10 paise was recovered from their possession! That is why out of the total jail population of 2,57,000 prisoners, as many as 1,82,000 — a full 73 per cent — are undertrial prisoners, many of whom have been booked for petty offences. Once they are in, they have to await trial in a never-ending queue, irrespective of the gravity of their crime or even their apparent innocence. Whenever the injustice of this all is brought out, there is a concerted effort to blame someone else for it. While the government — through various ministers earlier and now even the Prime Minister — has accused the judiciary of progressing too slowly, the latter has countered that the government has never shown any urgency about filling many of the posts that have been lying vacant. Around 1000 posts in the lower courts and 154 posts of Judges in the High Courts have been lying vacant for long. Moreover, the governments themselves are the biggest litigants.

While all these factors have individually and collectively affected the work, these are really none of the concern of the common man. All that he wants to know is the date on which he will finally get justice. If it has to be delayed month after month, year after year and even decade after decade as in the case of the murder accused from West Bengal, his faith in the system is bound to be shaken. This feeling of helplessness spawns greater lawlessness, vitiating the entire atmosphere. Ironically, when some insurgents in the North-East were asked as to why they were waging war against their own State, many of them replied that they were disillusioned with the judicial system which reached a final conclusion after decades. In contrast, their own local judicial system functioned much more quickly and effectively. It is this disillusion which fans the embers of separatism at times. What needs to be kept in mind that having a large paraphernalia is not the same thing as adequate dispensation of justice. A system is only a means and not an end. The sooner it is reoriented to the aspirations of the people, the better it would be.

Recycled commitments

WHEN was the last time the ruling party at the Centre proposed the introduction of a Bill on a subject not discussed before? Today’s newspapers look like carbon copies of the editions published three years ago. Why? Because the issues which should have become part of history remain in the news for a variety of reasons. Neither the Opposition parties nor the Treasury Benches seem to worry much about the cost of indecision and delay in clearing pending Bills. Whether it is the creation of Prasar Bharati or reservation of seats for women in Parliament and assemblies or reorganisation of states people are being made to live on false hope. When the Opposition decides to cooperate in “the national interest” the result is the easy passage of the IRDA Bill in both Houses of Parliament. But such cooperation between political parties belonging to rival camps as resulted in the passing of the IRDA Bill is rare. Against this backdrop the Union Cabinet’s decision to introduce fresh legislation for the creation of Vananchal (out of the territory in Bihar), Chhatisgarh (Madhya Pradesh) and Uttarakhand (Uttar Pradesh) is not likely to make even the supporters of the measure jump with joy. In Bihar, Mr Laloo Prasad Yadav, whose political fortunes appear to be in a state of free fall, has decided to oppose “tooth and nail” the attempt to “divide and rule Bihar by the political enemies of social justice and secularism”. His Rashtriya Janata Dal may have been decimated in the Lok Sabha elections but has not been totally destroyed. By raising the issue of “united Bihar” he hopes to add political miles to his shrinking base in the state of which he was once the acknowledged uncrowned king.

In UP, too, the agitation for the creation of a separate hill state has forced the political leadership to make many false starts. But the fact of the matter is that except for the people of Kumaon and Garhwal no non-hill political party is serious about the creation of Uttarakhand. However, this time a rejuvenated Uttarakhand Kranti Dal led by a highly respected regional leader, Mr Diwakar Bhatt, may just about succeed in calling the bluff of the parties making promises without actually delivering. The situation in Madhya Pradesh is different. Here both the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Congress have committed themselves to the creation of Chhatisgarh as a separate state. The delay in delivering has something to do with who should take the credit for getting for the simple tribal people their promised land. However, if the leaders in Bihar, Madhya Pradesh and UP really care for an all-round development of the areas which are backward because of political neglect, they should not oppose the creation of new states. They should realise that the smaller a state the easier it is for the bureaucracy and the political leadership to plan its balanced growth. Himachal Pradesh and Haryana may not have made the kind of progress they have made had they remained part of an administratively unmanageable Punjab. In fact, a case can be made out for further reducing the size of UP, Bihar and Madhya Pradesh by creating some more administratively viable states.

Jackboot justice

ALTHOUGH Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif is, generally speaking, only reaping what he has sown in the polity, economy and judiciary of his country, one cannot help feeling distressed at his plight as a citizen. As if reminding Chief Executive General Pervez Musharraf that he had suspended the Constitution but had not extinguished the fundamental rights, Mr Nawaz Sharif narrated on Tuesday his predicament since his ouster and arrest on October 12. He was making a statement before a 12-member Supreme Court Bench headed by Chief Justice Syed-uz-Zaman Siddiqi in Islamabad. He said that his rights as a suspect were not being respected. While Attorney-General Aziz A. Munshi claimed on behalf of General Musharraf and the State that Mr Nawaz Sharif was “treated in a dignified manner with hospitality and utmost respect”, the former Prime Minister had shocking facts to reveal. He was confined to an “absolutely dark room for 30 days in Chaklala (on the outskirts of Islamabad)” where he was taken at gunpoint. Then he was shunted to Murree, the famous hill station, and kept there “in a dark room, which had its window-panes painted so that nobody could see anything from outside, for 10 days”. The army subsequently took him to the notorious prison at Landhi in Karachi and lodged him “in a small cage-like cell”. He was carried to Islamabad in a decrepit plane which refused to fly fast enough. The journey to the court premises was made in an armoured personnel carrier accompanied by a large number of paramilitary personnel and policemen. His lawyer said: He (Mr Nawaz Sharif) was brought in “as if he was a dangerous killer. Is he someone so dangerous as to be brought in in this manner?”

General Musharraf tried to get Mr Nawaz Sharif charge-sheeted in Karachi on Wednesday for crimes most of which are punishable with death — treason, kidnapping, attempted hijacking, attempted murder, criminal conspiracy and abatement. Truth and lie are getting strangely mixed up. But what is the actual position? General Musharraf says that he has put in place “an efficient and impartial interim set-up which would ensure stability, credibility, transparency and accountability” in matters of governance and dispensation of justice. When Zulfikar Ali Bhutto was imprisoned by his own army chief, General Zia-ul-Haq, in 1977, laudable terminology signifying the fairest of the administrative regimes was loudly publicised. But Bhutto was hanged two years later as a consequence of a highly controversial and politically tainted judgement which compromised the reputation of the military leadership and the courts. The Pakistan Supreme Court knows it clearly that fundamental rights cannot be protected by a Constitution “kept in abeyance”. It cannot protect the citizens in the absence of constitutionality: Habeas corpus becomes privilege, not right. General Zia stifled the courts when they ruled against his wishes. Legitimised sectarian political assassination is not unknown to the Pakistanis who have been subjected to dictatorial rule by edict time and again. They have begun to realise that self-insulting tolerance breeds jackboot injustice which throws up a deadly brew of military blindness and bureaucratic insensitivity.

INDIA, USA AND THE CTBT
Right time to take a decision
by Inder Malhotra

AFTER its rejection by the US Senate, the CTBT ought not to have been a problem between America and India. But, unfortunately, that is not how things work in international affairs, especially where the sole superpower is engaged in a single-minded pursuit of an objective.Unfazed by the Senate’s resounding rebuff, the US President, Mr Bill Clinton, sticks to the CTBT. He insists that he and his administration remain committed to honouring this treaty and would want India too to sign it on the dotted line. Rather adroitly the USA has also let it be known that the Indian signature on the CTBT is not a precondition for Mr Clinton’s visit to this country. But this is sophistry.

If India is to comply with the call to sign the CTBT, the time to do so would be well before the presidential sojourn so that whatever corresponding advantages in terms of the wider Indo-US relationship in economic, technological, political and other fields are to be obtained can be clinched before Air Force One touches down at Indira Gandhi International Airport. To refuse to sign before Mr Clinton’s arrival and dutifully to do so after Mr Clinton has become even more of a lameduck President than he is would be the height of absurdity.

In taking whatever decision this country wants to, another factor has got to be considered seriously. The relationship with the USA is doubtless of overriding importance both in itself and because Washington lays down the line that other world capitals usually follow. However, America is not alone in telling India to sign the CTBT regardless of what has happened in the US Senate. The European Union, Japan and Russia are also saying the same thing. In fact, until recently Japan was demanding that this country should both sign and ratify the CTBT. It gave up the insistence on ratification during the visit to Tokyo by the External Affairs Minister, Mr Jaswant Singh. But it has made it clear that the resumption of Japan’s official development aid (ODA) to India can be resumed only after India has put its signature on the CTBT.

Japan’s ODA amounts to a billion dollars a year and equals the bilateral official financial assistance by the rest of the world. Even so self-respecting nations do not formulate sensitive policies for the sake of a billion dollars or more. However, the impact of a policy on nearly worldwide relationships has got to be factored into the making of it.

In short, the time has come to take a stand on the CTBT, one way or the other, and the issue cannot be evaded for long. This should explain why at last the Prime Minister, Mr Atal Behari Vajpayee, has invited Mrs Sonia Gandhi, Leader of the Opposition and Congress President, for a one-to-one talk with a view to building a consensus on the CTBT issue. This effort should have begun much earlier but then, as they say, it is better late than never rather than vice versa.

Given the prevailing political atmosphere in the country and unending recrimination among political leaders, to say nothing of the bitter opposition to the Vajpayee government’s nuclear policies by the Left Front and such political outfits as Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav’s Samajwadi Party or Mr Laloo Yadav’s RJD, consensus-building is easier said than done.

Even within the Congress opinion on signing the CTBT at this stage is divided though the party ranks will go along with whatever stand Mrs Sonia Gandhi takes, evidently after widest consultations. Within the strategic community, small in numbers but extremely influential in shaping opinion and making policy, the division is even sharper.

For a very long time, India’s nuclear policy has been articulated in normative terms, stressing high principles. Until recently Indian security, leave alone realpolitik, was not even mentioned in this connection. Even now, 18 months after the Shakti series of tests, old thought processes persist. Indeed, so strong is the established mindset that the nuclear issues continue to be discussed on the basis of emotion rather than cold calculation of vital Indian interests.

A voluntary moratorium on nuclear tests is already in operation. The Indian government began by saying that it was prepared to give an “international de jure” form to this commitment, whatever that might mean. In any case, since then the government’s position has changed. The Americans, headed by the Secretary of State, Mrs Madeleine Albright, have been shouting from the housetops that India (and Pakistan) has expressed willingness to sign the CTBT and that the Indian government is engaged in building up national consensus towards that end. In his latest interview to The Hindu Mr Jaswant Singh has gone quite a long way to confirm that impression.

For this he has been under attack from those who think that signing the CTBT would be contrary to Indian interests and, therefore, this step must not be taken. They have three main arguments against signing.

First, with the treaty already in abeyance because of the refusal of the US Senate to ratify it, the only cause for India putting its signature on it would be the intense American pressure. And to be seen to be succumbing to pressure would be bad for this country internally and externally. It would encourage both the USA and others to apply more pressure for a number of other reasons.

Secondly, and this is a corollary of the first, expectations of an American quid pro quo for signing, it is argued, are unrealistic because the USA is promising nothing apart from the lifting of post-Pokhran sanctions. Denial of technology will persist. Moreover, Mr Clinton as the President on his way out will be in no position to make any concessions to India.

Thirdly, the verification provisions of the CTBT — an international monitoring system (IMS) that can be activated by any of the powerful nations having national technical means (NTMs) to detect alleged violations of the treaty — can play havoc with the Indian nuclear programme. This view is shared by some of the respected scientists.

As against this, the arguments for signing the CTBT are also equally forceful. Not only has the majority of the world accepted it but China has even announced that it would start the process of ratifying the treaty even though the US Senate has refused to do so. Should India be the only odd man out?

India’s refusal to subscribe to the CTBT will invite adverse reaction of the rich and the powerful nations, of course. But it will also mean that all other nuclear weapon or nuclear capable countries would be free to test. The question, therefore, arises whether this would be in India’s best interests. Or will a test ban serve these interests better, now that this country is overtly nuclear and the best scientific advice is that no more tests are needed?

This point has, of late, been put even more sharply. Assuming that India refuses to sign the CTBT completely, and assuming that, contrary to what scientists are saying, more tests are needed to refine our nuclear arsenal, would New Delhi really go ahead and test, given the totality of its circumstances? Against this backdrop, there are really only two viable alternatives available to Indian policy makers.

The first is to announce that since, after the non-ratification of the treaty by the USA, the CTBT cannot come into force until after 2001 when a new American administration might or might not revive it, there is no hurry for an Indian decision. We shall decide at the appropriate time. Meanwhile, our voluntary embargo on testing will continue.

Secondly, this country can sign the CTBT now but declare that the process of its ratification would begin only after the treaty has been ratified by the USA, China and Russia. To go on dilly-dallying will be neither here nor there.

Israeli-Syrian discord: a role for India
by Dharmvir Gehlaut

ALTHOUGH India and Syria have shared close ties in the past, the 1990s have seen India entering into a new alliance with Israel. The Barak government is keen to have closer economic and political understanding between New Delhi and Jerusalem, and Prime Minister Barak may visit India next year.

While the USA is playing a very active and positive role in the region, the sole superpower cannot bring about another Camp-David-like diplomatic miracle. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright’s recent visits and shuttle diplomacy could produce some optimistic results but much remains to be done.

What we are seeing is the collapse of superpower diplomacy and conflict management in situations where facts cannot be arranged neatly into patterns required by a policy of “engagement”.

So, does an alternative for progress exist?

Despite their deep differences, Israel and Syria have access to back-channel diplomatic communication to give a new form to the West Asian peace process. Bitterness and mutual suspicion cannot be removed in a day or two, but India can play a pivotal role in untying the Golan Heights knot. Its improved understanding with Israel equips it well to make realistic diplomatic manoeuvres for securing justice and economic advancement for the Arabs as well as meeting Israeli security needs.

With Syrian President Hafez Al-Assad in the mood for finding concrete results through the diplomatic channel, Israel can use this opportunity to move closer to Damascus via the Indian government. New Delhi does not have to assess the capabilities or weaknesses of the two sides. It has to simply take a pragmatic view so that Syria and Israel can be helped to gain a long-term perspective.

Indian diplomats are aware of this substantial progress and discussion between two hostile neighbours. India, eventually, could become a persuasive facilitator by goading Mr Barak and Mr Assad in the direction of a peaceful solution of the Golan Heights and Lebanon problems.

It is right to be profoundly cautious about any Indian peacekeeping role. Nevertheless, despite India’s domestic difficulties in the political, economic and strategic spheres, both sides perceive New Delhi as a stabilising factor for international peace and security.

Its potential was historically demonstrated in the days of superpower rivalry, in the Korean and Congo wars in early 1950’s. India was one of the first countries to participate in United Nations peace initiatives and send peace-keeping contingents there under the UN umbrella. Later, in the case of the transfer of power from the Netherlands to Indonesia in East Timor, New Delhi played a important role. Today, it can derive a political advantage from the present situation as well as reinforcing stability and promoting peace in the West Asian region, by facilitating Israeli-Syrian dialogue on the Labanon problem and the Golan Heights.

India’s strength lies in the fact that it has no hegemonistic ambition or tendencies. On the other hand, it is one of the few countries which has relevant expertise to facilitate effective negotiations, especially through informal channels.

Since the creation of Israel there has been a lack of choice at the root of the distortions in the Israel foreign policy. The first Prime Minister of Israel, Ben Gurion, had a compelling vision of Israel in Asia but his dreams were shattered by geopolitical and Cold War compulsions.

The present situation is also the product of the long period of Israeli isolation from Asia, recently overcome with the upgrading of diplomatic relations with India and China. Israeli’s Eurocentric legacy brought it major economic and commercial benefits, no doubt, but it never helped the country in international political circles. Israel has been absent from all Asian political and economic groups.

Hatred and animosity against Israel will not disappear overnight among Arab countries, of whom Syria represents the strongest security threat to Israel. Nevertheless, India can help the two sides come together, encouraging dialogue and helping find face-saving means of ceasing hostilities.

Doing this will require a reshaping of the tone and content of India’s own approach towards the West Asian problem. For years, Indian has sided with the Arab world and maintained relatively low-profile relations with Israel. Whether on security problems related to Syria or on the unrest and civil war in Lebanon, India has always supported UN Resolutions 242 and 338 and has been sympathetic to President Assad’s wishes and demands for a complete Israeli withdrawal from the Golan Heights.

Unfortunately, the geopolitical situation in West Asia, along with Cold War pressures, prevented India from expressing sympathy and understanding for Israeli independence. While it is not fair to say that India was not interested in a closer economic or political relationship with Israel (other than maintaining mutual commercial consulates), the Arab factor always dominated the Indian foreign policy. This was not a balanced approach.

In addition, during the era of super power rivalry, Syria and India were close allies of the former Soviet Union. Both have used Russian military hardware for their defence forces. President Assad has also enjoyed good relations with India as a fellow NAM (Nonaligned Movement) member.

Since 1992, when full diplomatic relations were established, India has strengthened its trade and strategic relations with Israel, with which it has a shared commitment to liberal democracy. The level of cooperation increased, in particular, with respect to military technology and knowhow.

Now relations at the government level have thawed. The recent visit of a high-level Indian delegation, which included Mr Brijesh Mishra, National Security Adviser of Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, resulted in very fruitful talks with the Israeli leadership.

In this environment, the military ties and cooperation between Israel and India are likely to increase. Israeli President Ezer Weizman’s visit to New Delhi in 1996 and Mr Simon Peres’ earlier visits as Foreign Minister showed the importance of India as a friend of Israel. Now Prime Minister Ehud Barak also wants to strengthen relations between the two countries.

In future India can play an important role in helping to build bridges between Israel and post-Saddam Hussain Iraq and a less radical Iran. This would be a major achievement, reinforcing India’s standing as an emerging global diplomatic power.

(The writer is a journalist based in Israel).

A holy deadlock
by D. K. Mukerjee

“DISPLAY your wife’s photograph into life size in your office. You won’t make the mistake that Clinton did” was a catchy advertisement inserted in a newspaper by the owner of some photo studio claiming to possess the latest technology. This was read out to me by my better half one fine morning. I explained that this could never be implemented in government-run offices where the yearly calendars with the figure of the head of the democratically elected political master are invariably displayed. These too are quickly replaced with the swift changes in government. However, this was not required in my case as my wallet, which had come out victorious after many Operation Secret Searches contained our wedding photograph and another displayed in my pension payment papers. Even otherwise, such display was not required when “Dil Ke Ainey Mein Tasvir-a-yaar, Jab Kabhi Gardan Jhukai Dekhlee”. There was no flicker of a smile anywhere.

The story of three dear friends who were suddenly recalled and appeared collectively in the court of the Lord was my other defence. The first friend, when questioned, explained that he had been faithful to his wife, smilingly faced the onslaught of “belnaas”, never visited a cabaret show or bargained for a new suit as money was being saved for the wedding of the dream girl still in the cradle. These exactly tallied with the data fed on the Internet and the Lord provided him with a chauffeur-driven airconditioned car with permission to visit any part of His Domain. The second friend was bestowed with a latest Kinetic scooter and allowed to roam about in any part as he had reluctantly parted with the factual information of his being not hundred per cent faithful. The third one could hardly utter anything in defence of his case because the information available on the Internet had declared him guilty. He was, thus, provided with a cycle and his movements were restricted.

My cherished desire and dream was inclusion in the first category for which I had toiled all these years. However, there was hardly any movement and this could not break the ice. Like a seasoned lawyer. I did not give up as there was still a documentary proof and a ray of hope left.

My late father’s book “Rose Garden of the Punjab” compiled and got printed by my elder brother K.K. Mookerjee, through Punjabi University, contained memories of a few of his old students who went on to make a mark in their respective spheres. There is one from Justice Girdhari Lal Chopra, who later on became the Chief Justice of the PEPSU High Court and Chairman of The Tribune Trust. It says that “... once we requested Prof Mukerjee to hold a meeting on a day that happened to be a Sunday. To this he humorously replied that on Sundays Christians go on their knees in the church and he goes on his knees before his wife”. Since the same blood runs in my veins, I argued, how could I be different? There was laughter and sunshine everywhere. Thus, ended the beginning of that day.

Pioneer of higher technical education

A DOYEN of civil engineering, Prof Rajinder Nath Dogra, a former Chief Engineer of Capitol Project, and founder-Director of the IIT, New Delhi, who died in Chandigarh on November 27 at the age of 91, was a pioneer of higher technical education, a technocrat par excellence besides being an enlightened personality.

Associated with various projects, including selection of a site for the new capital of Punjab and the initial years of the Capitol Project as a right-hand man of Mr P.L. Varma, Chief Engineer of the Capitol Project, Professor Dogra had deep attachment to the development and upkeep of Chandigarh. He was perhaps one of those few gifted technocrats who had been closely associated with two of the city’s institutes of excellence — Punjab Engineering College and Post-graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research. He was Chief Engineer of the Capitol Project from October 30, 1958 to July 23, 1959.

After retiring from IIT, New Delhi, as its founder-Director, he returned to Chandigarh for a while before taking up an assignment as Technical Attache to the Indian High Commission in London.As a tribute to his contributions, the Delhi IIT, has named a hall after him.

Professor Dogra on return from London was appointed Consultant to the PGI’s Engineering Department. “He was a visualiser, realist, a keen planner, a straight-forward and practical person,” remarked Mr Kuldip Singh, SE, UT Engineering Department, who had worked with him at the PGI.

“For me, he was the pioneer of higher technical education in the country. It was he who, as a founder Director-Principal, set up the IIT, in Delhi — a model that was subsequently followed everywhere in the country.

“Though I never had an opportunity to work with him but I knew him personally. When I joined the Capitol Project as Chief Administrator, Professor Dogra had already left Chandigarh. After working in the project with Mr P.L. Varma, he joined Punjab Engineering College from where he had gone to Delhi. He was a wonderful personality,” says Mr K.S. Narang, a former Chief Secretary of Punjab who had been associated with the Capitol project as Chief Administrator.

“I met Prof R.N. Dogra in May 1950 during a meeting with Mr Varma at Ellersly — the Punjab Government’s Secretariat in Shimla. I was the first architect to join the project. Fresh after studies and training abroad I was deeply impressed by Mr Dogra’s interest in architecture.

“Mr Dogra was associated with Mr Varma in the selection of the site for the capital and obtaining survey plans of the entire region. He took part in discussions on the first Master Plan prepared by Mr Albert Mayer and his team and thereafter in discussions over Le Corbusier’s Master Plan. I came to know him more during the start of work on the project.

“I found a lot of similarity between him and Mr Varma in their working. Professor Dogra was a multifaceted personality and his interests were not limited to engineering. He was meticulous and took interest in the architectural project and landscaping. He was a strict disciplinarian and took deep interest in whatever was entrusted to him, setting very high standards. As the principal of Punjab Engineering College, he took the institution to new heights.

“In our last meeting at his residence, Professor Dogra deplored the upkeep of the city and showed equal concern for its future. He was articulate, an Englishman at heart and an enlightened personality. One could discuss almost every subject with him. His loss will be greatly felt by all those who came close to him and the engineering profession for which he left a rich legacy,” writes Mr M.N. Sharma, the first Indian Chief Architect of Chandigarh.

Mr Kulbir Singh, who had the longest tenure as Chief Engineer-cum-Secretary of the Engineering Department, says Professor Dogra was a doyen of civil engineering.

“I came in contact with him when I joined the Capitol Project in 1951. He was then working with Mr Varma. There was a lot of opposition to Chandigarh as the new capital at the time of site selection. It was decided that the new capital could not be located in any of the existing towns.

Professor Dogra was very competent civil engineer and a man of integrity who never heart or accepted any nonsense. He was very considerate to those working under him. One of his closest confidants was Mr I.D. Mirchandani, an Executive Engineer, who went with him to Punjab Engineering College.

“Though I did not have much opportunity to work with him, I knew him personally . He was a stalwart and his death has created a major void in engineering circles. Chandigarh was very dear to him,” concludes Mr Kulbir Singh.

Professor Dogra was a soft-spoken man with an eye for of detail and a superb team leader, says Mr J.S. Kohli, a former Chief Engineer of the Capitol Project, who succeeded him as Consultant at the PGI Engineering Department.

In fact, it was he who was instrumental in getting Mr Kohli in the PGI even before he relinquished charge as Consultant. Professor Dogra’s concept, plan and design of the buildings of the PGI speak volumes for his professional competence and authority.

“When I joined the Capitol Project as a Subdivisional Engineer, he was Chief Engineer. I was looking after work on the Assembly building, the Polytechnic and some houses in Sector 7. One of these houses was later to be occupied by him. He would go into the minutest details and appreciate good suggestions. He would discuss everything and was always open to suggestions.

“I still remember when he called a meeting of all Superintending Engineers, Executive Engineers and Subdivisional Engineers at the Punjab Engineering College to ascertain their views and comments on important projects and issues.

“Besides, he carried the dignity of the chair he occupied. It was the time when in Chandigarh, the Chief Engineer was the only official known to the public. This position was maintained for a long time,” Mr Kohli adds.

“With the passing away of Professor Dogra, the era of professional greats appears to fading off. He was an ideal engineer, a decent gentleman, well dressed, soft spoken, conversant with etiquette and my ideal. He was a conglomerate of a practical civil engineer with sound knowledge of structural design, an architect, a planner, a landscape expert, a horticulturist and an elite administrator,” says Mr S.S. Virdi, a former Chief Engineer and Secretary of the UT Engineering Department.

He was the trend-setter of good building construction in Punjab PWD (B&R) when he executed PAP Building complex in Jalandhar with modern architectural concepts and effective quality control.

“He laid emphasis on training of officers both as engineers and as individuals. The loss of Professor Dogra has created a vacuum in engineering fraternity and the likes of him will be hard to come by,” concludes Mr Virdi. — Prabhjot Singh

75 YEARS AGO

December 9, 1924
Round Table Conference

A LONDON cable to The Bengalee says that “it is stated in the Sunday press that an idea which attracts Lord Birkenhead very much is concerned with the calling of a conference to explore the possibilities of agreement on the Indian constitutional changes”.

This, however, is coupled with another statement which practically neutralises it, that “Lord Birkenhead holds the view that India can only move towards constitutional settlement and possibly Home Rule by very gradual stages.

Does Lord Birkenhead really believe that with this preconception on his part, a conference will serve any useful propose?

The only way out of the present impasse is the calling of a Round Table Conference such as was suggested in Pandit Motilal Nehru’s resolution adopted by the new Assembly. All other attempts in this direction are sure to prove abortive.