Letters

Letters to the editor dated September 14, 2021

| Updated on September 14, 2021

IBC’s eventful journey

Apropos the Editorial ‘IBC-five years young’ (September 14), in the last over three decades, there has been three major recovery mechanisms — Lok Adalat in 1986, Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRT) in 1993 and SARFEASI Act in 2002.

When Lok Adalat was introduced, all banks were jubilant that they got some remedy in realising their long pending overdues. Likewise, when DRTs came into existence, it further enhanced the confidence of bankers that legally, they got a right to seek remedy in recovering the dues. But unfortunately, both did not give enough expected results. Then came SARFEASI Act 2002 by which, the bankers were empowered to take possession of the property mortgaged, which brought up huge pressure on the part of borrowers in repaying their dues.

Now, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). Given the huge number of 32,000 pending insolvency applications at NCLT and the unimaginable haircuts that were allowed as was seen in the recent case of Videocon, it infuses pessimism in the minds of bankers.

RV Baskaran

Chennai

The pollution problem

Apropos ‘Battling air pollution’, an average Indian does not think much about air pollution and genuinely believes that the activists and other concerned citizens are needlessly going ballistic about the problems caused by air pollution. Since the effects of air pollution are not immediate, we tend to dismiss them from our minds.

The economic cost of pollution in the form of health issues and the costs incurred to maintain good health are issues which are nebulous for most. Otherwise we would have forced the politicians to address the problem first before venturing to other areas like bullet trains.

The businessman with a polluting industrial product shows little enthusiasm for installing anti-pollution measures as it reduces profit margins. In the meanwhile we ignore the fact that we are being slowly poisoned.

Anthony Henriques

Mumbai

The snooping row

Over the past weeks, the issue of snooping has perhaps been dialled down. However, it has once again come to spotlight with government’s refusal to file a detailed affidavit. Moreover, the Centre’s denial to file an affidavit raises doubts over its intentions. Furthermore, since Assembly elections are on the cards such actions will only dent the trust of public in the government and it seems that the BJP will find it an uphill task to dodge the apex court.

Aanya Singhal

Noida

The NEET tangle

Barring the BJP, parties across the political spectrum in Tamil Nadu are up in arms against NEET exam ever since it came in to force and became the only gateway to gain admission and pursue undergraduation in medicine at both state-owned and private medical colleges of the country.

The Opposition against NEET in the State on the grounds that it does not offer a level playing field to medical aspirants especially to the students from lower rungs of the society cannot be simply brushed aside as politically motivated. In the backdrop of a student having recently ended his life hours before he was about to write NEET exam, the DMK-led government in Tamil Nadu passed a Bill in the State Assembly to dispense with NEET exam and allow admission to medical courses based on class 12 marks to ensure social justice.

Given the fact that both the BJP-led NDA government at the centre and Supreme Court had a favourable position towards NEET, it will be an uphill task for the DMK government to get the Bill ratified from the President. However, it is pertinent on the part of both the Union government and judiciary to address the concerns regarding the lack of level playing field in the NEET exam with a seriousness it truly deserves.

M Jeyaram

Sholavandan (TN)

Published on September 14, 2021

Follow us on Telegram, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and Linkedin. You can also download our Android App or IOS App.

  1. Comments will be moderated by The Hindu Business Line editorial team.
  2. Comments that are abusive, personal, incendiary or irrelevant cannot be published.
  3. Please write complete sentences. Do not type comments in all capital letters, or in all lower case letters, or using abbreviated text. (example: u cannot substitute for you, d is not 'the', n is not 'and').
  4. We may remove hyperlinks within comments.
  5. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name, to avoid rejection.

You May Also Like