People think that by disrupting the normal life and destroying public property, government will meet their demands which is true most of the times. People who destroy government property during any protest should be given very strict punishment but ultimately the government will use the tax payers money to compensate the loss. Also government should not agree to demands if there is violence in protest
You are talking for punishment, what is situation, during jatt agitation in Haryana, agitators, it is better to say unsocial elements, were burns property of million, they rape, they looted shops and houses. Know government withdraw case from most of unsocial elements. It is also happen in Gujjar agitation, they stop trains,uproot railway treks, but government withdraw cases.
Did they rape during agitation? This is rediculous and why they were not punished for it more strange.
I know this fact confirm that when jat were doing protests, they saw a group of women and they captured all of those women and raped in groups. One policeman tried to stop them but they slapped the policeman and hit him badly. But the question is why the government did not use army power ?
People think that by disrupting the normal life and destroying public property, government will meet their demands which is true most of the times. People who destroy government property during any protest should be given very strict punishment but ultimately the government will use the tax payers money to compensate the loss. Also government should not agree to demands if there is violence in protest
You are talking for punishment, what is situation, during jatt agitation in Haryana, agitators, it is better to say unsocial elements, were burns property of million, they rape, they looted shops and houses. Know government withdraw case from most of unsocial elements. It is also happen in Gujjar agitation, they stop trains,uproot railway treks, but government withdraw cases.
Did they rape during agitation? This is rediculous and why they were not punished for it more strange.
Yes it is was happen in Sonepat region, but in pressure of Jat leaders not action taken by government.
Maybe you would call me undemocratic but the fact is that all Bund, strikes, hunger strikes and protests are nothing but political stunts. The first thing we should do is to make them illegal especially strikes by government and trade unions since these are nothing but blackmailing. A government servant and employees of a private company are bound with a contract so how can they go for making demands against the rules especially for hike in salary since they are getting their due increment regularly? I can go to the extent of saying that all found striking against the rule and paralyzing the services should be sacked immediately (No suspension but dismissed)
All it happen with changing of time. Strikes and hunger strikes are useful tool of protest. But at present most of strikes and agitation are backed by political parties. In our nation it is became a system that government never agree for reasonable demands of public until strikes and agitatin. It surprising that government agree on demands after agitation to which they said no earlier. It is not era of freedom struggle, so it time to make some new rules and regulation for protest.
Maybe you would call me undemocratic but the fact is that all Bund, strikes, hunger strikes and protests are nothing but political stunts. The first thing we should do is to make them illegal especially strikes by government and trade unions since these are nothing but blackmailing. A government servant and employees of a private company are bound with a contract so how can they go for making demands against the rules especially for hike in salary since they are getting their due increment regularly? I can go to the extent of saying that all found striking against the rule and paralyzing the services should be sacked immediately (No suspension but dismissed)
All it happen with changing of time. Strikes and hunger strikes are useful tool of protest. But at present most of strikes and agitation are backed by political parties. In our nation it is became a system that government never agree for reasonable demands of public until strikes and agitatin. It surprising that government agree on demands after agitation to which they said no earlier. It is not era of freedom struggle, so it time to make some new rules and regulation for protest.
Do you mean all demands which the governments agree to in the end are justified? The truth is that most of these demands are fulfilled to save the vote bank otherwise public in general is always at a loss. What do you think about about the public servants who go on strike frequently for raise in their salaries or who suffers when the governments agree to that? The lower class public in general pays the price in form of increased prices as everything becomes costlier in same ratio. Let's see the case of Hardik Patel who has just ended his strike would help none but his own political dreams and the parties supporting him.
I love this free image hosting site for sharing my work
Maybe you would call me undemocratic but the fact is that all Bund, strikes, hunger strikes and protests are nothing but political stunts. The first thing we should do is to make them illegal especially strikes by government and trade unions since these are nothing but blackmailing. A government servant and employees of a private company are bound with a contract so how can they go for making demands against the rules especially for hike in salary since they are getting their due increment regularly? I can go to the extent of saying that all found striking against the rule and paralyzing the services should be sacked immediately (No suspension but dismissed)
All it happen with changing of time. Strikes and hunger strikes are useful tool of protest. But at present most of strikes and agitation are backed by political parties. In our nation it is became a system that government never agree for reasonable demands of public until strikes and agitatin. It surprising that government agree on demands after agitation to which they said no earlier. It is not era of freedom struggle, so it time to make some new rules and regulation for protest.
Do you mean all demands which the governments agree to in the end are justified? The truth is that most of these demands are fulfilled to save the vote bank otherwise public in general is always at a loss. What do you think about about the public servants who go on strike frequently for raise in their salaries or who suffers when the governments agree to that? The lower class public in general pays the price in form of increased prices as everything becomes costlier in same ratio. Let's see the case of Hardik Patel who has just ended his strike would help none but his own political dreams and the parties supporting him.
Demands may be or may not be justified, but question is that government agreed on demands after agitation, loss of big properties. Why not they agree before agitation and strikes. I think in this way they can save their vote bank better way. Most of us knows that Hardik patel is an unsocial element like other persons who are interested is making carrier in politics. Why peoples are supporting him?
