The MUA Government is elected by the entire voting population of Meghalaya and not by any single lobby. The government by its very definition is a framework of the administration of laws, and the carrying out of the public force. Government therefore should be representing the welfare or the greater good of the people of the state. In the present case, however, the Government is regularly paying from the exchequer the legal cost for contesting the orders of a quasi-judicial body – the National Green Tribunal – set up by an Act of Parliament to investigate cases of violation of environmental norms by mining companies and individuals. If the coal mining lobby is affected by the NGT ban on coal mining then it is well within its rights to approach a court of law at its own expense but why should the Government even be seen to be fighting its cause? One facile reason propounded by the State Government is that the livelihood of thousands of people is affected by the ban on coal mining. The NGT could well ask the Government whether that livelihood is sustainable in the long run and whether a welfare state should allow an activity that has caused grave environmental degradation to continue unabated.
It is the constitutional duty of the government to conserve the environment. Ironically, in Meghalaya we find that the Government stands in solidarity with the mining lobby at the cost of the large numbers of people who are affected by coal mining activities. This issue should actually be taken up by the opposition parties. But they too are perhaps part of the grand alliance whose hearts bleed for the affluent coal lobby but who have not even taken a count of the actual number of people whose livelihood are affected by the NGT ban. Generic claims made by the Government that ‘people’ are affected by the ban on coal mining holds no ground unless a credible research has been conducted in the coal mining areas of the State. This is a task that Government should have undertaken to back up its claims. As of today the Government is seen as taking sides with the wealthy and powerful while ignoring the larger environmental issues that will impact the state adversely in the long run.