By our Reporter
SHILLONG, March 13: The opposition bench on Thursday voiced concerns over the ongoing land acquisition process for the Western Bypass project, highlighting disputes over ownership claims and reports of alleged misappropriation of compensation.
With large sums already disbursed, Rs 121.40 crore in Ri Bhoi and Rs 455.39 crore in East Khasi Hills, questions arose over whether all affected families had received their due and if the process had accounted for those who did not hold formal land titles.
Leader of Opposition Mukul Sangma led the charge and questioned whether the government had adhered to Section 6 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement (RFCTLARR) Act, 2013 during the land acquisition process. Deputy Chief Minister Prestone Tynsong assured that the process was followed, with each clause and provision strictly observed.
Sangma pressed further, asking whether the Social Impact Assessment (SIA) was published in local languages to ensure the community fully understood the process and its consequences. Tynsong confirmed that the assessment was available in local and English languages.
The Leader of the Opposition delved into the critical issue of displaced families, invoking Sections 28, 29, and 31 of the Act, which mandate support for affected families. “In this part of the state, we have many landless people who settle on community or clan-owned land.
Has the government identified any families eligible for rehabilitation support?” he asked.
In response, Deputy Chief Minister in-charge PWD (Roads) Prestone Tynsong maintained that due diligence had been done and all entitled beneficiaries had received their compensation, barring a few cases of internal disputes over land ownership. “As of today, the beneficiaries are satisfied,” he said while acknowledging minor disagreements among claimants.
Sangma, however, highlighted the ongoing unrest surrounding the project, as reported in the media. “Why is there still dissent even after the government claims to have followed the Act? Have we verified whether families without formal land titles were displaced?” he asked. Tynsong reiterated that the deputy commissioners of East Khasi Hills and Ri Bhoi handled emerging disputes, mainly revolving around ownership claims within clans. He assured that the government was committed to minimizing displacement and would support affected families as per the law.
Further, Sangma sought a firm commitment from the government to use the RFCTLARR Act, 2013, rather than relying solely on the National Highways (NH) Act for acquiring land. He emphasized that the 2013 Act was specifically designed to protect the land rights of Scheduled Tribes and marginalized communities, ensuring proper compensation and rehabilitation. “By not using this Act, we are denying our people the benefits intended for them,” he asserted.
Tynsong responded by saying both Acts would be strictly followed. “For national highways, we use the NH Act because these projects involve existing roads, not Greenfield projects. But even without the SIA, landowners’ concerns are addressed through compensation provisions,” he explained. He assured that 97.5% of the land required for the Western Bypass had been acquired, with the remaining 2.5% under negotiation.
Raising a supplementary question, VPP MLA Ardent Basaiawmoit alleged the misappropriation of compensation meant for landowners. “There was a complaint filed with the deputy commissioner regarding compensation being siphoned off by certain individuals claiming to represent clans. What is the status of that complaint?” he asked.
Tynsong denied any official reports of misappropriation. “Compensation was transferred directly to beneficiaries’ accounts. Any deductions or disputes happened informally among the claimants themselves, not through the official process,” he stated.
Basaiawmoit, unsatisfied, pressed on, pointing out the complexity of Khasi-Jaintia landholding systems, which include private, community, and Raid land. He alleged that some individuals had exploited their positions as clan representatives to take a cut from villagers’ compensation. “Has the government investigated these claims?” he asked.
Tynsong admitted he was aware of media reports about landowners being coerced into sharing their compensation but reiterated that no formal complaints had been lodged. “It seems some landowners, unfamiliar with paperwork, entrusted the process to others, but these were personal arrangements, not official matters,” he said.
Sangma stressed the need for a transparent method of determining land ownership to avoid future disputes. “There must be a clear process, consistent with traditional laws, where clans unanimously authorize representatives. Otherwise, conflicts over compensation will keep surfacing,” he cautioned.
Tynsong assured that all procedures under the law, including opportunities for claimants to voice their concerns, had been followed. He maintained that the government was committed to resolving the remaining land disputes and ensuring fair compensation for all affected landowners.