By Our Reporter
SHILLONG, Feb 17: The Opposition Voice of the People Party (VPP) on Tuesday demanded a comprehensive statewide audit of all community and customary lands, warning that accelerating alienation threatens traditional governance, social equity, constitutional safeguards, and indigenous identity.
Moving a special motion during the budget session, VPP’s Nongkrem MLA Ardent Miller Basaiawmoit urged immediate structural reforms to curb misuse, manipulation, and capture of communal land.
He called for digitisation and scientific mapping of Raid, Hima, Elaka, and other communal lands, creation of a transparent land registry in coordination with Autonomous District Councils (ADCs), and mandatory prior informed consent from affected communities before any acquisition, lease, or land-use change.
“Present an annual report to the Assembly on tribal land protection,” Basaiawmoit demanded, stressing stronger legal safeguards to prevent misuse of customary authority for private enrichment.
Opening his motion, Basaiawmoit said the State is witnessing a disturbing trend of community land being fragmented and concentrated in the hands of a few powerful individuals.
“Development must not become a cover for land capture. Investment must not be an excuse for dispossession,” he said, alleging weak documentation, lack of transparency, illegal transactions and administrative silence have contributed to the erosion of traditional safeguards.
Basaiawmoit cautioned that alienation now increasingly involves internal manipulation of customary systems, with Ri Raid, Hima, Elaka, and A•king lands slipping from the communities they serve.
“This is not development; this is dispossession by design,” he asserted.
Explaining the Khasi system—Ri Kynti (private), Ri Raid (community), and Ri Kur (clan)—he noted its foundation in the principle that no Khasi should be landless, ensuring social equality and collective ownership.
He warned that loss of community land would weaken Sixth Schedule autonomy and reduce constitutional protections to “mere decorative provisions.”
In Garo Hills, he highlighted conflicts from the dual system: traditional matrilineal A•king lands (where Nokmas act as custodians and sale is prohibited) versus statutory frameworks like the adopted Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886, and pattas under the 1960 A•king Land Revenue Act.
These overlaps, he said, have led to disputes over authority, compensation, and ownership, with pattas allegedly exploited to override customary structures and fuel land concentration and litigation.
Basaiawmoit pointed to discrepancies between state laws and ADC powers, weak enforcement of protected-belt provisions, poor record-keeping, and RTI revelations of documentation gaps.
While the Meghalaya Transfer of Land (Regulation) Act, 1972 aimed to protect tribal land, he said amendments and loopholes have enabled circumvention. Citing the Socio-Economic Census 2011—showing only 24 per cent of households in Meghalaya own land—he highlighted high rural landlessness, rising prices, abandonment of traditional farming, and commercialisation pushing poor families into vulnerability.
He observed that land grabbing occurs not just through external projects but via internal manipulation of customary institutions, shifting resources from marginalised families to elites.
“Land, once regarded as a sacred and common resource, is becoming a commodity,” he said.
Concluding, he urged: “We were elected to protect our people, not to preside over their dispossession.”
Leader of Opposition Mukul M. Sangma supported the call, noting large-scale acquisitions in the name of development often overlook subsurface mineral value.
“Meghalaya is rich in minerals. If ownership is preserved, our people can benefit immensely in the future,” he said.
He referenced the July 3, 2019, Supreme Court coal-mining judgment, which held that surface ownership includes subsurface minerals, making landowners the grantors.
“If landowners are recognised as grantors in coal mining, the same principle should apply to other minerals unless a specific law states otherwise,” he said.
Sangma warned against compromising future generations for short-term gains, advocated inviting investors without surrendering ownership, and stressed global importance of resource control.
“Our responsibility is not to compromise the future of coming generations for present gains,” he said.
He criticised weak implementation of protective laws, raised concerns over projects like the Shillong Western Bypass affecting more people, illegal mineral extraction, and lack of enforcement on complaints.
He reminded the House of obligations under the 2013 Land Acquisition Act—Social Impact Assessments, consultations, and rehabilitation—and called for review of inadequate compensation cases, return of unused acquired land, and scrutiny of land banks to prevent indirect alienation.
Replying to the special motion, Revenue Minister Lahkmen Rymbui described Meghalaya’s land governance as complex, involving clans, Shnong authorities, Himas, ADCs, and the state government, each with defined roles.
He stressed that all land transfers follow legal provisions, and pattas are issued only after no-objection certificates from relevant traditional authorities (headmen, Dallois, or Nokmas, depending on the area).
The Minister noted that most land remains unregistered, complicating identification and streamlining of holdings. Achieving uniform landholding across the State would require extensive discussion, as such reform is challenging.
On highway land acquisition, the process follows the National Highways Authority of India Act, 1956, with Divisional Commissioners acting as arbitrators after Government of India approval. Dissatisfied persons can approach the arbitrator regarding compensation.
Public hearings comply with legal procedures, backed by reports from deputy commissioners, he said.
Highlighting that land governance Garo Hills is dictated by the 1954 Regulation, Jaintia Hills by the 1985 Regulation and Khasi Hills by the 2021 Regulation, the Minister explained that ADCs manage land in Sixth Schedule areas, while the state government retains responsibility for government land via the Revenue and Disaster Management Department.
The Assam Land and Revenue Regulation, 1886 (adopted in 1972), applies to government land (with council exceptions), and cadastral surveys occur under the 1980 Meghalaya Land Survey and Records Preparation Act with State support, he added.
Rymbui made it clear that the state government aims to streamline landholding/transfer systems and harmonise laws (including Benami and Land Transfer Acts) to curb illegal alienation.
Any detected illegal or benami holdings will face legal action, he warned.
