Villagers of Daistong in East Jaintia Hills, backed by the Jaintia National Council (JNC) and the Jaintia Students’ Union (JSU), have mounted a sustained protest against a proposed Shree Cement limestone-mining and cement-plant project located in the Nongkhlieh area near the Shnongrim ridge. Protesters say the project would directly threaten Krem Liat Prah, a cave system measuring 30,957 metres (about 101,600 ft) — the longest and largest cave system on the Indian subcontinent — and would imperil nearby settlements, farmland and water sources.
Residents and campaigners argue the scale of proposed mining and the construction of a fully functioning cement plant could damage rivers, forests, agricultural land and local air quality. They warn of dust pollution, groundwater depletion and long-term ecological harm, and say the site is uncomfortably close to villages and cultivated land. Those concerns, they say, were not meaningfully addressed before project approvals were sought.
Beyond environmental risks, protesters allege irregularities in land transfers. They claim tribal land was previously transferred to non-tribal entities in ways that may contravene the Meghalaya Transfer of Land Regulation Act and rules of the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council. Activists say the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) documents fail to clarify land ownership and the chain of approvals.
The public hearing process has become a flashpoint. Protesters allege that villagers were pressured into accepting hearings, that earlier hearings took place amid intimidation, and that opponents were at times blocked from attending or speaking freely. Such accounts have amplified fears of a corporate takeover of local land and resources, and fuelled longstanding grievances about transparency and community consent.
The JNC and JSU contend that East Jaintia Hills is increasingly being treated as an industrial extraction zone that benefits outside corporations while local communities shoulder environmental and social costs. They frame the dispute as a larger struggle over indigenous land rights, dignity and the right to prior, informed consent. Questions have also been raised about legal and procedural compliance, including whether environmental clearances should be processed by the state or the central government because of the proposed lease size, and about alleged deficiencies and violations in the EIA process.
Supporters of the project point to potential short-term benefits: job creation, improved infrastructure and contributions to Meghalaya’s economy. That promise of economic gain has split opinion locally, even as more residents ask how much mining is too much. The debate now centers on whether developmental imperatives should override environmental protection and the rights of indigenous communities.
Original Source: https://theshillongtimes.com/2026/05/22/mining-versus-environment-2/
Category: EDITORIAL
Tags:
Publish Date: 2026-05-22 03:46:00
