JOIN THE LCW
COMMUNITY

Exclusive monthly policy briefs, stories from the ground, quarterly analytics report, curated expert talks, merchandise and much more. Support our work!

Sign up today

East Jaintia Hills villages demand immediate shutdown of illegal coke oven plants

Reported by

Sarup Sinha

Legal Review by

Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Published on

May 19, 2024

June 24, 2024

Edited on

May 19, 2024

State

Meghalaya

Sector

Industry

People Affected by Conflict

759

Households Affected by Conflict

135

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

2022

Location of Conflict

Nongsning

Umrasong

East Jaintia Hills

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Other Kind of Industry

Land Conflict Summary

On 15 February 2024, residents of Nongsning and Umrasong villages in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills protested against the establishment and operation of illegal coke oven plants in their vicinity.

Alleging that the plants pose serious environmental and health risks, the Rangbah Shnongs (traditional village heads) of the two villages submitted a formal petition to the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board (MSPCB), demanding an immediate closure of illegal coke oven plants.

The MSPCB had recently granted licenses or Consent to Establish (CTE)  to five companies, namely M M Minerals, Unique Industry, Presidium Breez, Magic Coke, and Loanis Industries Private Limited, to set up their coke oven plants near the two villages.

Villagers said that the emissions from the plants are polluting the air, leading to respiratory problems like bronchial diseases. They further claimed that the Presidium Breez coke plant in Nongsning contaminated the drinking water sources at Umthlu Umdathli by dumping construction materials. They also alleged that some of the coke oven plants in the area were operating without the required licenses from MSPCB.

In 2023, a Meghalaya High Court-appointed committee, led by Justice (retired) BP Katakey, found that three coke oven plants - Jaintia Coke Pvt Ltd, Abhi Coke, and Syrpai Coke - in East Jaintia Hills had unpaid dues of Rs 2.4 crore in royalty and cess.

On 23 February 2024, Mowkaiaw MLA Nujorki Sungoh told Meghalaya Assembly that the MSPCB had initially denied licenses and Consent to Establish (CTE) to these five coke plants. Sungoh also expressed his surprise that the cases against five plants were withdrawn.

Responding to Sungoh, Chief Minister of Meghalaya acknowledged the potential health risks but pushed back against the notion of portraying coke plants, or industries in general, as "villains". He argued that such perceptions would hinder Meghalaya's economic growth and job creation. Sangma stressed the need to alter this narrative, stating, "This narrative must be changed. The government is concerned about the environment and is striving to maintain a delicate balance between ecology and economy."

Regarding Presidium Breez issue, Sangma said that a show-cause notice was issued on 19 February 2024, ordering the company to cease all establishment and construction activities for violating CTE conditions and dumping construction materials in water sources.  

The former village head of Umrasong had reportedly given Presidium Breez Coke Plant a No Objection certificate (NOC) without realising that it would have a negative effect on the water source. Several petitions have also been made by the villages since 2022 to the authorities of East Jaiñtia Hills to not grant any consent for establishment.

Since 2000, 12 units were given the CTE by the MSPCB prior to formulation of the siting norms/criteria for the coke plants in 2020 via Notification dated 23.12.2020.

In its judgement against the coke plants in 2022, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) deemed as “fallacious” the state authorities position that no action was taken against the coke plants because the Consent to Operate (CTO) was issued to the companies before the existing norms for Coke Plants were laid down in 2020.

The 12 industries, which had obtained permits prior to the 2020 notification, challenged the NGT order before the Supreme Court. The matter is still ongoing.

Media reports suggest that as many as 57 illegal coke plants are functioning in a clandestine manner in East Jaintia Hills district and neighbouring areas districts of the state polluting the environment.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Details of sources (names of accused, names and numbers of any lawyers, names of any police officers contacted)

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Water bodies, Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Legal Data

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Section 17 [State Pollution Control Board to advise the State Government with respect to the location of any polluting industry.] Section 24 [No person shall knowingly cause any polluting matter to be discharged into any stream or well or on land] Section 25 [No person, without prior consent of State Pollution Control Board, to establish any industry which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into water body]
Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
Section 17 [State Pollution Control Board to advise the State Government with respect to the location of any polluting industry.] Section 21 [No person shall establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area without the consent of State Board]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

No

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Violation of environmental laws

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

National Green Tribunal, Supreme Court

Case Number

O.A. 100/2022 (EZ), CA 8364/2022 (Supreme Court)

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

On July 8, 2022, the National Green Tribunal (Eastern Zone bench) disposed of the case. Among other findings, the Tribunal held that 12 coke oven industries had obtained necessary permissions before the 2020 notification was issued. The Notification lays down the siting criteria of Coke Plants (with installed production capacity of less than 25,000 MTPA) in Meghalaya. The Tribunal directed that appropriate action be taken against these 12 industries. The respondent coke industries filed an appeal in the Supreme Court shortly thereafter. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court on November 7, 2022. The respondent industries contended that the only grievance of the original petitioner was with reference to the location of the industries and that each of them had already obtained prior permission from state authorities. On February 20, 2023, the Supreme Court directed the state authorities to refrain from taking further action against the industries. The matter is next set to be heard on July 16, 2024.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Protests/marches

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Hynñiewtrep Youths’ Council (HYC)

Information on the use of criminal law

What was the action taken by the police?

How many people did the police detain or arrest?

What is the current status of the detained/accused persons?

Did the person face any violence while in police custody?

If any arrests took place, were the accused persons produced before a judge within 24 hours of the arrest?

If the accused was not produced before a magistrate within 24 hours, or not produced at all, what were the reasons?

Legislation under which the accused was charged

Was the accused person informed of their right to legal representation? Did the accused person have access to legal aid?

In cases where the accused person approached the court for bail, was bail granted?

Why was bail granted or rejected? If granted, what were the bail conditions and quantum of bail?

Were there any other notable irregularities that took place, or other significant details?

Resources

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Images

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Video

Meghalaya Legislative Assembly Channel

On 15 February 2024, residents of Nongsning and Umrasong villages in Meghalaya's East Jaintia Hills protested against the establishment and operation of illegal coke oven plants in their vicinity.

Alleging that the plants pose serious environmental and health risks, the Rangbah Shnongs (traditional village heads) of the two villages submitted a formal petition to the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board (MSPCB), demanding an immediate closure of illegal coke oven plants.

The MSPCB had recently granted licenses or Consent to Establish (CTE)  to five companies, namely M M Minerals, Unique Industry, Presidium Breez, Magic Coke, and Loanis Industries Private Limited, to set up their coke oven plants near the two villages.

Villagers said that the emissions from the plants are polluting the air, leading to respiratory problems like bronchial diseases. They further claimed that the Presidium Breez coke plant in Nongsning contaminated the drinking water sources at Umthlu Umdathli by dumping construction materials. They also alleged that some of the coke oven plants in the area were operating without the required licenses from MSPCB.

In 2023, a Meghalaya High Court-appointed committee, led by Justice (retired) BP Katakey, found that three coke oven plants - Jaintia Coke Pvt Ltd, Abhi Coke, and Syrpai Coke - in East Jaintia Hills had unpaid dues of Rs 2.4 crore in royalty and cess.

On 23 February 2024, Mowkaiaw MLA Nujorki Sungoh told Meghalaya Assembly that the MSPCB had initially denied licenses and Consent to Establish (CTE) to these five coke plants. Sungoh also expressed his surprise that the cases against five plants were withdrawn.

Responding to Sungoh, Chief Minister of Meghalaya acknowledged the potential health risks but pushed back against the notion of portraying coke plants, or industries in general, as "villains". He argued that such perceptions would hinder Meghalaya's economic growth and job creation. Sangma stressed the need to alter this narrative, stating, "This narrative must be changed. The government is concerned about the environment and is striving to maintain a delicate balance between ecology and economy."

Regarding Presidium Breez issue, Sangma said that a show-cause notice was issued on 19 February 2024, ordering the company to cease all establishment and construction activities for violating CTE conditions and dumping construction materials in water sources.  

The former village head of Umrasong had reportedly given Presidium Breez Coke Plant a No Objection certificate (NOC) without realising that it would have a negative effect on the water source. Several petitions have also been made by the villages since 2022 to the authorities of East Jaiñtia Hills to not grant any consent for establishment.

Since 2000, 12 units were given the CTE by the MSPCB prior to formulation of the siting norms/criteria for the coke plants in 2020 via Notification dated 23.12.2020.

In its judgement against the coke plants in 2022, the National Green Tribunal (NGT) deemed as “fallacious” the state authorities position that no action was taken against the coke plants because the Consent to Operate (CTO) was issued to the companies before the existing norms for Coke Plants were laid down in 2020.

The 12 industries, which had obtained permits prior to the 2020 notification, challenged the NGT order before the Supreme Court. The matter is still ongoing.

Media reports suggest that as many as 57 illegal coke plants are functioning in a clandestine manner in East Jaintia Hills district and neighbouring areas districts of the state polluting the environment.

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to cancel the project

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

Type of Common Land

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land)

Total investment involved (in Crores):

Type of investment:

Year of Estimation

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Categories of Legislations Involved in the Conflict

Legislations/Policies Involved

Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974
Section 17 [State Pollution Control Board to advise the State Government with respect to the location of any polluting industry.] Section 24 [No person shall knowingly cause any polluting matter to be discharged into any stream or well or on land] Section 25 [No person, without prior consent of State Pollution Control Board, to establish any industry which is likely to discharge sewage or trade effluent into water body]
Air (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 1981
Section 17 [State Pollution Control Board to advise the State Government with respect to the location of any polluting industry.] Section 21 [No person shall establish or operate any industrial plant in an air pollution control area without the consent of State Board]
  1. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  2. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  3. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  4. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  5. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  6. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

  7. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

    Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Whether claims/objections were made as per procedure in the relevant statute

No

What was the claim(s)/objection(s) raised by the community?

What was the Decision of the Concerned Government Department?

Legal Processes and Loopholes Enabling the Conflict:

Violation of environmental laws

Legal Status:

In Court

Status of Case In Court

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

No

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

National Green Tribunal, Supreme Court

Case Number

O.A. 100/2022 (EZ), CA 8364/2022 (Supreme Court)

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

On July 8, 2022, the National Green Tribunal (Eastern Zone bench) disposed of the case. Among other findings, the Tribunal held that 12 coke oven industries had obtained necessary permissions before the 2020 notification was issued. The Notification lays down the siting criteria of Coke Plants (with installed production capacity of less than 25,000 MTPA) in Meghalaya. The Tribunal directed that appropriate action be taken against these 12 industries. The respondent coke industries filed an appeal in the Supreme Court shortly thereafter. The matter was heard in the Supreme Court on November 7, 2022. The respondent industries contended that the only grievance of the original petitioner was with reference to the location of the industries and that each of them had already obtained prior permission from state authorities. On February 20, 2023, the Supreme Court directed the state authorities to refrain from taking further action against the industries. The matter is next set to be heard on July 16, 2024.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Whether criminal law was used against protestors:

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Nature of Protest

Protests/marches

Complaints/petitions/letters/memorandums to officials

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Hynñiewtrep Youths’ Council (HYC)

Resources Related to Conflict

  • News Articles Related to the Conflict:
  • Documents Related to the Conflict:
  • Links Related to the Conflict:

Image Credit:  

Image Credit:  

Meghalaya Legislative Assembly Channel

Documented By

Text Link

Reviewed By

Text Link

Updated By

Text Link

Edited By

Text LinkLand Conflict Watch

Other Land Conflicts in Meghalaya

cross
Not a member yet?
Sign up now