Manipur
Ramva/Lambui village
,
Lunghar
,
Ukhrul
Published :
Aug 2026
|
Updated :
NH-202 expansion faces resistance in Manipur’s Lunghar village over proposed bypass
Reported by
East Street Journal Asia
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
435
Households affected
2088
People affected
2017
Year started
14
ha.
Land area affected
435
Households affected
2088
People Affected
2017
Year started
14
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Infrastructure
Reason/Cause of conflict
Roads
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

National Highway 202 winds through Manipur’s Ukhrul district, connecting thousands of Tangkhul Naga residents to healthcare, education, markets, and jobs in the capital city. Lunghar village in Ukhrul is known for producing pineapples, lemons, and bananas. The village, with around 435 households, relies on the highway to sustain its livelihoods through transportation and roadside vending.

The issue traces back to a 2017 survey that aligned with the existing NH-150 (old designation) route and raised hopes for improved connectivity. However, another survey in 2022, conducted under the then-Ukhrul District Commissioner Krishna Kumar, introduced a bypass allegedly without prior consultation with village authorities or local organisations. 

Villagers proposed alternate route

Villagers have proposed “Alignment No. 4,” a shorter route through the village ground that avoids existing structures. The alignment was suggested during the 2022 survey, but was not included in the final proposal. Demanding reconsideration, locals continue to refuse compensation, stating they will resist the bypass until their alternative alignment is accepted.

The project was opposed publicly in December 2025, when over 1,000 residents, including men, women, elders, and youth, staged a peaceful protest, marching from the public ground to the main gate of Lunghar village along NH-202. The proposed bypass, part of a National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL)-led highway expansion under the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH), is expected to alter the existing route in the area.

Estimated 6–7 km farmland impact

Estimates suggest it could affect 6–7 km of farmland and extend across nearly 14 km of village land, including forests, landscapes, and water sources. Villagers allege serious procedural and technical flaws in the planning process. A 3D mapping exercise reportedly listed only three landowners across a 14 km stretch, despite records indicating 54 private owners overall and more than 100 in a 3.4 km section. They also claim fertile farmland was misclassified as barren, raising concerns over the accuracy of the survey. 

Village Headman LW Mataisang said initial optimism had turned into concern after the bypass proposal. “We were happy. But when we learned that the road would bypass our village, it deeply hurt the sentiments of our people,” he said, describing NH-202 as a “lifeline” for the community’s economic survival. Lunghar Village Authority member LW Vareiso added that tribal land protections under the Constitution, along with exemptions from the Revenue Act and Land Requisition Act, make the survey findings questionable. Multiple appeals were also made to Chief Minister Biren Singh, Minister Nitin Gadkari, and through Ramdas Athawale’s letter in May 2025. 

Similar concerns have emerged from neighbouring Ramva village, a commercial hub at the junction of four state highways. Landowners say they gave up land under the National Highways Act, 1956, expecting fair compensation, but allege it was undervalued at about Rs 40 per square foot and commercial plots were also wrongly classified as barren land.
Chairman L. Luingam said delays of over three years continue despite repeated appeals, partial verifications, and assurances of arbitration. Residents also report erosion risks to homes due to the absence of retaining walls, describing the situation as a “man-made disaster” affecting already vulnerable households. The project, executed by NHIDCL under MoRTH, includes multiple packages such as the Yaingangpokpi–Finch Corner section, estimated at Rs 478.71 crore, and remains under implementation amid continuing local opposition.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

1. Opposition to bypass 2. Demand to retain existing alignment through the village for continued connectivity and development 3. Support for NH 202 upgradation but insist on inclusion of village in the route

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

Non-Forest (Other than Grazing Land), Common

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?

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

Agricultural land, Other natural resource collection/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Data Unavailable

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

478.71

Type of investment:

Not Available

Year of Estimation

2022

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

4
Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH); District Commissioner, Ukhrul

PSUs Involved in the Conflict:

National Highways & Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL)

Did LCW Approach Government Authorities for Comments?

Name, Designation and Comment of the Government Authorities Approached

Corporate Parties Involved in the Conflict:

Dhruv Consultancy Services Ltd and M/s Varaha Infra Limited

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Tangkhul Naga Community, Lunghar Village Authority; Tangkhul Naga Long (tribal body), Ramva Village Development Committee

5
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?

Legal Supporting Documents

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
Author
Reported by
Show more work
Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

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

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?

Status of Project

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Agricultural land, Other natural resource collection/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Data Unavailable

Source/Reference

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
Conflicts Map
Conflict Database
About Us