Assam
,
Sonapur
,
Kamrup
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Protests erupt in Assam's Sonapur over proposed cement plant
Reported by
Emilo Yanthan
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
Households affected
People Affected
2024
Year started
8
Land area affected
Households affected
People Affected
2024
Year started
8
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Industry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Industry
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

On 10 June 2024, Sonapur in Assam witnessed widespread protest during a public hearing organised by the Assam Pollution Control Board on a proposed cement plant by Taj Cement. Residents and local organisations vehemently opposed the factory, alleging procedural lapses including inadequate public notification and advertising.

Locals said that the proposed factory, which would produce 10 lakh units a year, could cause severe pollution, environmental damage and pose health risks.

Before the hearing, a crowd surrounded officials from the Taj Cement, criticising the lack of announcements on information regarding the Rs 342-crore project. As the situation worsened, police and CRPF forces were called in to manage the unrest. According to a media report, protesters and security personnel engaged in violent altercations. However, there are no details of the number of persons injured.

Locals demanded a reassessment of the impact of the project on the environment since the project site is close to the Air Force station in Digaru and the Amchang and Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuaries. While a few people supported the factory for new job opportunities, many opposed it.

The Additional District Commissioner commented, "Many organizations have submitted memorandums, and each will be reported. Those involved in the violence will face the law."

Meanwhile, villagers near the proposed Taj Cement plant in Sonapur, filed a complaint with the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) claiming that the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) Assam violated procedures, especially concerning the timing and transparency, during the public hearing on June 10, 2024.

Baten Ali, a petitioner from Kapalkata village, stated, “The public hearing was conducted 106 days after Taj Cement’s application. The EIA Notification 2006 clearly states a 45-day limit. Such delays cast doubt on the fairness of the entire environmental assessment process.”

Another petitioner, Rakesh Hazarika, said, “This is a clear lapse in ensuring transparency and access to crucial information. The public cannot provide informed feedback if they don’t have access to the Draft EIA document locally.”

In its order, the NGT directed the SEIAA to cancel the public hearing dated 10/06/2024 and engage in other agencies to hold a fresh public hearing as per the procedure laid down in the EIA Notification, 2006.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

1. Demand to quash the public hearing held on 10/06/2024 2. to engage other agency or authority other than the Assam State Pollution Board to complete the public hearing process as per the procedure laid down in EIA Notification,2006.

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common

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?

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

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

342

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

2024

Page Number In Investment Document:

Has the Conflict Ended?

No

When did it end?

Why did the conflict end?

Author
Reported by
Emilo Yanthan

Assam

Kumar Sambhav is a social entrepreneur and award-winning journalist, leading innovative research in accountability investigations. He is the founder of Land Conflict Watch and is currently working as India Research Lead with Princeton University’s Digital Witness Lab.

Read More

Latest updates
Rajasthan
Rajasthan

UIT Bikaner's Jorbeer Housing Project on Stalls Following Rajasthan High Court Order

Rajasthan
Rajasthan

Jaipur Development Authority Acquires Land for Township Project, Ending Conflict

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Farmers land acquired under Mansarovar Housing Scheme in Lucknow

Maharashtra
Maharashtra

Citizens unite against cycle track around Powai, Vihar Lakes in Mumbai

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Families displaced by Mandal Dam in Jharkhand opppose project resumption

Jharkhand
Jharkhand

Jharkhand approves Adani's thermal plant, farmers allege violation of LARR Act

Gujarat
Gujarat

Pastoral Community in Gujarat's Banni Grasslands Demands Titles Recognising Community Forest Rights

Uttar Pradesh
Uttar Pradesh

Builder Encroaches Upon Farmers Land in Gosaiganj Lucknow, 150 Allottees in Lurch

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Protests erupt in Assam's Sonapur over proposed cement plant

Reported by

Emilo Yanthan

Legal Review by

Sourabh Rai, Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

September 17, 2024

September 18, 2024

Edited on

September 17, 2024

Sector

Industry

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Other Kind of Industry

Environmental/Ecological Damage

Starting Year

2024

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

8

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

People Affected by Conflict

State

Assam

Sector

Industry

People Affected by Conflict

Households Affected by Conflict

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

8

ha

Starting Year

2024

Location of Conflict

Sonapur

Kamrup

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Other Kind of Industry

Environmental/Ecological Damage

Land Conflict Summary

On 10 June 2024, Sonapur in Assam witnessed widespread protest during a public hearing organised by the Assam Pollution Control Board on a proposed cement plant by Taj Cement. Residents and local organisations vehemently opposed the factory, alleging procedural lapses including inadequate public notification and advertising.

Locals said that the proposed factory, which would produce 10 lakh units a year, could cause severe pollution, environmental damage and pose health risks.

Before the hearing, a crowd surrounded officials from the Taj Cement, criticising the lack of announcements on information regarding the Rs 342-crore project. As the situation worsened, police and CRPF forces were called in to manage the unrest. According to a media report, protesters and security personnel engaged in violent altercations. However, there are no details of the number of persons injured.

Locals demanded a reassessment of the impact of the project on the environment since the project site is close to the Air Force station in Digaru and the Amchang and Pobitora Wildlife Sanctuaries. While a few people supported the factory for new job opportunities, many opposed it.

The Additional District Commissioner commented, "Many organizations have submitted memorandums, and each will be reported. Those involved in the violence will face the law."

Meanwhile, villagers near the proposed Taj Cement plant in Sonapur, filed a complaint with the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority (SEIAA) claiming that the State Pollution Control Board (SPCB) Assam violated procedures, especially concerning the timing and transparency, during the public hearing on June 10, 2024.

Baten Ali, a petitioner from Kapalkata village, stated, “The public hearing was conducted 106 days after Taj Cement’s application. The EIA Notification 2006 clearly states a 45-day limit. Such delays cast doubt on the fairness of the entire environmental assessment process.”

Another petitioner, Rakesh Hazarika, said, “This is a clear lapse in ensuring transparency and access to crucial information. The public cannot provide informed feedback if they don’t have access to the Draft EIA document locally.”

In its order, the NGT directed the SEIAA to cancel the public hearing dated 10/06/2024 and engage in other agencies to hold a fresh public hearing as per the procedure laid down in the EIA Notification, 2006.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Opposition against environmental degradation

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

1. Demand to quash the public hearing held on 10/06/2024 2. to engage other agency or authority other than the Assam State Pollution Board to complete the public hearing process as per the procedure laid down in EIA Notification,2006.

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

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Other Natural Resource extraction/dependence

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

342

Type of investment:

Investment Expected

Year of Estimation

2024

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

Environmental Impact Assessment Notification, 2006
Schedule I, Item 3(b) [Mandatory environmental clearance for cement plants with one million tonne production capacity] Paragraph 2 [Prior Environmental Clearance to be sought for certain projects] Paragraph 3(2)(iv) [This section empowers the Union government to take any measures necessary for protecting the environment. It is under this section that it can lay down standards for emission or discharge of environmental pollutants from various sources]; Paragraph 7(i)(III) [Public consultation necessary before granting of environmental clearance.]
Environment Protection Rules, 1986
Section 8 [This section states that persons handling hazardous substances must comply with the required procedural safeguards]
  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

Yes

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

Pending

Whether any adjudicatory body was approached

Name of the adjudicatory body

Name(s) of the Court(s)

National Green Tribunal (Eastern Bench)

Case Number

Original Application No. 151/2024

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

The residents of Village Kapalkata, Sonapur, District Kamrup (M), Assam, have filed the petition in the NGT Eastern Bench, alleging that the 'Public Hearing' conducted on 10.06.2024 was illegal and in violation of the villagers' right to live in a clean and healthy environment. They further allege that the 'Public Hearing' was not adequately advertised, leading to insufficient awareness among the local population. The court on the order dated August 2, 2024 directed all the Respondents to file their counter-affidavits within four weeks.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

No items found.

Reported Details of the Violation:

Date of Violation

Location of Violation

Additional Information

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

District Administration, Police and CRPF forces, 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:

M/S Taj Cement Manufacturing Pvt Ltd

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

No

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

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

Other Land Conflicts in Assam

cross
    Not a member yet?
    Sign up now
    Conflicts Map
    Conflict Database
    About Us