Loading…
The Meghalaya Legislative Assembly unanimously adopted a resolution rejecting uranium exploration, mining and ore-processing in the state, with all 60 MLAs voting in favour.
The resolution was moved by Chief Minister Conrad K Sangma and urges the Union Government, the Department of Atomic Energy and Uranium Corporation of India Limited not to permit or undertake any uranium mining operation in Meghalaya.
It targets the long-stalled Kylleng-Pyndengsohiong-Mawthabah (KPM) project in the West Khasi Hills, where sandstone-hosted uranium reserves were established by the Atomic Minerals Directorate in 1992.
Opposition rests on health and contamination fears and on Meghalaya's Sixth Schedule land regime, under which land and the minerals beneath it are largely under community, clan and private ownership.
The stand sets state consent and customary land rights against the Centre's search for domestic uranium for the nuclear power programme.
The Atomic Minerals Directorate for Exploration and Research (AMD) establishes ore reserves at Kylleng and Rangam in the West Khasi Hills - the first sandstone-hosted uranium orebody of its kind found in India
Exploratory drilling begins; sustained community protests lead to repeated suspension of operations
UCIL prepares a feasibility report for open-pit mines with a processing plant at Mawthabah
The Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change grants environmental clearance to the KPM project
The state permits UCIL exploratory activity over 422 hectares
That permission is revoked after renewed protests
The Assembly passes a unanimous resolution against uranium mining and ore-processing in the state
Apex body for India's nuclear programme, covering fuel supply, research and power generation
Public sector undertaking under the DAE responsible for uranium mining and milling in India
DAE unit that surveys and establishes India's atomic mineral reserves, including the Meghalaya deposits
Most Indian mineral law assumes the state owns the subsoil and can lease it out. Meghalaya, a Sixth Schedule state, is different: land is overwhelmingly held by clans, communities and private owners under customary practice, administered through Autonomous District Councils rather than the state revenue machinery. That makes local consent a legal question and not only a political one. The resolution cited the Supreme Court's 2019 judgment in State of Meghalaya vs All Dimasa Students' Union as recognising private and community landowners' rights over the surface and the minerals beneath it. A project can therefore hold central environmental clearance and still be unable to obtain the ground it needs.
Simple Analogy: In most states the government owns the basement of the house and can rent it out even though you live upstairs. In Meghalaya the family that owns the house owns the basement too - so a tenant has to persuade the family, not just the municipality.
GS Paper II > Federalism, Sixth Schedule and tribal rights; GS Paper III > Energy security, mineral resources and environmental impact of mining
General Awareness > Polity and Current Affairs
General Awareness > Current Affairs
General Awareness > National Current Affairs
Under which Schedule of the Constitution of India can the transfer of tribal land to private parties for mining be declared null and void?
Answer: Fifth Schedule
Constitutional provision for administration of tribal areas in Assam, Meghalaya, Tripura and Mizoram through Autonomous District Councils with powers over land, forests and customary law.
Kylleng-Pyndengsohiong-Mawthabah uranium mining and processing project in Meghalaya's West Khasi Hills, environmentally cleared in 2007 but never operational.
Residual material left after uranium ore is milled; its long-term storage is the main contamination concern raised by mining-affected communities.
An expression of the will of the House. It carries strong political weight in Centre-State bargaining but does not by itself override central law.