Meghalaya
Lum Survey, Bara Bazaar
,
Shillong
,
East Khasi Hills
Published : 12 July, 2014   |   Last updated - 24 Jun, 2024
Hynniewtrep Youth Council dismantles alleged illegal settlements at Lum Survey in Shillong
Reported by
Sarup Sinha
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Updated by
Anupa Kujur
80
Households affected
384
People Affected
2024
Year started
Land area affected
80
Households affected
384
People Affected
2024
Year started
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Land Use
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Land Use
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Urban
Ended
1
Summary

The Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC), a pressure group in Meghalaya, took extreme measures against alleged illegal encroachment and drug peddling at Lum Survey, Shillong, by dismantling around 80 structures on 23 May 2024.

HYC president Roy Kupar Synrem had previously warned that the HYC would take matters into their own hands if the authorities did not act. Synrem justified the action by saying: "We had asked the district administration and the Defence Estate Officer (DEO) to immediately evict the illegal settlers from the said land. We went ahead because we did not receive any word from them till today."

The issue started on 25 April 2024, when the HYC voiced concerns over the illegal settlement of approximately 100 families near the Bara Bazar Fire and Emergency Station at Lum Survey, an area under the jurisdiction of the Shillong Cantonment Board (SCB). Synrem claimed that many settlers were outsiders, lacking voter identification cards issued in Meghalaya, and even alleged that some were Rohingya Muslims.

On 26 April, the HYC formally petitioned the Shillong Cantonment Board to evict the illegal settlers. During a meeting with SCB CEO Ayush Maurya, the HYC was informed that the land was under the DEO’s jurisdiction and that there was ongoing litigation regarding the land.

A joint inspection at Lum Survey was conducted on 8 May 2024, which involved additional magistrates, DEO officials from Guwahati, members of the Shillong Municipal Board, Shillong Cantonment Board, police, and HYC members. “During inspection we found that about 80-100 households were staying in the said plot of land by constructing huts used of plastics and other scrap materials and further on enquiry it is learned that these people were illegally staying there without any permission from the Cantonment Board or any other authority,” Synrem told reporters.

Following the demolition, the Superintendent of Police, Rituraj Ravi, informed the press that a case had been registered at Sadar Police Station against Synrem, Vice President Donbok Kharlyngdoh, Assistant General Secretary Isaac Basaiawmoit, and others involved in the eviction. “We have no problem in going to jail since we have done which was supposed to be the job of the government. The district administration should have evicted the illegal settlers immediately after the joint site inspection. But they decide not to act,” Kharlyngdoh told The Shillong Times

Synrem charged that Lum Survey had become a ‘den’ for drug dealing. He [emphasised](https://theshillongtimes.com/2024/05/24/hyc-dismantles-80-houses-at-lum-survey/#:~:text=“We cannot allow people involved,dismantling of their houses began.), "We cannot allow people involved in drug dealing to resume their illegal activities from this place."

Speaking to the media, the Deputy Commissioner of East Khasi Hills, Sibhi C Sadhu_, _stated, “The DEO and the district administration are on the “same page” in our effort to resolve the issue at the earliest legally. Nobody is allowed to take law into their own hands.”

Both Synrem and the Deputy Commissioner informed that the eviction issue of Lum Survey settlers is pending before the district court. The litigants in this case, according to reports, are not those whose houses were demolished, but rather three other people whose title suit against an eviction order by the Defense Estate Officer has been pending since 2006.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

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

Residential area

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?

Author
Reported by
Sarup Sinha

Meghalaya

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
Gujarat
Gujarat

Amid protest, Gujarat scraps Par-Tapi-Narmada river-linking project

Himachal Pradesh
Himachal Pradesh

Protests by Kinnauri tribes halt hydro electric project in Himachal Pradesh

Tamil Nadu
Tamil Nadu

Villagers oppose greenfield airport for Chennai in Parandur, Tamil Nadu

Himachal Pradesh
Himachal Pradesh

Landowners affected by Renukaji dam project await fair compensation

Arunachal Pradesh
Arunachal Pradesh

Hydroelectric projects on Subansiri river continue despite public outcry, disasters, and persistent floods

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers divided over Mandal-Becharaji Special Investment region in Gujarat

Gujarat
Gujarat

Farmers protest against GIDC in Gujarat, demand promised jobs, compensation

Goa
Goa

Proposed construction in Goa village blocks residents' access to agricultural fields, river

Fact sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Complaint against procedural violations

Hynniewtrep Youth Council dismantles alleged illegal settlements at Lum Survey in Shillong

Reported by

Sarup Sinha

Legal Review by

Anmol Gupta

Edited by

Anupa Sagar Kujur

Updated by

Updated by

Published on

July 16, 2024

July 29, 2024

Edited on

July 16, 2024

Sector

Land Use

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Other Kind of Land Use

Starting Year

2024

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Households Affected by Conflict

80

People Affected by Conflict

384

State

Meghalaya

Sector

Land Use

People Affected by Conflict

384

Households Affected by Conflict

80

Land Area Affected (in Hectares)

ha

Starting Year

2024

Location of Conflict

Shillong

Lum Survey, Bara Bazaar

East Khasi Hills

Reason or Cause of Conflict

Other Kind of Land Use

Land Conflict Summary

The Hynniewtrep Youth Council (HYC), a pressure group in Meghalaya, took extreme measures against alleged illegal encroachment and drug peddling at Lum Survey, Shillong, by dismantling around 80 structures on 23 May 2024.

HYC president Roy Kupar Synrem had previously warned that the HYC would take matters into their own hands if the authorities did not act. Synrem justified the action by saying: "We had asked the district administration and the Defence Estate Officer (DEO) to immediately evict the illegal settlers from the said land. We went ahead because we did not receive any word from them till today."

The issue started on 25 April 2024, when the HYC voiced concerns over the illegal settlement of approximately 100 families near the Bara Bazar Fire and Emergency Station at Lum Survey, an area under the jurisdiction of the Shillong Cantonment Board (SCB). Synrem claimed that many settlers were outsiders, lacking voter identification cards issued in Meghalaya, and even alleged that some were Rohingya Muslims.

On 26 April, the HYC formally petitioned the Shillong Cantonment Board to evict the illegal settlers. During a meeting with SCB CEO Ayush Maurya, the HYC was informed that the land was under the DEO’s jurisdiction and that there was ongoing litigation regarding the land.

A joint inspection at Lum Survey was conducted on 8 May 2024, which involved additional magistrates, DEO officials from Guwahati, members of the Shillong Municipal Board, Shillong Cantonment Board, police, and HYC members. “During inspection we found that about 80-100 households were staying in the said plot of land by constructing huts used of plastics and other scrap materials and further on enquiry it is learned that these people were illegally staying there without any permission from the Cantonment Board or any other authority,” Synrem told reporters.

Following the demolition, the Superintendent of Police, Rituraj Ravi, informed the press that a case had been registered at Sadar Police Station against Synrem, Vice President Donbok Kharlyngdoh, Assistant General Secretary Isaac Basaiawmoit, and others involved in the eviction. “We have no problem in going to jail since we have done which was supposed to be the job of the government. The district administration should have evicted the illegal settlers immediately after the joint site inspection. But they decide not to act,” Kharlyngdoh told The Shillong Times

Synrem charged that Lum Survey had become a ‘den’ for drug dealing. He [emphasised](https://theshillongtimes.com/2024/05/24/hyc-dismantles-80-houses-at-lum-survey/#:~:text=“We cannot allow people involved,dismantling of their houses began.), "We cannot allow people involved in drug dealing to resume their illegal activities from this place."

Speaking to the media, the Deputy Commissioner of East Khasi Hills, Sibhi C Sadhu_, _stated, “The DEO and the district administration are on the “same page” in our effort to resolve the issue at the earliest legally. Nobody is allowed to take law into their own hands.”

Both Synrem and the Deputy Commissioner informed that the eviction issue of Lum Survey settlers is pending before the district court. The litigants in this case, according to reports, are not those whose houses were demolished, but rather three other people whose title suit against an eviction order by the Defense Estate Officer has been pending since 2006.

Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Demand to retain/protect access to common land/resources

Complaint against procedural violations

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Urban

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

Residential area

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

Cantonments Act, 2006
Section 3 [Central Government to notify places as cantonments], Section 10 [Every cantonment to have a Cantonment Board. The Board is deemed to be a municipality] Section 247 [Provision penalizing erection or re-erection of a building which fails to satisfy criteria under the Act, including those which have not obtained sanction from the Board], Section 248 [The Board may direct demolition of a building which satisfies criteria set out in Section 247. The Board is required to provide notice to the owner/ occupier of the land prior to demolition. The Board is also required to pay the owner compensation for any loss incurred due to demolition]
Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971
Section 4 [Estate officer must issue a notice of show cause against proposed eviction]; Section 5 [An order of eviction shall only be made after an opportunity has been given to the unauthorised occupant to show cause after a personal hearing]
Meghalaya Municipal Act, 1973
Sections 158-160 [These provisions allow the Municipal Board to remove any encroachment on public roads, drains, water-course etc. The Board must issue a notice to the encroacher to remove the encroaching structure within 48 hours of the notice.]
  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:

Forced evictions/dispossession of land

Non-consultation with stakeholders

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)

Meghalaya District Court

Case Number

Main Reasoning/Decision of court

Little information is available regarding the subject of the case ongoing in the district court. The matter came up for hearing on May 27. The Defence Estate officer is yet to file their reply. The district court fixed July 7 for hearing.

Major Human Rights Violations Related to the Conflict:

Other harassment

Displacement

Reported Details of the Violation:

Around 80-100 houses and other structures were dismantled by HYC.

Date of Violation

May 23, 2024

Location of Violation

Lum Survey, Shillong

Additional Information

Nature of Protest

Protests/marches

Property damage/arson

Government Departments Involved in the Conflict:

Defence Estate Officer (DEO), Guwahati; Shillong Cantonment Board; District Administration of East Khasi Hills; Shillong Municipal Board; Meghalaya Human Rights Commission

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:

Hynniewtrep Youth Council

Protests/marches
Property damage/arson

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

Northeast Live

Other Land Conflicts in Meghalaya

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