Meghalaya
,
Daistong
,
East Jaintia Hills
Published :
Oct 2026
|
Updated :
Tribal land transfer, cement plant, and community opposition in Daistong, Meghalaya
Reported by
Sarup Sinha
Legal Review by
Anmol Gupta
Rakshit Dhingra, Amrita Chekkutty
Edited by
Anupa Kujur
85
Households affected
596
People affected
2025
Year started
25
ha.
Land area affected
85
Households affected
596
People Affected
2025
Year started
25
Land area affected
Key Insights
Sector
Industry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Industry
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Unclassifed
Sector
Industry
Reason/Cause of conflict
Other Kind of Industry
Conflict Status
Ongoing
Ended
Legal Status
Region Classification
Rural
Ended
1
Summary

In the Daistong village of Meghalaya’s East Jaintia Hills, the proposal to establish an Integrated Cement Plant by Shree Cement Limited has stirred controversy, with local residents and pressure groups alleging illegal land transfer and procedural violations in the public hearing.

Public opposition intensified on 19 December 2025 when the Jaintia National Council (JNC), along with residents of Daistong and nearby villages, organised a big protest outside the Deputy Commissioner’s office in Khliehriat. Hundreds of people gathered, holding placards reading “Shree Cement Go Back” and “Daistong Land Is Not Factory Land,” while raising slogans like “Dai thaw beain, ngi pyrshah,” meaning “selling land illegally, we protest.”

The issue first surfaced after Shree Cement proposed setting up an integrated cement plant at Khara Siang Lum Pyrshin in Daistong, with a planned clinker capacity of 0.95 million tonnes per annum and cement capacity of 0.99 million tonnes per annum. According to documents, 61.97 acres of land were purchased at ₹4 lakh per acre through an agreement dated 6 October 2025. The agreement states that the buyer, Bharat Sharma, holds absolute possession of the land and that no future claims related to agricultural loss or the establishment of the cement plant will be raised.

Soon after these details became public, the JNC raised objections, stating that the land transaction violated the Meghalaya Transfer of Land Regulation Act, 1971, which prohibits the transfer of tribal land to non-tribals without statutory approval from competent authorities and the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council. The JNC also alleged that the company’s Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report, submitted to the Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board (MSPCB) on 19 November 2025, lacked essential documents, including Autonomous District Council approval, mutation records, and permissions under the 1971 Act.

The JNC Central Executive Committee submitted a memorandum to East Jaiñtia Hills Deputy Commissioner Shivansh Awasthi, demanding a detailed inquiry and calling for the suspension of the MSPCB-scheduled public hearing. JNC president Sambormi Lyngdoh argued that the project also violated the EIA Notification, 2006, and the Meghalaya State Investment Promotion Facilitation Act, 2024, which, he said, does not override existing land protection laws. He further criticised the MSPCB for proceeding with the hearing without verifying land ownership. “We demand an immediate inquiry into the land chain of title, the authenticity of documents, and directions to the MSPCB and the State Environment Impact Assessment Authority to halt the public hearing,” Lyngdoh said.

The Deputy Commissioner assured the delegation that the matter would be brought to the attention of higher authorities and that a written response would be provided.

At the protest site on 19 December, speakers—including village elders, community leaders, and JNC representatives—declared that community land could not be handed out for industrial purposes without their free, informed, and collective consent.

On the day of the public hearing at Madan Mooki in Daistong, members of pressure groups and local residents opposing the project alleged that they were forcibly prevented from reaching the venue. Protesters said that heavy dump trucks were parked across the road and that hundreds of individuals, allegedly hired by the company, formed a human blockade nearly 500 metres from the site. According to the JNC, villagers who attempted to pass through were stopped by unidentified masked men, some of whom were allegedly carrying weapons and appeared intoxicated.

Lyngdoh said the blockade violated the EIA Notification, 2006, which guarantees citizens the right to participate in public hearings. “India’s Constitution guarantees every citizen the freedom to appear, speak, and express their concerns at a public hearing, especially those directly affected”, he said. He further alleged that some residents of Daistong were physically assaulted while trying to reach the venue.

As a result of the blockade, only 114 people attended the public hearing, and no representatives of the opposing groups were able to participate. Four representatives from Nongkhlieh Elaka spoke in support of the cement plant. The Doloi of Elaka Nongkhlieh, Na-O Sukhlain, said villagers would benefit from employment opportunities. Other Elaka functionaries stated that while coke oven plants had caused pollution in the past, they believed the cement company would follow environmental norms.

The hearing was chaired by MSPCB Environmental Engineer Y F Laloo and attended by Deputy Commissioner Shivansh Awasthi, Superintendent of Police Vikash Kumar, and other senior officials. Pressure groups later accused the district administration and police of failing to ensure free and fair public participation.

Hynniewtrep Integrated Territorial Organisation (HITO) president Donbok Dkhar criticised the NPP-led government, alleging a ‘conspiracy’ to push the project through. “The Chief Minister chairs the single window agency and under him many coke oven plants were established. Outside he speaks about the North East, but wants to sell off the State and to make us swallow smoke. If this company is allowed to set base, many others will follow and affect the livelihoods of farmers” he said.

Following the hearing, the JNC announced that it would move the High Court, citing serious flaws in the EIA report and what it described as the use of force to silence opposition. “We will not sit idly. We will take this issue to the judiciary so that a public hearing held under fear and force cannot be used to justify environmental clearance for the project,” Lyngdoh said.

2
Fact Sheet

Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Complaint against procedural violations

Demand to cancel the project

Other Demand/Contention of the Affected Community

Region Classification

Rural

Type of Land

Common and Private

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

Project underway despite protests

Original Project Deadline

Whether the Project has been Delayed

Significance of Land to Land Owners/Users

Dwelling/habitation use, Other natural resource collection/dependence, Ecosystem/Environmental Services

Whether the project was stalled due to land conflict

Source/Reference

Total investment involved (in Crores):

₹

2.48

Type of investment:

Investment Made

Year of Estimation

2025

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:

Department of Mining and Geology (Directorate of Mineral Resources), Meghalaya; Meghalaya State Pollution Control Board; Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council; Office of the District Commissioner; East Jaintia Hills District.

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:

Shree Cement Limited

Did LCW Approach Corporate Parties for Comments?

Communities/Local Organisations in the Conflict:

Jaintia National Council; Hynñiewtrep Integrated Territorial Organisation

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
Sarup Sinha

Sarup is a researcher and doctoral student in Political Science at the North-Eastern Hill University, Shillong. His research interests lie in the area of ethnic and land conflicts, political ecology and development and urban spaces of Northeast India. He has a Masters’ degree in Development Studies from the Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati. He has previously done research/internships with NABARD, Oxford Microfinance Initiative (renamed Oxford Development Consultancy) and CSDS (Lokniti Programme).

Show more work
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