Shillong, Meghalaya – September 22, 2025 – The Meghalaya government has firmly rejected accusations of widespread forest land encroachment by the University of Science & Technology, Meghalaya (USTM), and refuted Assam’s claims linking such activities to flooding in Guwahati. In a detailed submission to the Supreme Court, prompted by a petition filed by Jitul Deka, the state defended its land allocation processes and outlined systemic issues in Assam as the true cause of Guwahati’s waterlogging. The case is set for further hearing on October 8.

The controversy stems from a report by the Central Empowered Committee (CEC), which advises the Supreme Court on environmental compliance. The CEC recommended a ₹150.35 crore penalty on USTM for allegedly diverting forest land without necessary approvals. The fine encompasses charges for the net present value of forest land, tree felling, environmental compensation, land restoration, demolition, and compensatory afforestation.

In response, Meghalaya asserted that land allocated to USTM adhered to legal procedures, with penalties already imposed and recovered for any violations. The state emphasized that forest lands in Meghalaya fall under the dual jurisdiction of the state government and autonomous district councils, a fact well-recognized by the Supreme Court.

Clarifying Land Use and Infrastructure Claims

Meghalaya clarified that the 60.05 hectares diverted for the 400kV NETC transmission line spans 10.4 km across Ri-Bhoi District, not exclusively within USTM’s campus. Chief Minister Conrad K. Sangma had previously defended the university against accusations leveled by Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma, underscoring that the institution operates within regulatory frameworks.

Debunking Assam’s Flooding Narrative

Addressing Assam’s claim that hill-cutting in Meghalaya caused Guwahati’s flooding, the state government pointed to natural topography rather than man-made interventions. “Rainwater flows from Meghalaya to Assam due to elevation differences—an inevitable geographical reality,” the submission noted. Meghalaya attributed Guwahati’s flooding to systemic urban planning failures, including:

Unplanned Urbanization: Rapid expansion up to Khanapara and Jorabat near the Meghalaya border has reduced floodplains.

Wetland Encroachment: Natural water bodies have been compromised, exacerbating waterlogging.

Poor Drainage Systems: Blocked drains, silted channels, and inadequate dredging have turned rivers like the Bharalu into “heavily polluted open sewers.”

Lack of Systemic Planning: Fragile infrastructure and encroachments on waterways have intensified monsoon flooding.

Citing Assam’s own media reports, Meghalaya highlighted that Guwahati’s urban sprawl, not activities in Meghalaya’s hills or by USTM, is the primary driver of the city’s inundation.

Expert Findings and Ongoing Scrutiny

The Meghalaya government referenced a National Green Tribunal-appointed committee, which included experts from IIT Guwahati, that found no evidence of “muck flow” from Meghalaya contributing to Guwahati’s water bodies. This further undermines Assam’s allegations.

The Supreme Court has directed Meghalaya to submit a comprehensive report addressing the alleged forest land encroachment by USTM. Meanwhile, the university faces the proposed ₹150.35 crore penalty as the legal and environmental debate continues.

As the case unfolds, Meghalaya’s robust defense underscores its commitment to transparent governance and challenges the narrative of cross-border blame, pointing instead to systemic urban challenges in Assam as the root of Guwahati’s flooding woes.