Meghalaya, Assam agree to resume farming at Lapangap

way2barak, June 3: After weeks of uncertainty over farming activities in the disputed Lapangap sector, Meghalaya and Assam on Tuesday arrived at an interim understanding that allows cultivators from both sides to continue their traditional agricultural practices pending resolution of the broader boundary issues.

The decision was taken at a joint meeting involving ministers, senior bureaucrats, police officials and community leaders from the two states. The meeting followed recent consultations between Meghalaya Chief Minister Conrad K. Sangma and his Assam counterpart Himanta Biswa Sarma.

Under the arrangement, Pnar cultivators will be allowed to continue paddy farming in the foothill areas, while residents from Tapat in Karbi Anglong will continue cultivating crops such as banana, pineapple and ginger in upland portions of the disputed tract.

Officials indicated that the understanding is intended to maintain status quo and ensure that farming activities are not disrupted.

Both governments agreed that the matter of ownership and final boundary alignment will be examined by appropriate state-level mechanism tasked with addressing the issue. Until then, all stakeholders have been urged to maintain peace and avoid any actions that may aggravate the situation.

The latest breakthrough comes after an unsuccessful attempt by local authorities last month to forge a consensus among village representatives. A meeting convened on May 18 by the West Jaintia Hills administration had ended without an agreement as the two sides differed on the issue of plantation activities in the area.

Deputy Chief Minister Sniawbhalang Dhar led the Meghalaya delegation, which included senior officials, representatives of the Jaintia Hills Autonomous District Council and district authorities. Assam was represented by Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council Chief Executive Member Tuliram Ronghang, Member of Parliament Amarsing Tisso, senior bureaucrats and other elected representatives from Karbi Anglong.

In a related development, Sangma on Tuesday informed the Hynniewtrep Border Dispute Redressal Forum (HBDRF) that efforts had been made in consultation with the Assam government to allow farming activities to resume.

The issue was raised during a meeting between the HBDRF and the Chief Minister, where the forum highlighted the plight of Lapangap villagers, allegedly denied access to their farmlands since May.

Speaking to reporters after the meeting, HBDRF adviser Thomas A. Passah said the Chief Minister informed them that discussions had already been held with Assam and a decision was taken to allow the villagers to return to their fields.

He, however, urged the state government to ensure adequate security for the farmers. He insisted that Meghalaya Police personnel accompany farmers to provide protection to them, alleging that they faced repeated attacks, stone-pelting and intimidation. He described the situation as “inhuman,” stating that the villagers depend primarily on agriculture for their livelihood.

The Chief Minister also briefed the forum on the status of the second phase of the Meghalaya-Assam boundary settlement process.

According to the HBDRF adviser, Sangma informed them that the Assam government is expected to soon appoint a Minister to head its regional committee, following which discussions between the regional panels of both states will resume.

Passah reiterated the HBDRF’s stand that the 1958 notification and the findings of the joint demarcation exercise conducted between Khasi and Karbi representatives should remain the basis for any future boundary settlement.

He maintained that historical records clearly indicate the presence of Khasi-Pnar settlements in the disputed areas and cautioned against any move that could result in the loss of Meghalaya’s claim over Block-I and Block-II.

According to him, the Chief Minister assured them that the state government would protect Meghalaya’s interests and, if necessary, explore legal recourse by approaching courts to safeguard the state’s territorial claims.