Meghalaya’s rail connectivity imbroglio: A battle of opinions, promises, fears
The primary reason for the deadlock stems from deep-rooted concerns over unchecked influx and demographic changes, particularly in the Khasi and Jaiñtia Hills.
Earlier this month Meghalaya chief minister Conrad K Sangma told the state assembly that the Centre has asked the state government to surrender ₹200 crore, given to it since 2017 for the acquisition of land to extend 21.5 kms railway connectivity from Tetelia in Assam to Byrnihat in Meghalaya.
This project is part of an ambitious initiative to link all state capitals in the Northeast by rail, aimed at boosting transportation and economic activities in the region. However, the funds have remained unutilised for years due to strong opposition from local organisations, forcing the Northeast Frontier Railway (NFR) to request the return of the unspent funds in December 2024.
The debate over railway connectivity in Meghalaya has been a contentious issue, marked by strong opposing views from the government, opposition parties, civil society organisations, and local communities. While proponents see railway expansion as a catalyst for economic growth, cheaper transportation, and improved trade, detractors argue it will lead to demographic shifts, environmental degradation, and the erosion of indigenous identity.
The primary reason for the deadlock stems from deep-rooted concerns over unchecked influx and demographic changes, particularly in the Khasi and Jaiñtia Hills. Groups such as the Khasi Students’ Union (KSU) have strongly resisted railway expansion, arguing that without the implementation of an Inner Line Permit (ILP) system, Meghalaya remains vulnerable to large-scale migration. Meghalaya is the only tribal-majority state in northeast where ILP, which keeps tab on all outsiders entering the state, is not implemented. The provision is applicable in Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh and Manipur.
“Without ILP, railway connectivity will open the floodgates to outsiders, overwhelming our indigenous population,” said a KSU functionary. The fear is that an influx of outsiders could dilute indigenous identity and strain local resources, exacerbating the already contentious issue of land ownership.
Chief minister Sangma has been a firm advocate for railway connectivity, emphasising that it would significantly reduce transportation costs and boost the local economy. He has reiterated that the proposed rail project is primarily aimed at freight transport, not large-scale passenger movement, addressing concerns about migration. “Railways will bring down the cost of essential goods, boost our agricultural and industrial sectors, and create employment. This is about development, not demographic change,” Sangma said.
The government has pointed out that Meghalaya is among the few states in India without a functional railway line. Improved connectivity would help farmers, traders, and entrepreneurs access larger markets and reduce dependency on costly road transport, the state government has said, The administration has assured that proper safeguards will be implemented to address security and environmental concerns while ensuring that the railway serves Meghalaya’s long-term interests.
Meghalaya has no rail connectivity
Despite being rich in natural resources, Meghalaya is the only indigenous-inhabited state in India that remains landlocked with no rail connectivity. This isolation has severely impeded economic progress, making the cost of goods higher compared to neighboring states. Currently, essential commodities such as cement, steel, and food supplies are transported exclusively by road, significantly increasing transportation costs. For instance, a 50-kg sack of rice costs ₹300 in Assam but rises to ₹400 in Meghalaya due to road freight charges. Similarly, construction materials such as cement and steel see price hikes of ₹20-30 per unit, a burden that could be eased with railway freight services.
Opposition parties, including the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and the Congress, have raised strong objections. Former chief minister Mukul Sangma, now a TMC leader, warned that railway connectivity could lead to unchecked migration, impacting Meghalaya’s indigenous population. “The government has not adequately addressed the concerns of the people. We need ironclad measures to ensure that our identity and resources are protected,” Sangma said. Congress leader Celestine Lyngdoh also questioned whether rail connectivity should be the state’s priority. “Before pushing for a railway project, the government should focus on healthcare, education, and better roads. Development must be inclusive, not imposed.”
While the opposition to rail connectivity remains strong in parts of Khasi and Ri-Bhoi districts, a shift in perspective has emerged in East Jaiñtia Hills. Here, many residents and business stakeholders are open to the idea of railway connectivity, recognising its potential to drive economic development. “Railways would help reduce our transportation costs and make our products more competitive in national and international markets,” said a local coal trader from East Jaiñtia Hills. This region, known for its coal mining and limestone deposits, sees a railway network as an opportunity to enhance export capabilities and reduce transportation costs.
The opposition
Meghalaya’s powerful civil society organisations, particularly the KSU and the Hynñiewtrep Youth Council (HYC), have been at the forefront of protests against railway expansion. Their primary concern remains the potential influx of outsiders, which they believe will threaten the social and economic fabric of the state. Expressing strong opposition, KSU President Lambokstar Marngarsaid, “We are not against development, but history has shown that railways often lead to a rapid increase in migration. Without strict protective measures, this will alter the demography of our state.”
The Meghalaya People’s Environment Rights Forum (MPERF) has raised alarm over the environmental consequences of railway construction, warning that it could lead to deforestation, soil erosion, and the disruption of fragile ecosystems. “We need concrete environmental impact assessments before any railway project begins. Meghalaya’s forests and rivers must not be sacrificed in the name of development,” stated MPERF coordinator Sumarlin Syiem.
What the supporters of rail connectivity say
The supporters of rail connectivity argue that Meghalaya is paying a high price due to its reliance on road transport. With goods currently transported by trucks, logistical costs are significantly higher compared to rail transport. The Indian Railways’ Roll-on/Roll-off (RO-RO) service, which allows trucks to be transported via trains, has been proposed as a cost-effective alternative. Transporting a truck over 640 kilometers by road costs around ₹32,000, whereas the RO-RO service could lower this to ₹28,000, reducing expenses on tolls, fuel, and driver wages.
The impact of high transportation costs is evident in the prices of essential goods. Currently, TMT steel bars—critical for construction—range between ₹70 and ₹74.50 per kilogram depending on thickness. Similarly, agricultural produce such as potatoes, ginger, and turmeric—key cash crops for Meghalaya’s farmers—face exorbitant transportation costs, making them less competitive in larger markets. Farmers are often forced to sell their produce locally at lower prices due to expensive logistics. Rail connectivity could provide a solution by enabling them to reach better markets at reduced costs, improving their profit margins and making agricultural trade more sustainable.
Beyond freight transport, railway connectivity also presents a massive opportunity for Meghalaya’s tourism industry. High-end tourist train services, such as Vistadome coaches that offer panoramic views, could transform Meghalaya into a more accessible and premium travel destination. “Imagine luxury tourist trains running through the breathtaking hills of Meghalaya. It could bring high-value tourism, benefiting hotels, homestays, and local artisans while ensuring responsible travel,” said D. Rymbai, president of the Meghalaya Chamber of Commerce and Industry.
In response to the ongoing debate, the state government has reiterated its commitment to engaging with all stakeholders. Transport minister Sniawbhalang Dhar said, “We are not rushing this project. The government is open to discussions with civil society groups, opposition leaders, and local communities to ensure railway connectivity benefits everyone.”
What people say
The people of Meghalaya remain deeply divided on the issue. While urban dwellers, young professionals, and business groups welcome the economic benefits, rural communities and traditional institutions remain skeptical about its long-term impact.
A resident of Nongpoh, Patricia Kharshandi, expressed concern stating, “I want development, but I fear that once the railway comes, our way of life will change forever.”
On the other hand, college student Daniel Lyngdoh from Shillong argued: “Other states have railways and still preserve their identity. Why should Meghalaya remain cut off when we can benefit from better connectivity?”
The railway debate in Meghalaya is far from over. It is a complex issue that intertwines economic aspirations with cultural preservation, infrastructure growth with environmental concerns, and government assurances with public skepticism. As discussions continue, the challenge will be to find a path that safeguards Meghalaya’s unique identity while ensuring its people benefit from modern connectivity. The future of railways in Meghalaya depends on whether the state can bridge its divisions and strike a fine balance between progress and preservation.
