Guwahati: The University of Science and Technology, Meghalaya (USTM), one of the region’s most prominent private universities, has found itself at the centre of a major land controversy after a Supreme Court-appointed panel accused it of large-scale forest land encroachment.
In a report submitted to the Registrar of the Supreme Court on September 15, the Central Empowered Committee (CEC) stated that USTM, promoted by the Education Research & Development Foundation (ERDF), illegally occupied 13.62 hectares of deemed forest land in one phase and 12.13 hectares in another, without obtaining mandatory clearances under the Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980.
The CEC noted that USTM failed to seek diversion approval despite repeated directions from both the Centre and the Meghalaya government. As a result, almost 93% of the university’s constructed area falls under forest land, with nearly 83% of it already broken up and used.
Political sparks: ‘Land Jihad’ controversy
The findings have inevitably spilt into the political domain. Earlier, Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had accused USTM of engaging in “land jihad” — alleging that the university’s unchecked expansion not only violated land norms but also contributed to artificial flooding in Guwahati.
While such remarks triggered heated debates across the Northeast, the CEC’s report now gives weight to environmental concerns by underlining what it called “devastating” ecological destruction. “The breaking of land has been devastating, and the surroundings have been heavily disturbed. The massive and indiscriminate destruction of the site is evident,” the committee observed.
Legal violations and penalties
The CEC concluded that USTM and ERDF had violated Section 2 of the Forest (Conservation) Act, which makes prior approval of the Central Government mandatory for non-forest use of forest land.
Recommending strict action, the committee proposed penalties under various heads. Chief among them is the imposition of Net Present Value (NPV) for the encroached land, calculated at five times the standard rate for medium dense forest, along with 12% annual interest from the start of the violation.
For the first encroachment (13.62 hectares), the violation period is considered from June 20, 2017 to September 15, 2025. For the second (12.13 hectares), the violation period is from April 1, 2019, onwards. The compensation, running into several crores, is expected to serve as a restorative charge for environmental degradation caused by USTM’s expansion.
USTM’s defence: ‘We followed due process’
The university, however, has strongly refuted the allegations. In submissions to the CEC, USTM argued that all its land acquisitions were carried out legally, with proper government sanction orders and no-objection certificates from relevant departments.
USTM has maintained that the campus land was acquired from private owners and was certified as non-forest land by the Divisional Forest Officer and the Khasi Hills Autonomous District Council.
They argued that permissions were obtained from the Meghalaya Urban Development Authority, Pollution Control Board, Health & Family Welfare Department, and local Dorbars.
Some plots were already degraded due to earlier unregulated activities, and USTM claims to have since undertaken ecological restoration through landscaping and plantation drives.
The university also pointed out that several other educational institutions are located in the vicinity, suggesting it was being unfairly singled out.
Conflicting records and ground realities
One of the most striking aspects of the report is the conflict between official records and ground verification exercises.
While earlier certificates declared much of the land as non-forest, later inspections by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) and independent surveys pointed out that vast tracts of USTM’s campus overlapped with deemed forest land.
The confusion deepened when the North East Transmission Company Limited (NETCL) sought diversion of land for rerouting a 400 KVA transmission line passing through the USTM area. In 2024, the MoEF approved the diversion of 9.84 hectares near the USTM campus, but USTM’s own proposal for diversion was delisted after it failed to respond to official queries.
As a result, while power companies got approvals after due diligence, USTM continued to operate on disputed land without clearance.
Environmental impact
The report paints a grim picture of ecological damage. Once categorised as medium dense forest, the land has been extensively broken for construction. Hill slopes have been cut, green cover has diminished, and natural drainage patterns have been disrupted.
“The destruction has been massive and indiscriminate,” the CEC warned, stressing the need for immediate restorative measures.
What lies ahead
The Supreme Court is now expected to examine the report and decide whether USTM’s expansion constitutes outright encroachment or if the university’s claims of legal acquisition hold merit. If the Court endorses the CEC’s findings, USTM and its parent body, ERDF, may face massive financial penalties along with restrictions on further expansion.
For many observers, the case also underscores the tension between development and conservation in ecologically fragile Northeast India. While private universities like USTM have played a vital role in expanding access to higher education, questions remain about whether this progress should come at the cost of forests that serve as natural buffers against climate risks.
As the legal battle unfolds, the fate of USTM’s forest-linked landholdings will set a precedent not just for Meghalaya but for the entire region grappling with balancing education, development, and the environment.