The silent crisis of rat-hole mining Premium

Stronger State laws, technological surveillance, and alternative livelihoods must replace reactionary governance

On January 29, the Gauhati High Court took suo motu cognisance of the mining tragedy in Umrangso, Assam. The January 6 mine flooding in Umrangso, which trapped nine labourers and killed at least four, was yet another preventable tragedy in a series of accidents in the north-east. For instance, in Meghalaya, at least 30 miners have lost their lives in the past five years due to similar accidents. Weak enforcement has allowed these disasters to persist, with influential individuals operating illegal mines unchecked. Rather than taking preventive action, authorities respond only after lives are lost.

Ground Zero | Assam rat-hole mine tragedy: Dying for black gold

Coal mining in Meghalaya and Assam, once a small-scale practice, expanded dangerously in the 1980s due to industrial demand from West Bengal and Bangladesh. The region’s terrain made mechanised extraction difficult, leading to a proliferation of rat-hole mines. This hazardous method involves digging narrow tunnels that are barely large enough for a person to crawl through, posing significant risks to miners. Rat-hole mining occurs in two forms: side-cutting, which follows coal seams along hill slopes, and box-cutting, where miners dig pits up to 400 feet deep and extract coal horizontally, forming a tunnel network. This technique, prevalent in the north-east, particularly Meghalaya and the borders of Assam, poses significant safety and environmental hazards. The mining period stretches between November and March. Migrant labourers, often trapped in cycles of debt, are lured by ‘Sardars’ (labour agents) under exploitative conditions that amount to bonded labour. Reports highlight that children are trafficked into these mines due to their ability to navigate the narrow tunnels, making them easy targets for abuse. There are approximately 26,000 unclosed mine openings, each employing up to 200 workers in shifts, putting thousands of labourers at daily risk in hazardous conditions.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) banned rat-hole mining on April 17, 2014, due to environmental degradation and unsafe working conditions. This decision was later upheld by the Supreme Court in State of Meghalaya v. All Dimasa Students Union (2019). However, enforcement remains weak, as many illegal mines operate under the influence of powerful bureaucrats and coal mafias. Whistle blowers, including local officials and activists, face threats while authorities fail to hold perpetrators accountable.

Also Read | In poll-bound Meghalaya, rat-hole coal mining hopes ride on Article 371

Several States indirectly enable rat-hole mining by exploiting regulatory loopholes. They are often under pressure from coal mafias and local politicians who profit from these illegal operations. For instance, the Meghalaya government has attempted to secure an exemption under Schedule 6, Paragraph 12A(b) of the Constitution to regulate coal mining on its own terms, bypassing national laws such as the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 (MMDR Act). The State Assembly even passed a resolution seeking this exemption, but the resolution remains unapproved. Economic and political interests drive this effort — coal mining generates revenue and employment — while powerful individuals with stakes in the industry resist enforcement of the ban. However, under Section 23C of the MMDR Act, Meghalaya is obligated to prevent illegal mining. Yet, it has failed to create State-level laws to enforce the 2014 NGT ban. As a result, illegal mining continues.

Assam too has failed to prevent illegal rat-hole mining, leading to recurring tragedies. Despite the NGT ban and Supreme Court directives, the lack of stringent State regulations allows such operations to persist. If the State government is unable or unwilling to act, the Union government must step in, as it did in Karnataka’s Bellary region in 2011, when large-scale illegal mining forced the Supreme Court and the Centre to impose a ban, with the latter using its powers under Section 30 of the MMDR Act.