Imposition of PAP, FMR and job reservation figure at NLA

Leader of the house and chief minister Dr Neiphiu Rio Tuesday, informed the house of the Cabinet’s decision in opposing both Protected Area Permit (PAP) and Free Movement Regime (FMR). He Disclosed that during a meeting with the Union Home Minister, he conveyed the decision taken by the State Government and expressed hope that the Government of India would review the demands of the State. Dr. Rio said this while participating in the discussion at the first day’s session of the Seventh Session of the 14th Nagaland Legislative Assembly (NLA) on September 2.
Earlier replying to a starred question raised by NPF member Achumbemo Kikon on the issue of PAP and FMR (Border Fencing) deputy chief minister and minister-in-charge of Home and Border Affairs, Y. Patton, informed that the Ministry of Home Affairs had re-imposed PAP in Manipur, Mizoram and Nagaland with effect from December 17, 2024, due to security concerns in the border areas of the states.
He also informed the House that as of date, there was no report of any active fencing along the 215 km stretch of the India-Myanmar border in the State.
Reacting to Patton’s reply, NPF member Achumbemo Kikon objected to Nagaland being clubbed with Manipur and Mizoram under “law and order affected states.”
Kikon argued that Nagaland has been relatively peaceful due to the ceasefire with Naga national workers. While Mizoram faces refugee issues from Myanmar and Manipur faces ongoing unrest, Nagaland should not be equated with them. He questioned why the Government of India continues to deny permits to foreign tourists, despite Nagaland being among the safest states for women. “If our only source of revenue is tourism, especially during Hornbill and tribal festivals, why is the Centre strangulating us by restricting foreign tourists?” he asked.
Job quota: NPF member Kuzholuzo (Azo) Nienu, while raising a starred question on the issue of reservation and the number of employees in the State (tribe-wise), said he supported a review of the Reservation Policy but opposed the agitation associated with it.
Supplementing to an earlier answer given by the chief minister and minister-in-charge of Personnel and Administrative Reforms, Neiphiu Rio, the NPF member highlighted the contentious issue was likely to create more confusion rather than understanding in Naga society. He said he fully supported the demand of the five tribes for a review of the job reservation system, but not their method of agitation. Referring to the January 11, 1977 order/notification, Azo stated that the criteria were very clear: tribes identified as educationally and economically backward and with insignificant representation in government services were to be included.
“Now, the simple answer is: instead of trying to create hue and cry, deliver hate speeches, or point fingers, those tribes which no longer qualify under the three criteria should be pulled out from the backward quota. It’s as simple as that,” he remarked. While welcoming the formation of the Commission on job reservation, Azo made four suggestions before any finalization: assess the total population of each tribe; collect employment data across all departments, categorized by tribe; determine whether the number of employees in each tribe is proportionate to their population size and announce a solution based on the latest population and employment reports.
He pointed out that data from the State Government, PIMS, and the Census clearly revealed disparities—seven tribes have employee representation higher than their population share, while nine tribes have lesser.
He further highlighted discrepancies in the current quota distribution, citing that Konyaks enjoy 25% while Chakhesang (with a population of 1,54,000) have 4%, Zeliang (74,000) have 4%, Pochury (21,000) have 2%, and Sumis of Kiphire (15,000) also have 2%.
“These disparities must be looked into carefully. I am not against any tribe, but rationality, fair dealing, and proper documentation are necessary,” he concluded.
Ropeway Proposal: Supplementing to the answer given by the chief minister, Dr. Sukhato A. Sema raised the issue of the 2024 Swadesh Darshan 2.0 Scheme.
He noted that under this program, the Meghalaya Government constructed a ropeway at a cost of Rs.175 crore for 2.1 km. Similarly, Hyderabad and Telangana had ropeway projects at a cost of Rs.50 crore per km, whereas in the Northeast it amounted to Rs.83.3 crore per km. Uttarakhand also undertook a 4.15 km ropeway project under the same scheme.
Dr. Sema questioned why the Nagaland Government could not initiate a similar project, proposing a ropeway route from the Old Secretariat Complex to Kohima Science College, onwards to the Accountant General’s office, Kohima Village, Bayavu, and finally to the New Secretariat Complex.
He urged that since the Swadesh Darshan 2.0 scheme is still active, Nagaland should immediately pursue such a project under the tourism initiative.
Minister for Rural Development, Metsubo Jamir, in his reply, stated that a number of road construction proposals were already under consideration to ease traffic congestion, including routes such as Catholic Publication Centre–Assam Rifles–High School Junction–T. Khel Bypass, New Market–T. Khel Bypass, Model Higher Secondary School Lerie–Capital Bypass, and Alder College–T. Khel Bypass, amounting to Rs.20–25 crore.
While acknowledging Dr. Sema’s suggestion, Jamir assured that the department would seriously look into the ropeway proposal since traffic congestion in Kohima affects all sections of society.
Delay in PMGSY works: Supplementing to the reply of minister for PWD (R&B) G. Kaito Aye, Nuklutoshi, MLA questioned the delay in the sanctioned road works under PMGSY.
Minister Kaito clarified that although 40 roads had been sanctioned in 2024, work was delayed because the Ministry had stopped contractor payments after locking the Online Management Monitoring and Accounting System (OMMAS) for a year (March 2024–2025). The Ministry objected to advertisements restricting bids only to Nagaland-registered contractors, insisting it should be open nationally.
He explained that while the projects had 18 months’ timeline, contractors could not begin due to non-release of mobilisation advances. However, he assured that progress had now resumed and the Ministry had extended the deadline from March 2025 to March 2026.
Kaito highlighted that earlier phases of PMGSY had seen major failures, with projects from 2007–2014 left incomplete. The present government terminated 13–14 contractors, recovering nearly Rs.50 crore. He assured that under the current phase, a dedicated Project Implementation Unit (PIU) was set up to ensure timely completion.
Nuklutoshi expressed concern over delays across departments and urged ministers and officers to be mindful. He also sought assurance that new technologies being introduced for road construction in Nagaland would be suited to the environment.
In reply, Kaito admitted there were public complaints regarding slow progress, but explained that monsoon posed difficulties. He assured that with the one-year extension till March 2026, the department was determined to complete the projects “unlike in the past.”