Passing the NH 29 buck

The decade-long delay and dismal condition of the 72-km four-lane National Highway 29 (NH-29) project from Purana Bazar through Chümoukedima to Kohima represents far more than a logistical inconvenience-it is a glaring indictment of administrative oversight and institutional failure. The NH-29 four-lane project spans approximately 72 kilometers but remains incomplete in its tenth year. In comparison, a similar project like the 61 km Jorabat–Shillong NH 4 highway, was completed in five years. What was envisioned as a transformative connectivity project has turned into a persistent ordeal for travellers and a colossal indictment for both the state government and the National Highway Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL). This chronic delay raises fundamental questions about project planning, execution, monitoring, and accountability by the NHIDCL. The recent collapse of the embankment at Tsidukhru (Pagala Pahar) that led to the road being washed away, exemplifies flawed engineering and failure in geotechnical assessment. The recent attempt by the Nagaland government to deflect blame onto NHIDCL for the Tsidukhru (Pagala Pahar) washout underscores a systemic culture of passing the buck. Perhaps there is more than meets the eye in this regard. While NHIDCL bears substantial responsibility for technical failures and delays, the state government cannot absolve itself of oversight duties. It is the state’s obligation to monitor, compel accountability, and coordinate with central agencies to ensure timely delivery. Suddenly focusing attention on the road, only on the eve of the Hornbill Festival speaks poorly of the priority of the government. The contrast between the rhetoric of “world-class infrastructure” and the grim reality on NH-29 is stark. The promise of high-speed connectivity has transformed into a slow-motion disaster. Travellers spend hours navigating pothole-strewn roads, while communities along the route continue to suffer disruptions to mobility and commerce. Equally troubling is the state’s neglect of alternative and auxiliary routes. The Dimapur- Niuland-Kohima road, a shorter and potentially safer route spanning 59 kilometers, remains underdeveloped despite its strategic potential. Similarly, the Jotsoma bypass road -a vital route during landslides near the Kohima Municipal Council (KMC) dumping ground-has long required maintenance and widening to handle diverted traffic. Yet, the state government has not accorded necessary priority. Only after villagers where the two roads pass through, enforced road blocks in protest, did the government responded belatedly. This only reveals that the government acts only under public pressure rather than proactive planning. The Dimapur- Niuland-Kohima and Jotsoma bypass roads must be developed simultaneously as strategic alternatives to avoid future paralysis in connectivity. Without redundancy in transport networks, every landslide will remain a logistical crisis. This pattern of reactive governance-acting only when protests erupt or routes collapse-exposes a deeper malaise- a state apparatus that mistakes public tolerance for resilience. Each protest and each temporary restoration reflect not problem-solving but damage control. Ultimately, the NH-29 four-laning saga exposes the chasm between infrastructure vision and its on-ground execution in Nagaland. The government must rise above the inertia of excuses, enforce transparency, and show commitment worthy of the people it serves. Roads are more than physical connectors; they are the arteries of a state’s economy and lifeline of its citizens. When they fail, it is not terrain or weather to blame-it is governance itself.