The long and winding road

The Foothill Road project envisioned as a transformative artery for Nagaland which promised to boost connectivity, trade, and economic integration has instead, descended into a bitter public feud between the Nagaland Foothill Road Coordination Committee (NFHRCC) and the state’s Public Works Department (Roads & Bridges). At its core, this dispute is no longer about infrastructure-it is a glaring indictment of governance, accountability, and a crumbling public trust. The latest flashpoint involves a staggering ₹430.77 crore, which the NFHRCC claims was sanctioned for the project’s second phase. The department’s response, however, has been a masterclass in bureaucratic evasion. While admitting that an administrative approval was granted in March 2024, the NPWD (R&B) now insists the amount was never formally sanctioned, rendering the approval “infructuous.” To the ordinary citizen, this distinction between administrative nod and financial sanction is not just confusing-it is infuriating. It is precisely this kind of procedural quicksand that has stalled the project for months, turning a lifeline into a road block. The paralysis has only deepened as both sides dig their feet. The NFHRCC, losing patience, has threatened to lock the PWD’s Dimapur office if work orders are not issued. The department, for its part, hides behind rules, claiming that orders cannot precede government approval. Both sides are now locked in a cycle of claim and counterclaim, while the road remains unmade. Then comes the contentious issue of land. The NPWD insists that a 30-metre Right of Way (RoW) is mandatory for securing national highway status. The NFHRCC counters that landowners and tribal bodies have already donated 12 metres without compensation-a remarkable gesture of public goodwill. The committee’s question is simple and devastating: If the government can pay compensation for land acquisition for the four-lane on National Highway 29, why apply a different yardstick here? Once again, civic sacrifice is met with bureaucratic rigidity. To add salt to injury, NFHRCC resents the fact that contracts have been awarded to firms not recommended by it. When the committee inspected the work, it allegedly found poor workmanship. The department dismisses these concerns as routine, but for the public, this smacks of political interference and a disregard for quality. The tragedy is that both sides have valid points. The NFHRCC is right to demand speed and transparency. The PWD is not wrong to insist on due process. But when dialogue collapses into confrontation, the only loser is the public interest. The department, entrusted with a historic project, has chosen to cloak itself in a maze of procedures rather than embrace openness. That choice has bred not just delay, but a deep and dangerous trust deficit. Transparency is not a bureaucratic nicety-it is the foundation of accountability. Without it, even the most well-funded projects will crumble under suspicion. If the Foothill Road is ever to become a path of progress, the NPWD must break out of its procedural shell and engage honestly with the NFHRCC and the people. Otherwise, this road will remain what it has tragically become: a monument to institutional paralysis that had ironically led to abandonment of the project first during 1974-75, and again in 1993. Hopefully good sense will prevail and lead to completion of a dream revived in 2013.