A question from the audience at Ao Senden’s “Shisatokden Sentong” at Mokokchung Town Hall on Tuesday turned a public discussion into something far bigger: Does Nagaland truly have the power under Article 371A to make its own laws on oil extraction, or does the Centre’s authority under Entry 53 of the Union List override it?
The question struck at the centre of one of Nagaland’s most important unresolved issues, who controls the state’s petroleum resources, who benefits from them, and how far Article 371A can actually protect Naga land and resources.
Senior Advocate C T Jamir, speaking on the issue, traced the legal battle back to 2012 when the Nagaland government framed the Nagaland Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulations, believing Article 371A gave the state the authority to legislate on petroleum extraction.
That move was challenged by Lotha Hoho through a PIL, which argued that the Nagaland Land and Its Resources Act, 1990 already addressed such powers.
Jamir said the legal battle that followed moved through stays, withdrawals, judicial observations, and a suo motu PIL, eventually reaching Gauhati High Court for multiple hearings involving the Additional Solicitor General of India and the Advocate General of Nagaland.
Yet after years of proceedings, no constitutional clarity emerged.
“In 2026, it was decided that PIL is not maintainable,” Jamir said, noting that while the matter was recognised as an important legal question, it was dismissed without a final ruling on merit.
The case, despite involving major constitutional questions, ended without a final judicial determination on whether Nagaland can independently legislate on petroleum under Article 371A.
“Now, we are all looking at what is next,” Jamir said, while maintaining that he believes Nagaland does have that power.
The discussion comes at a time when petroleum extraction in the Disturbed Area Belt (DAB) remains a major political and economic issue.
Chief Secretary Sentiyanger Imchen said Assam has long been extracting oil from the DAB, while Nagaland’s claim has led to negotiations involving both states and the Government of India.
Chief Secretary Sentiyanger Imchen revealed that the Government of India had proposed an interim 50-50 sharing arrangement between Assam and Nagaland until the boundary dispute is resolved.
“Until now, we were getting nothing. At least now we will get 50%,” Imchen said, while clarifying that negotiations remain ongoing and no final tripartite agreement has been signed.
Imchen, however, made a clear distinction between DAB and the rest of Nagaland.
“Leaving DAB aside, for the rest of the area, we don’t need to consult Assam,” he said.
But he pointed out that Nagaland’s unique land ownership system makes petroleum policy more complicated than in most other states.
Across much of India, royalties are paid primarily to state governments. In Nagaland, where land and its resources are deeply tied to community ownership, the question is not just extraction but who gets to decide, who receives royalties, and how benefits are shared.
Imchen said the state government now wants stronger negotiations with the Centre on two fronts: Nagaland’s right to have a say over who extracts petroleum, and clearer rules on how landowners and communities should benefit.
He noted that current provisions do not adequately address situations where oil fields extend across multiple landowners, even if extraction infrastructure is set up on only one plot.
Ao Senden President Marsanen Imsong said the organisation had already urged Chief Minister Neiphiu Rio to first clearly identify what constitutes traditionally ancestral land and what falls under disputed land before moving ahead with extraction. He said, back then, Aos were not neighbors with the Assamese but the Ahoms.
He also said the Ao Senden have pushed for employment opportunities for educated unemployed youth if oil extraction and refinery projects move forward.