Manipur's Hill Districts Received Over Rs 17,259 Crore in Development Funds in Last 10 Years

In the charged narratives surrounding Manipur’s ethnic tensions, one accusation has proven especially persistent: that the valley districts have systematically swallowed development funds meant for the hills. A figure often cited claims that between 2017 and 2020, the valley received over Rs 21,000 crores, while the hill districts were left with a meagre Rs 419 crores. 

This narrative, repeated in political speeches and social media posts, paints a picture of deliberate structural discrimination—fueling demands for separate administration and widening the hill–valley divide. Some have gone beyond mere allegations, even writing to the President to demand separate budget allocations for the hill districts of Manipur.

Yet when held against the light of official records and rigorous scrutiny, this explosive claim begins to crumble. The numbers themselves are not what they seem. No one “ate” the funds earmarked for the hills—because the premise rests on flawed accounting and political expediency rather than fact. What appears at first glance to be evidence of systemic bias is, in reality, a distortion that collapses under careful analysis. However, the official data from a government-appointed committee reveals that Manipur's hill districts received over Rs 17,259 crore in actual development expenditure over the last 10 financial years (2011–12 to 2020–21), accounting for a significant and rising share of the state's total developmental spending. The Committee on Funds Released to Hill Districts, in its 2021 report, highlighted a fluctuating but ultimately upward trend: after dipping to 31.19% in 2015–16, the hill districts' share of total development expenditure climbed steadily, reaching 45.75% in 2020–21 – the highest in the decade.

In absolute terms, the last two years under the BJP-led government under CM N. Biren Singh marked a substantial surge, with hill expenditure jumping to Rs 2,133 crore in 2019–20 and Rs 3,226 crore in 2020–21, driven primarily by major departments such as Planning, Tribal Affairs & Hills, Rural Development, Public Works Department (PWD), and Public Health Engineering Department (PHED). The committee noted that while smaller departments had minimal impact due to limited allocations, these key sectors were responsible for the recent increase in both absolute funds and percentage share. This data also counters narratives of systemic neglect, showing instead a clear policy shift toward greater investment in the hill areas in recent years.

Two major departments, namely Tribal Affairs & Hills (TA & Hills) and Rural Development & Panchayati Raj (RD & PR), have been the primary engines behind the increasing development expenditure in hill districts over the past decade, together channeling billions directly into hill-area projects. Department-wise data from the 2021 Committee Report shows TA & Hills expenditure rising sharply from Rs 226 crore in 2011–12 to a peak of Rs 743 crore in 2020–21, while RD & PR scaled up from Rs 536 crore to Rs 960 crore over the same period—highlighting their significant role in the overall surge that pushed hill districts' share to 45.75% by 2020–21. 

These two departments alone accounted for over Rs 8,986 crore—more than half of the total Rs 17,259 crore in hill development expenditure recorded from 2011–12 to 2020–21. The committee specifically noted that the recent substantial increase in hill spending was driven primarily by TA & Hills, RD & PR, along with Planning, PWD, and PHED, while smaller departments had limited impact due to modest allocations. This granular breakdown reinforces that targeted departmental efforts, rather than general budget distortions, have fueled the rising investment in hill districts—further countering claims of systemic neglect alleged by a few leaders with separatist mindsets.

Now, the core error lies in conflating gross budget allocations with actual development expenditure. Manipur's budget classifies spending under "valley" and "hill" heads, but this is a crude, outdated mechanism that fails to reflect reality. The valley—particularly Imphal—hosts the state's secretariat, police headquarters, courts, commissions, and other central institutions. Salaries, pensions, debt servicing, and charged expenditures for these state-level entities are booked under "valley" because that is where they are physically located. Yet these funds benefit the entire state, including hill residents who work in these institutions or avail themselves of their services. Equating these non-developmental items with "funds for the valley" is like accusing Delhi of hoarding national resources because the Parliament and ministries are located there. As highlighted in analyses of Manipur's budgeting, raw allocation figures distort the truth by including items that cannot be geographically apportioned.

Official data tells a different story. A government-appointed committee, in its October 2021 report on funds released to Manipur’s hill districts (covering 2011–12 to 2020–21), reconciled department-wise expenditures with Accountant General records to isolate genuine development spending. The findings are striking: in 2016–17, the hills received Rs 1,539 crore (33.48% of total development expenditure); in 2017–18, Rs 1,844 crore (38.17%); in 2018–19, Rs 1,845 crore (36.79%); in 2019–20, Rs 2,133 crore (43.76%); and in 2020–21, Rs 3,226 crore (45.75%). Far from the oft-repeated claim of just Rs 419 crore over multiple years, the hills in fact received more than Rs 9,000 crore in development funds between 2017–18 and 2020–21 alone.

The hill districts’ share has steadily risen, reaching nearly half of Manipur’s total developmental outlay by 2020–21. Independent academic reviews corroborate this trajectory. When expenditures are reclassified—excluding salaries, charged items, state-wide institutions, and centrally sponsored schemes not routed through the state budget—the corrected figures show the hill districts receiving between 44% and 46% of development funds in recent years.

The most compelling rebuttal to the charge of systematic neglect lies in the per capita metrics—the truest measure of equity in development. By 2020–21, the numbers tell a striking story: per capita development spending in the hill districts stood at Rs 39,927, surpassing the valley’s Rs 37,654. In other words, a region so often branded as “neglected” actually outperformed the supposedly favored valley when measured on a per-person basis. This is not the profile of deprivation; it is evidence of a deliberate effort to channel resources where they are most needed.

The logic becomes clearer when geography and demography are taken into account. The hills cover nearly 90 percent of Manipur’s landmass but house only about 40 percent of its population. Proportional or higher per capita flows are not anomalies—they are acknowledgments of the unique challenges posed by terrain, sparsity, and the infrastructural demands of remote districts. Equity, in this context, means recognizing that building a road in the hills costs more than laying one in the valley, and that sparsely populated areas require greater investment to achieve even basic parity.

Why, then, does the misleading trope of “Rs 21,000 crore for the valley versus Rs 419 crore for the hills” continue to circulate? Part of the answer lies in structural flaws: the archaic hill–valley classification that obscures the complexity of fund flows, the valley-based implementation of projects meant for the hills, and the frequent omission of direct central transfers from state-level tallies. But politics plays the larger role. Gross figures, stripped of context, make for potent slogans. They are easy to weaponize, even if they are methodologically bankrupt.

Recent evidence highlights the distortion. Between 2020–21 and 2024–25, road and bridge projects in the hills were sanctioned Rs 2,396 crore—nearly double the valley’s Rs 1,300 crore. Yet accusations of bias persist, often by selectively highlighting central schemes while ignoring substantial state contributions. This selective framing feeds grievance rather than clarity.

In 2021, Union Minister Nitin Gadkari announced a series of major infrastructure projects for Manipur’s hill districts. Among them was the widening of the Ukhrul–Toloi–Tadubi section of NH-102A into a two-lane highway with hard shoulders, sanctioned at a cost of Rs 310.76 crore. Another project followed soon after: the widening of the Imphal–Jiribam stretch of NH-37 near Khongsang and Puilon village (Package 5), approved on EPC mode with a budget of Rs 410.68 crore. In 2023, Gadkari further declared the construction of a 51.89 km two-lane highway connecting Churachandpur to Tuivai (Package 3), estimated at Rs 404.48 crore. Most recently, Rs 777.61 crore was sanctioned for the widening and improvement of the Shangshak–Tengnoupal section of NH-102A (Package 3).

Despite these substantial allocations to the hills, political voices have continued to raise grievances. Even BJP MLA Paolienlal Haokip publicly complained, tweeting that all 57 road-building projects were concentrated in the valley. Such claims have been used to argue for separate Union Territory status with legislatures for the hill districts. Yet the reality is propaganda, as usual. The funds in question come from the Central Road & Infrastructure Fund (CRIF), which is designed to support the development and maintenance of state roads. Recent approvals under this scheme include Rs 399.36 crore for 57 “flood-affected road” projects in the valley in late 2024, alongside much larger allocations for National Highways that directly benefit the hills.

No funds were “eaten” by the valley people. They flowed where they were needed, often more generously to the hills when properly measured. Manipur’s hill districts have received over Rs 17,259 crore in development funds over the past decade. Yet the misleading trope of “Rs 21,000 crore for the valley versus Rs 419 crore for the hills” continues to circulate, not because it reflects reality, but because it serves political expediency. Such distortions ignore the documented flow of resources and obscure the real problem—that much of the highway development money sanctioned for the hills has been siphoned off by armed groups, undermining both delivery and trust. This is the uncomfortable reality that gets lost when misleading figures are weaponized in public discourse. The problem is not that the valley “ate” the hills’ share, but that insurgent networks and parallel authorities have diverted sanctioned funds away from genuine development.

By clinging to the false narrative of “Rs 21,000 crore versus Rs 419 crore,” political actors obscure the documented Rs 17,259 crore that has actually reached the hill districts over the past decade. They also deflect attention from the real challenge: ensuring that resources are not captured by armed groups but translated into roads, schools, hospitals, and livelihoods.

The persistence of wrong information deepens mistrust and fuels separatist demands, while the siphoning of funds corrodes the very foundations of governance. If Manipur is to move forward, the myths must be buried and accountability enforced. Transparent monitoring, stronger safeguards against diversion, and evidence-based dialogue are the only way to ensure that development spending achieves its purpose.

The truth is clear: no funds were “eaten” by the valley people. They flowed where they were needed, often more generously to the hills.