The Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC) has approached Governor Om Prakash Mathur over concerns about a preliminary draft linked to the Darjeeling-Gorkhaland issue. The organisation has questioned references to “contiguous areas of neighbouring States” in a July 2026 discussion draft. Prof Mahendra P. Lama, who prepared the draft, has clarified that the proposal never intended to include Sikkim.
He also said the fourth option did not appear in the final submission sent to the Centre in August. Meanwhile, SIBLAC wants formal clarification on the matter and has cited Sikkim’s constitutional safeguards under Article 371F.
Read More: Mizoram Farmer Lalrithangi to Receive FAO Award in Rome
Key Facts
- Organisation: Sikkim Bhutia Lepcha Apex Committee (SIBLAC)
- Representation date: September 23, 2026
- Governor: Om Prakash Mathur
- Main issue: Darjeeling-Gorkhaland political discussions
- Draft: July 2026 preliminary discussion draft
- Concerned proposal: “Fourth Pathway” or “Option-4”
- Draft author: Prof Mahendra P. Lama
- Constitutional provision: Article 371F
- Final submission: August 2026
SIBLAC Raises Questions Over Gorkhaland Draft
SIBLAC has written to Governor Om Prakash Mathur seeking clarity over a preliminary proposal linked to the Darjeeling-Gorkhaland issue.
The committee also sent its representation to the Union Home Minister, Sikkim Chief Minister and Union Home Secretary.
According to SIBLAC, a July discussion draft mentioned a “Fourth Pathway” or “Option-4.” The proposal referred to a separate North Bengal state and “contiguous areas of neighbouring States.”
The wording has raised questions within Sikkim about possible territorial implications.
Prof Mahendra Lama Clarifies the Proposal
Prof Mahendra P. Lama, who prepared the preliminary draft, has rejected the suggestion that the proposal sought to include Sikkim.
Lama has publicly clarified that the draft never intended to include Sikkim. He also said the fourth option did not form part of the final submission to the Centre.
Moreover, Lama said the final document contained three options after the fourth pathway was removed before the August 2026 submission.
SIBLAC Wants a Written Explanation
Despite Lama’s clarification, SIBLAC wants the authorities to provide a formal written response.
The organisation has asked who received the preliminary proposal and why the fourth pathway later disappeared from the final submission.
It also wants confirmation on whether anyone discussed Sikkim’s territory with the Centre.
For SIBLAC, an official response would help clarify questions surrounding Sikkim’s constitutional and territorial position.
Concerns Over Public Statements
The representation also refers to statements attributed to members of the Gorkha Rashtriya Congress.
SIBLAC has cited an alleged suggestion involving a possible merger of Darjeeling with Sikkim under President’s Rule. Therefore, the organisation has asked authorities to verify the statements and establish their context.
The committee also referred to recurring public references to “Greater Nepal.” However, SIBLAC said its concerns do not target Nepali-speaking or Gorkha citizens.
SIBLAC Raises Border Security Issues
SIBLAC has also highlighted the open India-Nepal border.
The organisation has called for continued verification of citizenship records and electoral rolls. It described Sikkim as a strategically sensitive state because of its location.
Sikkim shares borders with China, Nepal and Bhutan. In addition, the state lies close to the strategically important Siliguri Corridor.
Article 371F Cited in Representation
SIBLAC has invoked Article 371F(g) of the Constitution while seeking action from Governor Mathur.
The organisation wants the Governor to obtain a detailed report from the Sikkim government. It has also asked him to approach the President if the situation requires further action.
Meanwhile, SIBLAC has urged the Sikkim government to consider an all-party resolution in the state Legislative Assembly.
The proposed resolution would affirm Sikkim’s constitutional protections under Article 371F. SIBLAC wants the state to formally participate in any Darjeeling-related settlement that could affect those protections.
SIBLAC Says It Does Not Oppose Darjeeling’s Aspirations
SIBLAC convenor Tseten Tashi Bhutia, a former Sikkim minister, signed the representation.
The organisation said it does not oppose the democratic aspirations of people in Darjeeling. It also said it does not seek confrontation with the region.
Instead, SIBLAC wants authorities to keep Sikkim’s constitutional identity and territorial interests separate from any settlement concerning Darjeeling.
Questions and Answers
What has SIBLAC raised concerns about?
SIBLAC has questioned references to neighbouring states in a July 2026 Gorkhaland discussion draft.
What is the Fourth Pathway?
It was one of four options mentioned in the preliminary draft for addressing the Darjeeling-Gorkhaland issue.
Did Prof Mahendra Lama intend to include Sikkim?
Lama has clarified publicly that the proposal did not intend to include Sikkim.
What does SIBLAC want from the government?
The organisation wants a formal explanation and clarification about the draft and any discussion involving Sikkim’s territory.
Why has SIBLAC cited Article 371F?
The committee has cited the provision while seeking protection for Sikkim’s constitutional position.
Location Context
Sikkim is a strategically located Himalayan state in Northeast India. It borders China, Nepal and Bhutan and lies close to the Siliguri Corridor, an important link between mainland India and the Northeast.
Also Read: Creation of Arunachal Staff Selection Board Historic, Says CM Pema Khandu – Borok Times