Indiscriminate sand mining precipitating environmental damage to river ecology in several districts in Assam is a cause for grave concern. The line between legal and illegal mining is blurring due to the absence of strong public scrutiny over permitted mining activities. Strict implementation of a recent Supreme Court directive which makes it mandatory for the preparation of a final District Survey Report (DSR) every five years for environmental clearance of all sand mining projects is a crucial safeguard against irreversible ecological damage to river ecosystems. The apex court ruled in unequivocal terms that the lifetime of a DSR is five years, after which the existing DSR will not be tenable and a new DSR will have to be prepared and finalised. The SC explained that the purpose and object of prescribing a lifetime of five years for subsistence of a DSR is for the reason that the position of ecology and the environment is rapidly changing, and the position that existed five years back may not subsist for later days. The apex court has also made it mandatory that the DSR shall be prepared for all the districts, and the draft is to be placed in the public domain, and after comments are received, they shall be considered, and if found correct, they will be incorporated in the final report. The final DSR is to be finalised within 6 months by the District Environmental Impact Assessment Authority. Fixing the period of the final DSR will prevent clearance for a new sand mining project or the extension of an ongoing project in a location where it is no longer viable due to extraction or over extraction. The SC cautioned that unregulated sand mining disrupts riverine ecosystems, alters natural flow patterns, and leads to erosion and habitat loss. “Aquatic biodiversity suffers as spawning grounds are destroyed and water quality deteriorates. The destabilization of riverbanks increases flooding, risking human life and animal habitat alike,” adds the judgement. Another critical aspect of illegal sand mining, the SC observes, is that the illicit sand trade often operates under the shadow of organised crime, undermining the rule of law and weakening governance structures, and ruled that absolute standards with get-tough policies, strict enforcement and quick accountability are compelling for effective regulatory control. The SC directive has brought to the fore that due to the absence of dynamic data on changes in the river system on account of sand mining activities on its riverbed, the reason behind rampant and indiscriminate sand mining continuing unabated despite the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change issuing the Enforcement and Monitoring Guidelines for sand mining in January, 2020, supplemental to the Sustainable Sand Management Guidelines, 2016, to regulate the sand mining in the country and to curb illegal mining. The exponential rise in sand demand in the state is driven by rapid urbanisation, infrastructure push and real estate growth. Even a mechanism of stronger regulatory oversight fails to create the required checks and balances if the fundamental flaw in the assessment of sand layers for the feasibility of mining is not addressed through periodic surveys. People who live by the river and are dependent on its ecosystem services for their agricultural needs and other livelihood avenues, such as fishing and transportation of goods and passengers, know the river ecosystem well. Besides, their oral database about the river ecosystem, flow regime, and quality of fresh water, which has been built over generations and centuries, provides important research feedback to river experts and for making the river survey comprehensive. Ironically, they do not have a stake in enforcement and monitoring, due to which they often watch helplessly when indiscriminate and rampant sand mining takes place in front of their eyes. The opacity in the monitoring system allows a nexus of corrupt forest officials and illegal sand mining lobbies that includes sand suppliers and contractors to destroy the river ecosystem with impunity. Permission for legal mining comes with conditions of strict adherence to the prescribed extraction limit, which is fixed on a case-by-case basis, based on the nature of water flow, volume of flow, width of the river, replenishing capacity, degree of aggradation and degradation, existence of public infrastructure, etc. Making a comprehensive review of the prevalent system of preparation of DSRs in the state and the process of seeking public comment will help identify critical gaps in respect of a certain district. It is important that the draft DSR is not uploaded on official websites and made available in the revenue offices. Wide publicity is also given to motivate people to play a proactive role in giving their feedback for incorporation of their comments for the preparation of the final DSR. Making people important stakeholders of the official monitoring mechanism is crucial to strengthen enforcement of mining norms. Strict adherence to SC directive is critical for the sustainability of sand mining and balancing development with ecological conservation.