The Assam State Disaster Management Authority (ASDMA) issuing direction to all the landslide-prone districts of the state to set up safe shelters for landslide-affected people in the state is aimed at reducing the possibility of life loss due to landslides. The greater challenge on the part of the administration in the districts concerned is to make people living in vulnerable areas shift to these safe shelters when landslide risk aggravates during the monsoon, and this increases their vulnerability. While the administration notifies people about the identification of landslide-prone areas before the onset of monsoon rains every year, people often ignore such notices and remain vulnerable. The recurrence of fatal landslide incidents on Guwahati hills is reflective of the lack of awareness among the hillslope dwellers and the official warning failing to create the desired impact. Apart from notifying the population in the landslide-prone areas well in advance, explaining the risks is also critical to convince them to shift to the safe shelters. Planning and initiating such an awareness drive well ahead of pre-monsoon rain is essential to alert the people in landslide-prone areas to take caution and voluntarily relocate. Structural measures for landslide risk mitigation envisaged in the District Disaster Management Plan (DDMP) for Kamrup (Metropolitan) district are land use control through resettlement of colonies, avoiding major development works, reforestation, protection of vegetation, carrying out construction of buildings, roads, and canals after proper study of the area and following building codes, slope protection or stabilisation, no construction beyond certain degree of slope and provision of retaining wall. Non-structural measures, which need to be prioritised and included in the DDMP, are hazard/risk mapping using historical records; identifying areas at risk; locating areas prone to slope failures; building community awareness; training and drills at all levels; community mobilisation and institution building; response teams; insurance; constant monitoring and early monitoring. For most houses built on the hillslopes in Guwahati on encroached land and without a building permit, there is no scope for the application of the provision of the structural measures of carrying out construction only after a proper study of the area and adhering to building codes for safety. Such norms can be adhered to only in respect of the construction of government buildings and roads and the construction of houses after obtaining due permission issued either by the Guwahati Municipal Corporation or the Guwahati Metropolitan Development Authority. There are allegations even in respect of the construction of buildings authorised by GMC or GMDA norms being flouted and rampant construction of houses obstructing the natural flow of water and indiscriminate slope cutting aggravating landslide risk in those areas. As many as 366 locations on the city hills are mapped to be landslide prone, but the pertinent question to be asked is what are the measures taken by the authorities to relocate people from these areas to safer places other than conducting the survey, creating the inventory and issuing ritualistic appeals to shift to safer locations? Without proactive intervention to find retrofitting solutions wherever possible and alternative housing solutions to facilitate the voluntary shifting of the occupants of houses constructed in the landslide-prone areas. A multi-department survey of entire constructions on the hills is necessary to prepare a comprehensive inventory of buildings and infrastructure in terms of vulnerability risks, legal status to segregate the authorised construction from unauthorised, identify buildings which have been issued permission but flouted building codes, status of water flow regime of streams to find out if the natural flow is obstructed by any human interference, insurance coverage, awareness level of landslide risks, and economic status of building occupants. Ensuring that the exercise does not end in just carrying out the survey and compiling the report but also in drawing up an extensive roadmap of mitigation of the risks is critical to finding a sustainable solution. The approach so far has been conducting surveys and urging people to shift to safer locations and the administration remaining prepared to undertake post-disaster rescue, relief and rehabilitation. However, the primary problems which have aggravated landslide risks, such as rampant slope cutting, unauthorised construction of houses, and non-adherence to building codes, not only remained unaddressed but have also increased with the flow of migrant population to the capital city increasing in recent years. With investment flowing into hospitality, health, multi-brand retail, and real estate sectors, the demand for human resources to meet the rising demand of the service sectors is poised to increase manifold. Without affordable housing solutions for the migrant population, there is no end to the problem of rampant slope cutting and unauthorised construction on encroached patches of hills. Disaster management needs a new approach of combining risk mapping with development priorities. An integrated approach for landslide risk mapping, management and application of sustainable solutions, keeping in mind both public and private investment decisions, is the pragmatic approach. It is high time to act on solutions before it is too late.